40 réponses à ce sujet

[exorzist]

Dragon Age: Attitude Adjustment



In Dragon Age: Origins, the term “hardening” refers to a change a companion’s personality can go through as a result of dialogue or action choices made by the player. This change can have an impact on how the companion reacts to different situations and to the player character.


The concept of hardening events in Ferelden is foreshadowed in The Stolen Throne, the first Dragon Age: Origins prequel novel by David Gaider. In-game, both Alistair and Leliana can experience a hardening event following their personal quest. In each case, arguments can be made for or against the necessity of the hardening and whether it is a positive change.

Continue reading ...

[boraxalmighty]

Hell of an article mate! Guess i gotta go back and read the books =P

[Mlai00]

The inter-companions banter changes if Al/Lel becomes hardened. Also I think Lel stops giggling so much.

[CybAnt1]

I don't think it's the same in both cases.



Hardening Al just makes him a bit more of a pragmatic, realist less-idealist person, and some say makes him a better ruler (if you go that route).



Hardening Lel; well, this is just my view, but you essentially convince her to return to a life of deception, treachery, and killing that she thought she had abandoned; you undo an attempt to change herself and sabotage it (even if you disagree with the role the Chantry has played in that change). It's "harder" for me to do (so I don't).



Of course, there are those who are doing this just to go for a threesome or foursome with a certain pirate, which makes it even more shameful....

[SidheKate]

I've always kind of wondered if we have the right to harden people. If they are our friends, is it worth doing that to them? If we don't care for them, why not leave well enough alone? I understand Loghain was "loyal" to Maric and that the young man needed a nudge to step up, but the methodology employed was underhanded and cruel.



If that's the kind of character you're playing, then maybe it makes more sense. But I find myself doing it to my friends for game mechanics reasons and not because that is how I really want to treat them. Does anyone find they harden Al/Leli because those are the dialog choices they want to take? Do you find you harden them more when you like or dislike those characters?

[Nukenin]

It's just a game mechanic that you have more or less direct control over this.  You say something to them; it's really on them how they choose to change or not.  The game just guarantees the result.  If the companions decided to take the softer or harder view anyway, regardless of the player's dialog choices, gamers would revolt because their puppets were showing individuality.

I hate it when I make conversation decisions based on how I want to guide the direction of the game rather than what I feel my character would say.  This happens more often than I'd like to think, since not a few times I've thought more about avoiding disapproval rather than saying what comes "naturally".  So the next time I decide to "harden" a certain bard or go easy on a certain bastard, I have to wonder—am I doing this just to direct the flow of the game to my whims, or is this consistent with other dialog choices my character has already made?

[Freckles04]

SidheKate wrote...

Does anyone find they harden Al/Leli because those are the dialog choices they want to take? Do you find you harden them more when you like or dislike those characters?

I've always found the Alistair hardening dialogue a little tough to choose, because that's rarely what my characters think. I wish we had the option to tell him, instead, to grow up and stop depending on other people for his happiness. That's really what you do when you harden him: you make him realize that he's in control of himself, if not necessarily of his overarching destiny. So he can choose to resent the duty that life is throwing at him, or he can embrace it, accept it, and try to have a role in shaping his future.

I think the Leliana hardening dialogue is better implemented and makes more sense. If you're playing a character who has no love for the Chantry, the choices fit.  But if you're playing a good-hearted character, it would be difficult to choose those lines.  But isn't that how it should be?   Hardening Leliana is a dark act, to a large extent.

As for what I do depending on if I like/dislike the characters...I usually harden Alistair, because it has a positive outcome on his personality and outlook on life.  In Leliana's case, I rarely harden her, because my characters don't want her to lose the peace she's found (yes, I usually play the white-knight type).

Keep the discussion going! This is awesome.

[CybAnt1]

It's just a game mechanic that you have more or less direct control over this.  You say something to them; it's really on them how they choose to change or not.  The game just guarantees the result.  If the companions decided to take the softer or harder view anyway, regardless of the player's dialog choices, gamers would revolt because their puppets were showing individuality.

Whatever. If they changed on their own and it wasn't in your control, you wouldn't feel the satisfaction of doing it. Of course, changing them can be done with a very boilerplate formula, but hey, it's still a computer game. So is making them "fall in love with you". 

I liked the opportunity to change Viconia from CE in ToB (I think she becomes neutral instead). 

I liked the opportunity to help the dwarf warrior in the first NWN2 OC become a more spiritual monk. 

Yes, it's you making the change happen, but it's also something you can watch unfold. 

[hexaligned]

SidheKate wrote...

I've always kind of wondered if we have the right to harden people. If they are our friends, is it worth doing that to them? If we don't care for them, why not leave well enough alone? I understand Loghain was "loyal" to Maric and that the young man needed a nudge to step up, but the methodology employed was underhanded and cruel.

Letting nieve dillusional people remain that way when you have influence over them is not altruistic.  It's a disservice to them and the species in general.  Being "hard" isn't a bad thing, it's a necessity to effectively function in a reality that can be both cruel and unfair.  Unless you plan on simply letting other people take care of you,  while relying on fantasies to keep you content.  I want better than that for my friends personally.  Humans should be fierce in all things.

As far as Alistar his rule would be disastrous in anything but a fantasy, he isn't smart enough and he doesn't have enough emotional fortitude to lead an adventuring party, let alone a kingdom.  Hardening aside, I think it's nothing but selfish to put him anywhere near a position of power (and considering the relativity of evil, "selfish" is about as close to a definition as you can form"). I always dump him for Loghain or let him sacrifice himself, bigger picture wise, killing him is better for everyone involved.   I won't comment on the bard, her character didn't intrest me enough to talk to her more than was necessary to do her little side quest.

Modifié par relhart, 15 avril 2010 - 02:35 .

[Cell1e]

I never harden Alistair or Leliana for many reasons. (Well only once to see the differences)

1. I love their kind and soft ways in the game and really just want to comfort and reassure them when they are upset at those crucial moments. It is my personality I think that influences this decision.

2. I never feel the need to have the king/queen ending, I believe Anora has always been a good ruler and has suffered a lot from her father going crazy and killing her husband. Wow I just hate to take the crown from her especially since all through the game Alistair insists he is in no way wanting to be King. I feel he and my character are best suited to carry on as wardens together as they will have so much more freedom and not be under the pressure of having to govern a whole country. I have always thought it must really suck to be royal. Wow there is no freedom or privacy or real safety as their are always enemies plotting your downfall.

3. It is stated in the game many times that if you become a warden you must leave your old life behind, my female Cousland could not keep her title, she was now a warden so how a person can be a warden and King? Alsitair took the darkspawn blood so can never sire a child so another reason to leave him as his lovely sunny self and let Anora rule.

I just always choose for my human/elf/dwarf females and Alistair to remain as wardens, equal together for a happy ending and I believe that is the happiest ending all round. Anora deserves her happy ending too. She is a wonderful queen.

Modifié par Cell1e, 15 avril 2010 - 02:27 .

[exorzist]

Nice comments! Thanks everybody so far

[AlanC9]

Freckles04 wrote...
I've always found the Alistair hardening dialogue a little tough to choose, because that's rarely what my characters think. I wish we had the option to tell him, instead, to grow up and stop depending on other people for his happiness. 

I was told that one of the DA writers said that this was the original intention; there were going to be a couple of lines that would lead to hardening, one of which was like the one you propose. Somehow the more universal hardening line got lost in editing.

[searanox]

Frankly I'm not sure I understand the point of this article. Are you trying to shed some sort of light upon the characters? Draw comparisons between the novel and the game? Because all I can really see in it is "there are characters in Dragon Age and they do stuff", or rather, you have done nothing but provide a synopsis. I was waiting for the piece to go somewhere, but it never did, as if it ended halfway through.  At least your writing seems competent as far as grammar and spelling go, which is, frankly, less common than you'd think... I can't decide if that really deserves praise, though.

Modifié par searanox, 16 avril 2010 - 01:10 .

[soteria]

I've always kind of wondered if we have the right to harden people. If they are our friends, is it worth doing that to them? If we don't care for them, why not leave well enough alone? I understand Loghain was "loyal" to Maric and that the young man needed a nudge to step up, but the methodology employed was underhanded and cruel.

Though I don't completely agree with Relhart, I think if you're really their friend, you'll tell them what you think is best for them. Society places a stigma on "judging" people, but I believe a real friend will tell someone when they're wrong. There's a time and a place for being supportive, but there's also a time when you ought to step in and try to get your friend out of a destructive way of thinking.



I was just thinking of how I have a tendency to try to game the approval meters in conversations. It can be hard to honestly try to roleplay when you have that immediate feedback telling you what they think of your response. Well, Bioward did away with the morality meter in DA:O, to good effect, and maybe it's time to get rid of the approval meter. Instead of having a meter telling you what your companions think of you, give your dialogue choices certain consequences further down the way. Maybe just make meter hidden, so your choices do affect how they treat you, but not so obviously.

[Dick Delaware]

Freckles04 wrote...
I've always found the Alistair hardening dialogue a little tough to choose, because that's rarely what my characters think. I wish we had the option to tell him, instead, to grow up and stop depending on other people for his happiness. That's really what you do when you harden him: you make him realize that he's in control of himself, if not necessarily of his overarching destiny. So he can choose to resent the duty that life is throwing at him, or he can embrace it, accept it, and try to have a role in shaping his future.

I think the Leliana hardening dialogue is better implemented and makes more sense. If you're playing a character who has no love for the Chantry, the choices fit.  But if you're playing a good-hearted character, it would be difficult to choose those lines.  But isn't that how it should be?   Hardening Leliana is a dark act, to a large extent.

As for what I do depending on if I like/dislike the characters...I usually harden Alistair, because it has a positive outcome on his personality and outlook on life.  In Leliana's case, I rarely harden her, because my characters don't want her to lose the peace she's found (yes, I usually play the white-knight type).

Keep the discussion going! This is awesome.

I think that the idea of having an impact on your companions is good, but I don't like how it was implemented with Alistair. We've survived betrayals, been hunted at every turn, and fought countless numbers of vicious monsters, yet all I have to do is tell him that people only look out for themselves for him to become a more pragmatic, assertive guy?

It's pretty ridiculous. It would have made more sense for Alistair's personality to change on its own throughout the game - he starts off as this naive, handsome, fresh-faced kid, but by the end he's become an assertive man who commands respect, but he's lost a lot of that innocence. I just don't think that you go through carrying a burden and a responsibility like that and stay as goofy as Alistair does.

[eucatastrophe]

 I just don't think that you go through carrying a burden and a responsibility like that and stay as goofy as Alistair does.

Disagree, I know quite a few people who have remained light-hearted and optimistic despite whatever life throws at them. And I admire them for it, because I could never be like that.

It would have made more sense for Alistair's personality to change on
its own throughout the game - he starts off as this naive, handsome,
fresh-faced kid, but by the end he's become an assertive man who
commands respect, but he's lost a lot of that innocence.

Agreed, though I think even unhardened, Alistair does lose a lot of his innocence. Either way, it wouldn't hurt for Bioware to expand on the theme.

[yasuraka.hakkyou]

I do kind of agree that the article didn't exactly go anywhere. Haven't finished the Stolen Throne, though...

it is ridiculous IMO that alistair stays as goofy as he is w/o hardening. I personally would have been jaded after Ostagar, much less Redcliffe and the Landsmeet and such. don't like the guy, but I think its better for his future that he gets hardened.

I personally hate the chantry, so I seem to usually harden leliana too. I do kinda believe that you are what you are, so that plays a part in this. I do feel guilt and regret in telling Leliana she was just fooling herself, even though she found inner peace.

interesting how one harden option has many effects on the story, while the other one tugs at your heart strings much more and vice versa. also how one has more noticeable effects on the actual character and vice versa. maybe I'm just stating the obvious though *shrug*

Modifié par yasuraka.hakkyou, 16 avril 2010 - 02:07 .

[Lantrov]

Hardening in Dragon Age isn't necessary, but it is better IMO. It suits the general feel and setting of Dragon Age as grim and dark.

Hardening Alistair is obvious for blatant reasons simply because he mans up and becomes more mature as he doesn't feel so nervous or distasteful when concerned about duty and responsibility.

Hardening Leliana isn't much of a problem either (for me anyway) as it takes her away from the complacent and soft feelings, instead replacing it with a more practical, wary, and hard outlook for her. Never really believed her when she said she found peace and contentment in the Maker, I think complacency is a better word of what she found.

[exorzist]

Personally I never hardened Alistair ... On my next playthrough with a noble dwarf, I probably will go this route

[Aybeden]

I didn't think that article fully recognises the difference hardening a character can make to their personalities or outcomes. However I think asking whether a feature is "necessary" misses the point. We can argue about whether many features in the game are "necessary". The real question is whether a feature adds something to the depth of the game, and in my opinion our being given the choice whether to harden a character or not, and the changes to character personalities that can occur as a result, does exactly that.

[Mlai00]

I try to roleplay my games, and let approval/disapproval happen according to my chara's RP. I don't see hardening either chara as wrong or heartless.

Me not hardening Alistair hurt him in the long run; he ended up becoming a worthless drunk.

As for Lel, she was totally fooling herself with her born-again religion. Ever listen to her rationalizing her past actions in Orlais? It's downright creepy; she's talking about seducing and killing men like a day at the office. Hardening her simply allows her to be more honest to herself and to me.

[Seagloom]

soteria wrote...

Though I don't completely agree with Relhart, I think if you're really their friend, you'll tell them what you think is best for them. Society places a stigma on "judging" people, but I believe a real friend will tell someone when they're wrong. There's a time and a place for being supportive, but there's also a time when you ought to step in and try to get your friend out of a destructive way of thinking.

I agree with this. The dialogue option to harden Alistair always struck me as heavy-handed and overly jaded, but necessary. Alistair is the kind of guy that quite frankly needs a kick in the ass to accept his reality. Flemeth nails it early on when she tells Alistair to grow up. In another time, in another world, he could afford to cling to his ideals. Unfortunately Ferelden is in a bad way and the best thing for it is not Alistair's storybook idealism. I just wish we could explain it to him less harshly, rather than coming across as so bitter.

I almost always harden Leliana too but for entirely different reasons. She chose to join the Chantry out of desperation. Ferelden was a foreign land and there was no where familiar for her to go. The Chantry is one of the very few things Ferelden and Orlais have in common. If not for the events that forced her flight, I see no reason Leliana would not have remained a bard. She enjoyed the intrigue of it but tired of the consequences. The Chantry lay sister route is a safe choice for her but not one I felt was honest. I believe Leliana already had doubts for a certain NPC to get to her at all. Something she expresses in both the hardening conversation and follow-up. That is why I usually go the "follow your instincts" route with her. I think that it is what she really wants, but is denying herself because of the guilt involved. Afterwards she remains largely the same. Leliana will always possess spiritual zeal and an ardent belief in doing what she feels is right. The only difference is she becomes less of a paladin about it. Leliana may initially be afraid that accepting her bardic background will turn her into a bloodthirsty, paranoid monster, but events following that conversation show her fears are largely unwarranted.

I just wish Alistair's conversion had as many options. On a side note, the only times I do not harden Alistair is when my Warden is a pro Chantry idealist or all around good natured person that always takes the supportive role. Since the conversation option for Alistair comes across as so mean, I often do not get to harden him. My character simply would not be so cruel. In Leliana's case I only take that route when my character is a Chantry believer.

Modifié par Seagloom, 16 avril 2010 - 01:48 .

[Tirigon]

I don´t understand all this trouble whether or not "hardening" your companions is right.

I see it just like that:

You and your friend experience something. He / she asks what you think about it. You answer what you think is right, or at least what of the given options comes closest to what you think is right.

That´s neither good nor bad, and you are not responsible for what your companion makes with what you tell him.

[CybAnt1]

Well it comes down to the perennial metagame vs. game knowledge problem.

And also roleplaying your char's values instead of your personal values.



So Al asks me "is everybody just out for themselves".



Me? I don't think so. I've met some nice people in this world. I even try myself to be nice, at least when I'm in a good mood, anyway. "C'mon Al, your half-sister is the exception to the rule."



Most of my chars? Can't help it. I roleplay do-gooders. They usually don't think that either. However, my rogue might have said, "well, you're right, Al." That's her worldview.



And yet I have the metagame knowledge "well, my response will cause this effect on Alistair known as 'hardening' him and may help me get the game result I want."



Perhaps others are better at switching off metagame knowledge, or not blending their own values with what their char's values should be, in order to roleplay the more "pure" way. Honestly, I find I usually don't.

[Tirigon]

Well, with Alistair the problem comes down to one thing: If you don´t harden him a romance with a Non-Noble will end badly once he´s king. I did the mistake to roleplay instead of metagame and thus screwed the ending for my elf mage who wanted to live with him...