230 réponses à ce sujet

[Drasanil]

In Exile wrote...

Drasanil wrote...
True, your choices were fairly narrow. However, the different Origins informed who your character was and would ideally shape which choices different Wardens would make.

I don't roleplay that way. To me, it is not about experience and background that makes the character, but rather personality. To me, it is personality that drives the individual. So when I create a particular character, the background details are largely irrelevant. It does not matter the young Cousland had a mother and a father, and a brother, and a nursemaid, etc. What matters is whether he is competitive or shy, arrogant or reserved, etc.

And I do roleplay that way. Personality is all well and good and is one of the driving forces for a good character. However, that character’s background and history is what provides a filter through which he/she views the wider world and informs his/her decisions, it provides a context to his\\her motives and actions which personality alone cannot, and will never, account for.  A confident and ambitious Tabris will behave differently and have different motives than a confident and ambitious Cousland, they have similar personalities but they are not the same people and would not have the same motivations or views.
 
Personality without context is ultimately superficial and hollow, just as surely background and history is stale and uninspiring without personality.

A dalish warden would almost certainly side with Zathrian, were as a Cousland, might side with the Werewolves, a mage would be more likely to side with the circle and so forth...

A mage could as easily hate the Circle for years of imprisonment, for being forced to abandon his home for the sake of Irving's machinations, for the fact the mages were so weak and incompetent to become abominations in the first place (which is Morrigan's perspective).

A dalish Warden could as easily see Zathrian as an abomination who has perverted his people's traditions by extending his life unaturally and leading his people to believe he has captured some heritage of Arlathan when in fact he is a charlatan.

All these views which you have put forth are ultimately beholden to that character’s formative background and past experiences, personality would merely inform the manner in which he/she would act with regards to those situations.

So with this I disagree. I don't think your background is so determinant of who you are.

 
Oh of course not, it’s only the thing which provides the context to your character’s existence. Do you honestly believe someone would be the same person, if a formative event in their past had played out differently?
 
If someone’s parent were murdered in front of them during their childhood do you honestly believe that he/she would have developed into the same person as they would have if that event had never occurred, simply on account of personality?  
 

On the other Hawke is Hawke, he/she will have had the same formative experiences no matter how many times you restart the game he is the same person and therefore should make the same decisions no matter how many times a given scenario plays out. Doing otherwise just feels weird.

I disagree adamantly. This only matters if you think a formative expereince determines personality instead of personality determining the outcome of the so-called formative experience.

It’s nice that you disagree, unfortunately for you whether or not your right is irrelevant because your assertion still leads to the case of Hawke is still being Hawke regardless...

This is not to say I am on the nature side of the nature/nurture debate, but speaking from the point of view of developmental and personality psychology, to some degree at least personality is inborn and absolutely independent of background.

 
It’s true, however, background informs the manner in which your personality interacts with the world, what views you hold, what motivations you have, what you are likely to cherish or to hate etc etc... Being calm and rational has no more bearing than being impulsive and intuitive when it comes to say your love of hamburgers.

[In Exile]

Drasanil wrote...
And I do roleplay that way. Personality is all well and good and is one of the driving forces for a good character. However, that character’s background and history is what provides a filter through which he/she views the wider world and informs his/her decisions, it provides a context to his\\\\her motives and actions which personality alone cannot, and will never, account for.

And I disagree, and invert causality (insofar as games are concerned - the case in reality is far too complicated and I do not want to debate it).  What I am pointing out, though, is that you cannot declare by divine fiat that how you see personality is the appropriate way to role-play, and alternatives to this restrict roleplay in an objective as opposed to subjective sense.

Moreover, insofar as a video-game is concerned, the direction of our two way interaction does not matter. If personality is fixed (always cautious) but we vary background, we have different degrees of cautious. If background is fixed (always noble) but we vary personality, we have different degrees of noble.

It is the same with Hawke, so the argument that fixing to one background restricts you (putting aside concerns about the voice, which are a separate debate) is absolutely incorrect because there are absolutely infinite permutations of any personality type open to you.

A confident and ambitious Tabris will behave differently and have different motives than a confident and ambitious Cousland, they have similar personalities but they are not the same people and would not have the same motivations or views.

That's a poor argument. A confident Cousland, who experiences the same formative events as a shy Cousland, will be a different person in virtue of personality alone. Formative events are irrelevant insofar as personality is concerned with the purposes of background. This is why I refer to Hawke as perfectly variable - because if he has a particular nature at birth, then through that lense similar events can produce quite different attitudes, even if the outcomes are the same.
 

Personality without context is ultimately superficial and hollow, just as surely background and history is stale and uninspiring without personality.

No, that's just your subjective take. Insofar as a game is concerned, as long as you keep one fixed and vary the other you can produce a variety of different characters. So background does not restrict RP unless you have a subjective preference for which to restrict, in which case the problem is not the game.

Insofar as reality is concerned, personality is situational response - that's Mischel's argument, and the particular interpretation of personality I favour in conjuction with the Big 5. Background is what allows your personality to manifest, but personality is the fixed quality you are born with. Different experiences can make you a different person - to a fixed degree. But the same experiences do not make you the same person unless you were the same person personality wise to start with.

All these views which you have put forth are ultimately beholden to that character’s formative background and past experiences, personality would merely inform the manner in which he/she would act with regards to those situations.

Not at all. A selfish mage might see the death of the circle as an opportunity to gain power rapidly following defeating the blight, whereas a selfless mage might see precisely the same event as an obligation to help. Same person, same interactions with others in the circle, even potentially the same outcomes (where the selifsh person pretends to selflessness for advancement) yet in this one situation we play out a different outcome.

So once again, I reject your thesis that background matters in a definitive way, that overrides personality.

Oh of course not, it’s only the thing which provides the context to your character’s existence. Do you honestly believe someone would be the same person, if a formative event in their past had played out differently?

Yes, to the extent where the person is always on the same spectrum. So a child who was never bullied might be quite outgoing, while that same child bullied might be more outgoing than average but less outgoing than if there had been no bullying. So there is a quantitative difference (degree of extraversion) but no qualitative difference (independent of expereince, always extraversion).
 

If someone’s parent were murdered in front of them during their childhood do you honestly believe that he/she would have developed into the same person as they would have if that event had never occurred, simply on account of personality? 

Again, it depends on what you see as the value in same. To me, for the purposes of comparison, what matters is not the spectrum of the trait but the presence or absence. How extraverted Hawke is does not matter versus whether or not he is extraverted, since the game only ever gives you a choice to be extraverted one way.

For the purpose of the game, any fixed event is irrelevant insofar personality is concerned because different personalities, hinging only on birth, would react differently to the trauma. So it does not matter what experiences Hawke has. If we have shy-at-birth Hawke versus abusive-at-birth Hawke, he can experience the same trauma and grow up to be a different person, on account of personality.
 

It’s nice that you disagree, unfortunately for you whether or not your right is irrelevant because your assertion still leads to the case of Hawke is still being Hawke regardless...

Not unless you are adamant that Hawke always has the same personality. In which case, what is the point of roleplaying?
 

It’s true, however, background informs the manner in which your personality interacts with the world, what views you hold, what motivations you have, what you are likely to cherish or to hate etc etc... Being calm and rational has no more bearing than being impulsive and intuitive when it comes to say your love of hamburgers.

But your love of hamburgers is irrelevant to whether or not you will be calm or rational. Knowledge of that sort does not influence behaviour except in very specific instances that are never played out in an RPG. So for the purposes of discussion re: games these points are irrelevant. As to broader discussions about personality... your love for hamburgers may well be predicted by the physiological organization of your taste buds. Which is to say you might be born with a significant risk of being a hamburger lover.

[Riona45]

Kordaris wrote...
We already know that we won't be able to change race, backstory and family of the character. A huge step back from Dragon Age 1.

You could only pick your backstory to a point.  If you wanted to be a mage, you had to be a Circle mage--you couldn't be a Dalish mage or any sort of apostate.  Any human warrior/rogue had to be a Cousland, and you had a preset family (what if you wanted to be a lone wanderer with no attachments?).

[Ensgnblack]

Not to mention that people seem to be overlooking Gaider's point of "after your initial Origin story, you do the same mission. Your character is the same person regardless of your Origin; you get referred to as Warden mostly." (note that quote was paraphrased).



This isn't a step down in customization, not to mention that we have so little information that the amount of complaining is absurd.

[Riona45]

Drasanil wrote...

True, your choices were fairly narrow. However, the different Origins informed who your character was and would ideally shape which choices different Wardens would make. A dalish warden would almost certainly side with Zathrian, were as a Cousland, might side with the Werewolves, a mage would be more likely to side with the circle and so forth...

On the other Hawke is Hawke, he/she will have had the same formative experiences no matter how many times you restart the game he is the same person and therefore should make the same decisions no matter how many times a given scenario plays out. Doing otherwise just feels weird.

I completely disagree--coming from a certain background doesn't require you to make any particular choice.  Hawke is Hawke?  That doesn't mean anything.  Cousland is Cousland, Amell is Amell, Aeducan is Aeducan, etc.

The origins in DA:O were all essentially preset backgrounds just like Hawke is getting.

[Stanley Woo]

David Gaider has addressed several of the points brought u in this thread in this discussion. Please take your discussion there. THank you.



End of line.