145 réponses à ce sujet

[HopHazzard]

filetemo wrote...

HopHazzard wrote...


I know that's what you think. I just don't see how you can't understand that that's all just your opinion.

But let's say you're right. The Maker is real. And Andraste was his super special prophet that he gave divine powers to. How do you work that into the story as an ability that can possessed by a player character? You'd have to do a whole story about a new prophet of the Maker or the second coming of Andraste. If you make Maker's Prophet just a class you can pick at character creation than it seriously cheapens Andraste's story. Suddenly she's not so special.

Well, I already gave birth to a kid with the soul of an old god, does that cheapen the mysticism of the old gods? I think not.

The problem with you guys, is that you try to impose your views (maker doesn't exist, ashes not divine, Gauntlet a simple fade spirit) who have like 5% chance of being true over the general assumption of how things are (maker exists, gauntlet from divine origin, andraste ashes divine power) because that's what the game, the lore, the story, the developers drive you to think.

Really? Because I'm pretty sure Gaider has said that we're free to believe whatever we want because he deliberately left it ambiguous. 

[milkymcmilkerson]

Wait...I might have missed something because I haven't played much of the DLC yet...



So, in game, was there an argument brought up that challenges the notion of Divine magic in the game world? If so, is it the idea that Lyrium makes people hallucinate, thus magic doesn't exist and everyone is actually hallucinating?

[filetemo]

Skilled Seeker wrote...



You are the one imposing your views here, the others are simply saying it might not be true.

for "simply saying it might not be true" they seem to try very hard since they filled three pages of walls of text with the most bizarre teories about magic, spirits and lyrium

[HopHazzard]

milkymcmilkerson wrote...

Wait...I might have missed something because I haven't played much of the DLC yet...

So, in game, was there an argument brought up that challenges the notion of Divine magic in the game world? If so, is it the idea that Lyrium makes people hallucinate, thus magic doesn't exist and everyone is actually hallucinating?

No one in game has ever claimed that divine magic exists (in fact, even priests explicitly state that it doesn't) except in the case of Andraste and even then only people who follow the Chantry believe that's true.

[milkymcmilkerson]

Ahhh...ok. You guys meant specifically Divine magic, not magic in general. I see. I was confused, but now I'm not. Thank you

[HopHazzard]

filetemo wrote...

Skilled Seeker wrote...



You are the one imposing your views here, the others are simply saying it might not be true.

for "simply saying it might not be true" they seem to try very hard since they filled three pages of walls of text with the most bizarre teories about magic, spirits and lyrium

No more bizarre than "the maker did it"

[filetemo]

HopHazzard wrote...

filetemo wrote...

Skilled Seeker wrote...



You are the one imposing your views here, the others are simply saying it might not be true.

for "simply saying it might not be true" they seem to try very hard since they filled three pages of walls of text with the most bizarre teories about magic, spirits and lyrium

No more bizarre than "the maker did it"

well, for a quest which brings you to the deeps of the temple which holds the ashes of the makers prophet, "the maker did it" is more logical than "the cake is a lie"

Modifié par filetemo, 30 juillet 2010 - 10:53 .

[In Exile]

milkymcmilkerson wrote...

Wait...I might have missed something because I haven't played much of the DLC yet...

So, in game, was there an argument brought up that challenges the notion of Divine magic in the game world? If so, is it the idea that Lyrium makes people hallucinate, thus magic doesn't exist and everyone is actually hallucinating?

In game, there never is any divine magic. There is one possible miracle related to the maker that you see, and that is the ashes, but if you bring Oghren you hear that there is an incredible reservoir of lyrium in the mountain, and the implication is that all of that may have been caused in some way by lyrium, instead of divine intervention by the maker.

Morrigan is the only one who challenges divine magic outright. Leliana asks her how she can refuse to believe in the maker when she is a mage. Morrigan replies that one thing does not imply the other, and magic is quite obviously real, and it has nothing to do with making the maker real.

[HopHazzard]

filetemo wrote...

HopHazzard wrote...

filetemo wrote...

Skilled Seeker wrote...



You are the one imposing your views here, the others are simply saying it might not be true.

for "simply saying it might not be true" they seem to try very hard since they filled three pages of walls of text with the most bizarre teories about magic, spirits and lyrium

No more bizarre than "the maker did it"

well, for a quest which brings you to the deeps of the temple which holds the ashes of the makers prophet, "the maker did it" is more logical than "the cake is a lie"

Are they the ashes of the maker's prophet? Why should I believe that? Because a mind reader in a shiny suit told me so? I've certainly role-played religious characters who were suitably in awe of the urn. I've also role-played atheist characters who thought the whole thing was a bunch of hogwash that could be explained by the use of magic which unlike in our world is an actual verifiable and usable natural force. I enjoyed the freedom the narrative gave me to do that.

Modifié par HopHazzard, 30 juillet 2010 - 11:00 .

[filetemo]

if there's no maker why did the first blight start? Are they gonna change all tevinter magisters lore for something else and tell us "the chantry made that up and blights happen for other reasons"?



Not really I guess

[HopHazzard]

filetemo wrote...

if there's no maker why did the first blight start? Are they gonna change all tevinter magisters lore for something else and tell us "the chantry made that up and blights happen for other reasons"?

Not really I guess

The chantry teaches that. That doesn't make it true. You're accepting religious doctrine as history. Religions commonly make up stories to explain natural occurrences they don't understand.

[Grommash94]

filetemo wrote...

if there's no maker why did the first blight start? Are they gonna change all tevinter magisters lore for something else and tell us "the chantry made that up and blights happen for other reasons"?

Not really I guess

Even if the Magisters entered the Golden City to usurp whatever there was there (and we don't even know if that story is true) it doesn't mean there was a maker. There could have been a powerful spirit, or it could have been a repercussion of entering the Fade physically.

[filetemo]

Grommash94 wrote...


Even if the Magisters entered the Golden City to usurp whatever there was there (and we don't even know if that story is true) it doesn't mean there was a maker. There could have been a powerful spirit, or it could have been a repercussion of entering the Fade physically.

And is that equally plausible as the explanation that the maker simply vanished them from the city? no, it is not.

[In Exile]

Substitute maker for god and you have the internet's most annoying debate, so I'm going to bow out, but before that, I will point out that David and the writers achieved precisely what they wanted, since they have a maker that quite parallels our own modern monotheism.

[Grommash94]

filetemo wrote...

Grommash94 wrote...


Even if the Magisters entered the Golden City to usurp whatever there was there (and we don't even know if that story is true) it doesn't mean there was a maker. There could have been a powerful spirit, or it could have been a repercussion of entering the Fade physically.

And is that equally plausible as the explanation that the maker simply vanished them from the city? no, it is not.

Seeing as there is no definitive proof of the maker, yes it is.

[filetemo]

HopHazzard wrote...

The chantry teaches that. That doesn't make it true. You're accepting religious doctrine as history. Religions commonly make up stories to explain natural occurrences they don't understand.

So in a fantasy world, the theory of intelligent design isn't the more common explanation? Isn't it plausible the fact that, for example, Maker did the world and old gods grew jealous of his creation?

Or you find more credible that "there's no maker and just a powerful spirit in the fade" "there's black city but that doesn't mean there's a maker" and "after the tons of lore they gave us, I choose to believe there's no maker and something else created the world"

I do not believe what the chantry says, I believe there's a maker. The chantry would change tidbits of the story but the end of the tale is the same.

[Grommash94]

filetemo wrote...

HopHazzard wrote...

The chantry teaches that. That doesn't make it true. You're accepting religious doctrine as history. Religions commonly make up stories to explain natural occurrences they don't understand.

So in a fantasy world, the theory of intelligent design isn't the more common explanation? Isn't it plausible the fact that, for example, Maker did the world and old gods grew jealous of his creation?

Or you find more credible that "there's no maker and just a powerful spirit in the fade" "there's black city but that doesn't mean there's a maker" and "after the tons of lore they gave us, I choose to believe there's no maker and something else created the world"

I do not believe what the chantry says, I believe there's a maker. The chantry would change tidbits of the story but the end of the tale is the same.

Both theories make sense. We don't know which one is right or wrong, and we never will. There is no point arguing this any further though, as it is all based on opinion and not fact.

[filetemo]

In Exile wrote...

Substitute maker for god and you have the internet's most annoying debate, so I'm going to bow out, but before that, I will point out that David and the writers achieved precisely what they wanted, since they have a maker that quite parallels our own modern monotheism.

whoa, hold on. I'm an atheist in real life. I wouldn't want you to believe you're arguing with an ultra-catholic fanatic guy.

In DAO though, I'm a believer :innocent:

[filetemo]

but guys, really dragon age needs more than three combat classes.:D

Modifié par filetemo, 30 juillet 2010 - 11:20 .

[HopHazzard]

filetemo wrote...

HopHazzard wrote...

The chantry teaches that. That doesn't make it true. You're accepting religious doctrine as history. Religions commonly make up stories to explain natural occurrences they don't understand.

So in a fantasy world, the theory of intelligent design isn't the more common explanation? Isn't it plausible the fact that, for example, Maker did the world and old gods grew jealous of his creation?

Or you find more credible that "there's no maker and just a powerful spirit in the fade" "there's black city but that doesn't mean there's a maker" and "after the tons of lore they gave us, I choose to believe there's no maker and something else created the world"

I do not believe what the chantry says, I believe there's a maker. The chantry would change tidbits of the story but the end of the tale is the same.

There are a great many fantasy worlds wherein the existence of a god or gods is provable and anyone who doesn't believe in them is just being willfully ignorant. This is not one of them. Just because it's common in fantasy doesn't mean it applies to this particular fantasy universe. All of the "lore" about the maker is written by chantry scholars who are necessarily biased.

[HopHazzard]

filetemo wrote...

but guys, really dragon age needs more than three combat classes.:D

No it doesn't. It needs a deeper and more involved specialization system and more visually distinctive armor and weapons.