12857 réponses à ce sujet

[Joy Divison]

Vaughn is not a character. His entire purpose is to show the ****ty lives of city elves, the power humans have over them, and to make the CE origin KIll-Billesque. All he is is plot exposition (is that grammatically correct lol?). As pplr points out, the writers even had the good sense to have this non-character try and talk his way out dying - an excellent subtle addition that made DA:O great.

Now what do you mean you USUALLY killed him...

Agree that Mouse is what a demon should be. They are subtle, conniving, and prefer to work their ways without overt displays of power.

[Costin_Razvan]

Now what do you mean you USUALLY killed him...

Some of us don't really give a **** that he raped a few women in a video game. As a CE I find it stupid anyway to kill him seeing that everyone in the Alienage would be put to the sword by Urien because of it when Urien returned ( of course we don't know at that stage that he will die ).

As a non-CE the last thing I care when I am trying to convince the landsmeet to side with me is to kill an extra voter.

[pplr]

For one of my plays as I city elf (just the one) I let my elf buy the claim people in the Alienage would be put to the sword.

Plus I was also curious to see what he would do-that he betrays you after you spare his life says even more bad about him.


I never get his vote by the time the Landsmeet comes around because (even if I'm not a city elf) I feel people are better off without him being in a position of authority-which is exactly what I'd be giving him in order to get his vote.

Thus there was a time I did spare him as one of my city elf characters (not sure if I deleted that one or not-my current city elf, which I view as much more my canon story, killed him and told King Calien about it).

Anyway, any game that I play all the way through he doesn't make it to the end. It was just a matter of how soon he dies (in the city elf origin or in Howe's dungeon).

Just to make the point, someof the women he kidnaps end up dead (your wedding likely wasn't the first time he acts).

So he isn't only a rapist, he is arguably a rapist and a murderer.

Modifié par pplr, 11 janvier 2012 - 02:36 .

[Joy Divison]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Now what do you mean you USUALLY killed him...

Some of us don't really give a **** that he raped a few women in a video game. As a CE I find it stupid anyway to kill him seeing that everyone in the Alienage would be put to the sword by Urien because of it when Urien returned ( of course we don't know at that stage that he will die ).

As a non-CE the last thing I care when I am trying to convince the landsmeet to side with me is to kill an extra voter.

As a non-CE, I can see getting the vote.

Playing a CE, it is not an abstract hypothetical in a video game, it is personal.

There is already going to be retribution bc/ the CE already broke into the castle, killed guards, stole stuff, etc.

There is no way to compel Vaughn to live up to his end of the bargain.

If you take the deal, the other City Elves treat you as a sell-out, an Uncle Tom, a collaborator...rightly, I think.

[pplr]

Joy Divison wrote...

As a non-CE the last thing I care when I am trying to convince the landsmeet to side with me is to kill an extra voter.

As a non-CE, I can see getting the vote.

Playing a CE, it is not an abstract hypothetical in a video game, it is personal.

You're correct that it is personal as a CE.

Now one of the reasons I can opt not go for the votes is because I make a point of talking to other nobles so I'm pretty sure I don't need it.

Not all of the nobles are scumbags, them plus Anora is a potent political combination.

It is much more at the warden's discression on if a non-CE lets Vaughan live but if I feel I can successfully combat the blight as well as keep at least  a few terrible people from positions of authority then I figure do both.

Modifié par pplr, 11 janvier 2012 - 04:17 .

[LobselVith8]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Would you have handled Vaughan and Uldred differently?

I guess Vaughan served his small purpose well in CE, so maybe he doesn't need to be changed.

But Uldred, most certainly I would have handled him differently. In many ways, I sympathize with him more than Anders and respect the way he went about things (training an army of blood mages in the middle of the Circle right under everyone's nose? Impressive).

Uldred was an opportunity to explore radical libertarianism and a militant, but smart solution to the mage question (allying with states to oppose the Chantry). Instead, what we got was super rawr evil abomination. I don't really mind that Uldred's plan turned into a disaster and demons went on the loose. But I would have vastly preferred if:
A- Uldred was explored in the Mage Origin more, and that we could talk to him a bit in Ostagar
B- That Uldred was not possessed at the end.

But honestly, I think the whole mage thing in DA could have been handled much better. Demons are overblown and to the extreme in DA2. I would have much rather kept demons as sentient but ultimately week creatures that mages can control. As it stands, it's too much "dark side" vibe that made me despise Star Wars at the end. There are enough reasons to fear and hate mages without abominations. Indeed popular belief could be that mages are inherently demonic and possessed, even if it's untrue. The effect would have been the same. 

I think that would have been interesting to see, especially since the protagonist in the Magi Origin can state that he (or she) agrees with the Libertarian view during the conversation with Senior Enchanter Torrin, and Abomination Uldred does single out the Magi Warden as "Irving's star pupil."

Would you have had any ramifications for Loghain (and possibly siding with him), if The Warden could side with Uldred at Kinloch Hold?

Persephone wrote...

Interesting theory there. IMHO DAII went way overboard re: abominations and ignored the human side (No pun intended) of the conflict too much in the long run. Even unwilling mages (Olivia) became abominations....(Isn't that against the lore anyway?)

I would say it does. It goes against the lore in that mages need to be in the Fade to deal with demons (who are in the Fade and want to get a foothold into the real world) which would not leave them conscious of the real world (like the mages we see at Ostagar who are in the Fade), and the examples we see of mages turning into abominations in Dragon Age II have them conscious and in the real world - this is explicitly contradicted in the lore with Aeonar, where Andrastians were able to kill the Magisters within because all but one were in the Fade and, therefore, not aware of what was happening in the real world. According to the codex, "The fortress was overrun by disciples of Andraste upon hearing the news of her death. According to legend, it was a massacre-eerily silent, for the invaders caught the mages while all but one of them were in the Fade."

[KnightofPhoenix]

It would have been interesting if we could choose between mages, templars or blood mages who can summon demon allies. But I didn't give it much thought.

I don't kill Vaughn as HN or DN. The guy is a fool and hardly a threat in the long run, he could easily be eliminated.

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Mouse is infinitely more interesting to me than Vaughn. A demon that not only avoided being "lol I want to kill!" but actually gives advice to a mage?

It was brilliant and I wish that DA demons were morel like that. Subtle, perhaps being a voice of temptation, but not being this overwhelming force that take away sanity. Or that pop out of the ground sporadically....God DA2 is so annoying.

Torpor was an interesting demon.

[LobselVith8]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It would have been interesting if we could choose between mages, templars or blood mages who can summon demon allies. But I didn't give it much thought.

I don't kill Vaughn as HN or DN. The guy is a fool and hardly a threat in the long run, he could easily be eliminated.

Killing Knight-Commander Greagoir and the other templars at the Circle Tower did seem to be an option when the developers planned on allowing a mage Warden to reveal that he was a blood mage if Wynne confronted him about the matter (although they seemed to disable it because it bugged the Landsmeet), so going against the templars could have worked by fleshing out the mages and the mage rebels. The developers could have also worked on the reactions from the companions, although I suppose Wynne would have fought The Warden to the death.

As for Bann Vaughan, I didn't find much reason to let him live. I killed him with my Surana Warden (because of Soris telling me about how he had been kidnapping women - including his bride), but I also thought I might be able to step into the power vacuum left his demise would provide, although it turned out that becoming the new Bann in Denerim was only avaliable for The Warden with the City Elf Origin.

It was nice to see that there was the option to become the new Teyrn of Gwaren, but it doesn't seem like that has any impact in the DLC or even Dragon Age II (although the same is true for almost all of the royal boons, I suppose).

Addai67 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Mouse is infinitely more interesting to me than Vaughn. A demon that not only avoided being "lol I want to kill!" but actually gives advice to a mage?

It was brilliant and I wish that DA demons were morel like that. Subtle, perhaps being a voice of temptation, but not being this overwhelming force that take away sanity. Or that pop out of the ground sporadically....God DA2 is so annoying.

Torpor was an interesting demon.

It's unfortunate that he was the exception, rather than the rule.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Forgot about torpor. Kind of hard to remember him everything considered.

It would be much more useful from my characters' perspective to judge Vaughan publicly after, to please the elves so that they are more likely to accept their projects.

[Costin_Razvan]

There is already going to be retribution bc/ the CE already broke into the castle, killed guards, stole stuff, etc.

I don't really give a **** what the other elves think. Thieves and cowards all of them, and Shanni is a complete idiot in my eyes.

I want practical reasons why I should not accept Vaughn's offer as a CE, not emmotional bull**** ones.

Then again my DN and HN would ( if they took over Fereldan ) gladly sell all the City Elves into Tevinter slavery if they could, secretly of course so as not to ****** off the Dalish Elves. 

The City Elves are useless, illterate, unskilled except at being servants and prostitutes and they would greatly ****** off the Dalish Elves if they were sent to live at Ostagar.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 11 janvier 2012 - 07:01 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Cheap labor. And they are completely outside the nobility / feudal framework, so they are far more likely to be fanatically loyal to a crown that gives them some rights.

Empowering city elves ----> path to real citizenship ----> centralization and a weakened nobility.

That's what Ferelden should aspire to, once more important things like reparation are undertaken. Hence why I am not a big fan of Anora's short sighted treatment of the elves, not for morality's sake. Though I do not disapprove enough of her to prefer Alistair, far from it.

[LobselVith8]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Cheap labor. And they are completely outside the nobility / feudal framework, so they are far more likely to be fanatically loyal to a crown that gives them some rights.

Empowering city elves ----> path to real citizenship ----> centralization and a weakened nobility.

That's what Ferelden should aspire to, once more important things like reparation are undertaken. Hence why I am not a big fan of Anora's short sighted treatment of the elves, not for morality's sake. Though I do not disapprove enough of her to prefer Alistair, far from it.

Wouldn't a personality hardened King Alistair with Queen Anora make up for the weaknesses that both rulers suffer from alone? Anora's revolutionary plan to build a university and refill the royal coffers with Alistair's handling of the elves would seem to show that the pair can be very good in unison, especially with the reaction from the common people that they are very popular.

Also, I know your canon characters are ruling Ferelden with Queen Anora or playing King Alistair like a puppet, but what do you think should have been the ramification for The Warden being the new Teyrn of Gwaren? I notice it never gets a single mention past the royal ceremony, even though The Warden would be one of the only two Teyrns throughout Ferelden (and possibly a canidate for the throne, like Teyrn Couslands was after Maric's death, and a similar reaction was made by Loghain's supporters who thought he was going to become the new King of Ferelden).

As far as the games are concerned, it doesn't seem to play a role, and maybe it's just me, but I find it odd. Loghain gets praise at Ostagar for his role in the Orlesian occupation, and that his status rose from a commoner to being a high noble. Loghain doesn't really seem to care that he's no longer Teyrn after the Landsmeet, but do you imagine the writers should have had some repercussions for being Teyrn in Awakening or the following DLC? I would have thought that dwarves, elves, or mages would react to one of their own being the new Teyrn of Gwaren.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Wouldn't a personality hardened King Alistair with Queen Anora make up for the weaknesses that both rulers suffer from alone? Anora's revolutionary plan to build a university and refill the royal coffers with Alistair's handling of the elves would seem to show that the pair can be very good in unison, especially with the reaction from the common people that they are very popular.

I've expressed my concern for the pairing many times before. Simply put, I do not think they will work together well, unless Alistair is unhardened and willing to get out of Anora's way. It will also require the Warden to be there to make the union work. Otherwise, I do not see them getting along well, especially if Alistair is hardened.

Furthermore, I am completely in agreement with Anora not wasting ressources on the elves in Denerim and that there are more important things to spend money on, something that Alistair wouldn't agree with. But what Anora fails to do is handle Denerim being overcrowded. I would have wanted a lot of elves to be moved elsewhere, like Gwaren. By force if necessary. 

but do you imagine the writers should have had some repercussions for being Teyrn in Awakening or the following DLC?

Yes, but since they do not seem to comprehend politics or they simply lacked resources to add a single sentence, they didn't.

Being Teyrn of Gwaren, especially as a Cousland, is huge. Being Chancellor to anyone but Alistair is useless on the otherhand. See my blog of Arcturus as to why I believe Gwaren is important.

[LobselVith8]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Wouldn't a personality hardened King Alistair with Queen Anora make up for the weaknesses that both rulers suffer from alone? Anora's revolutionary plan to build a university and refill the royal coffers with Alistair's handling of the elves would seem to show that the pair can be very good in unison, especially with the reaction from the common people that they are very popular.

I've expressed my concern for the pairing many times before. Simply put, I do not think they will work together well, unless Alistair is unhardened and willing to get out of Anora's way. It will also require the Warden to be there to make the union work. Otherwise, I do not see them getting along well, especially if Alistair is hardened.

I suppose the writers can take it in any direction they want to, but I recalled reading that a personality hardened King Alistair often agreed with Anora's decisions as Queen. It read to me like the writers were trying to make it the best option of all three avaliable. With a personality hardened Alistair married to Anora, Eamon leaves court to return to Redcliffe rather than stay as Chancellor. If The Warden becomes Chancellor instead, it's noted that he isn't really needed at the court, although Alistair and Anora trusted him to handle matters in their absense. It does seem, initially, that the two won't work well together, but the slide reads that Alistair's agreements with Anora surprised her.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Furthermore, I am completely in agreement with Anora not wasting ressources on the elves in Denerim and that there are more important things to spend money on, something that Alistair wouldn't agree with. But what Anora fails to do is handle Denerim being overcrowded. I would have wanted a lot of elves to be moved elsewhere, like Gwaren. By force if necessary. 

 
It seemed like Alistair's decision about the Alienage focused on allowing a member of the Alienage to sit at the royal court, rather than where the finances should be focused. Even with a pairing between Alistair and Anora, the map from Witch Hunt noted that the Alienage was suffering from the effects of the Fifth Blight, while the rest of Denerim had improved. I suppose this could simply be the writers not addressing the possible scenerios of who could be the ruler of Ferleden for this particular DLC, though.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

but do you imagine the writers should have had some repercussions for being Teyrn in Awakening or the following DLC?

Yes, but since they do not seem to comprehend politics or they simply lacked resources to add a single sentence, they didn't.

Being Teyrn of Gwaren, especially as a Cousland, is huge. Being Chancellor to anyone but Alistair is useless on the otherhand. See my blog of Arcturus as to why I believe Gwaren is important.

I don't expect to see the complexity of Arcturus' plans for Ferelden implemented in Dragon Age anytime soon.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LobselVith8 wrote...
but the slide reads that Alistair's agreements with Anora surprised her.

I remember that what surprised her was Alistair making an effort to govern, not that they are in agreement. I could be misremembering though.

But I really doubt that a hardened Alistair would see Anora eye to eye, especially if Loghain is alive.

It seemed like Alistair's decision about the Alienage focused on allowing a member of the Alienage to sit at the royal court, rather than where the finances should be focused. Even with a pairing between Alistair and Anora, the map from Witch Hunt noted that the Alienage was suffering from the effects of the Fifth Blight, while the rest of Denerim had improved. I suppose this could simply be the writers not addressing the possible scenerios of who could be the ruler of Ferleden for this particular DLC, though.

Far more likely that they forgot. A  riot happening under Anora and not Alistair is very likely due to finances.
And I think that putting an elf representative in the Royal court  is too early a move.

I don't expect to see the complexity of Arcturus' plans for Ferelden implemented in Dragon Age anytime soon.

Me neither. And after DA2, I do not expect any political issue to be handled even decently.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 janvier 2012 - 07:53 .

[Costin_Razvan]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Cheap labor. And they are completely outside the nobility / feudal framework, so they are far more likely to be fanatically loyal to a crown that gives them some rights.

Empowering city elves ----> path to real citizenship ----> centralization and a weakened nobility.

That's what Ferelden should aspire to, once more important things like reparation are undertaken. Hence why I am not a big fan of Anora's short sighted treatment of the elves, not for morality's sake. Though I do not disapprove enough of her to prefer Alistair, far from it.

I'd strongly argue there are far better ways to spend your kingdom's resources then the bloody elves. That's my viewpoint on it.

Though of course unlike you I am very much willing to massacre the entire nobility, or a vast majority of it, and in the context of a post-Blight situation with my Warden being the great hero who saved the entire nation I believe I could get away with it too. Blaming the entire defeat at Ostagar on a number of foolish noobles who actively worked against the crown, and then the civil war as well.

Ostagar would have to be blamed on the foolishness of the nobility, more specifically that of the nobles, though not Loghain ( for purely pragmatic reasons of course mind you ) but neither on Cailan.

Eamon would become the main villain in my tale, the one who failed to come aid his king in the most critical hour.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 11 janvier 2012 - 07:55 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Ah yes, how long has it been since we had that discussion?

Needless to say, I find it very reckless and imprudent. If I felt otherwise, I would not have a problem with not only massacring the nobility, but purging their entire lines from existence.

In any case, I do not think it would be that big of a spending with regards to elves. On the contrary, I think the benefits far outweigh the costs.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 janvier 2012 - 08:01 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Months at least.

As for the nobility. It doesn't matter what you do, but how you portray it. The toughest part would be to secure support from Maric's Shield, but that could be done very easily with the Ostagar letters, especially if one gains Loghain's support on their side.

I'd argue that Maric Shield is 1000 men strong and loyal to a fault to Loghain.

Then once the Landsmeet begins and the doors to the Palace shut and the massacre begins it could be portrayed that Eamon and his men attempted to take down Royal Authority, that they had no intention in a real Landsmeet and that they spat on centuries of Fereldan tradition to try and take the throne for themselves. and that the massacre was because of him slaughtering the nobles!

Eamon having troops in the Landsmeet would help this greatly. In fact I would encourage him to bring more troops then he wanted, "just in case"

Furthermore, armed thugs in Redcliffe armor could be sent out among the population ( The Warden's paid thugs of course ) to murder the noble's families in Denerim, Outside Denerim assassinations would take place, preferably some Darkspawn blood. It would cause chaos among the noble families that survive.

As for the surviving nobles that would be on your side, they would have to agree to sending their children as hostages and submiting to having a bodyguard detail handpicked by the Warden. If not then they die to. ( Other men capable of governing can be found ).

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 11 janvier 2012 - 08:15 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

If we were talking about a modern state with control over the media, I might have agreed. As it stands, I do not see this as feasible, nor does it answer the inevitable power vacuum that will befall Ferelden that is completely unequipped to deal with it.

A massacre of a few select nobles, I could see. Like proscriptions Octavian did (and even then, it's not the same. By that point Roman Senators were mostly powerless. Their deaths caused no vacuum).

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 janvier 2012 - 08:30 .

[Costin_Razvan]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If we were talking about a modern state with control over the media, I might have agreed. As it stands, I do not see this as feasible, nor does it answer the inevitable power vacuum that will befall Ferelden that is completely unequipped to deal with it.

I think the recent year has shown that it's actually impossible to really control the media nowadays, and I do believe it was much easier to control in medieval times, when you would just have to send criers announcing the news of their Lord's demise at the hand of a traitorous noble.

As for the power vaccum, every Bann and Arl would have a Seneschal, these people could be either made to believe the Crown's versions of events, killed and/or replaced with other people. Then create a new governing system with for each province governed by someone handpicked by you, who would have the backing of a well paid military ( all that gold the nobles had, and all the gold earned from slaver deals would cover it ) that would be well supplies and well equipped as well. Strike a deal with Orzammar, military assistance for economic aid and military supplies ( armor and weapons ). 

Create a professional police force of loyal men. Remove taxes for 1-2 years ( Slaves were quite expensive in say the Roman era ) and then work to create a better taxation system. Create or use a league of assassins to control the province leaders.

Of course I know the issue is more complex then that.

[KnightofPhoenix]

With the advent of social media. By "modern state" I mean Westphalian. Feudal systems virtually had no media and it was much tougher than what you are portraying.

Seneschals are nothing if you remove the feudal order in which they operate. Their legitimacy springs from the nobility, without them they are powerless. Furthermore the Crown is no where near equipped enough to be able to back dozens of seneschals and have an army capable of policing all the provinces.

Empires that were much more prosperous and much more advanced than primitive Ferelden faced hell to maintain a standing army (indeed, more often then not that burden ends up being their downfall). There is no way Ferelden can now field a standing army strong enough to police the entire state.

Ferelden nobility is not based on wealth, but on indirectly owning land (freeholder support) and a small army. They do not need to be wealthy. And even if they were, plundering their wealth is not a sustainable solution to maintaining an army for long.

I do not think you realize how weak, unequipped and poor Ferelden is. It can't sustain such a policy and the most likely result of such a scenario is complete disaster.

What Ferelden needs is long term patient responsible reforms, a la Augustus.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 janvier 2012 - 09:02 .

[Costin_Razvan]

You should read on Vlad Tepes then, his internal policies are what I went on in this first place, and they did work for him ( He was arrested by the King of Hungary to be used as a scapegoat and then he was assassinated ).

Unlike Rome Wallachia was a poor country, with quarelling nobles that constantly fought against each other, rampant crime, no real army and an ****** poor economy. His methods did achieve the results he wanted, and he did strengthen his nation even when he was facing a mighty empire as the Ottomans had.

Can you imagine leaving a gold cup for people to drink water from and that cup never to be stolen? Such was the power of Vlad Tepes.

The issue for him is that the hungarian King imprisoned him, thus destroyed every plan he had made.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 11 janvier 2012 - 09:15 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

I was under the impression that he only killed a select few boyars and not most of them.
Rome was in fact quite poor at around Octavian's rise to power. Individual Romans were very rich on the otherhand.

I do not know of Wallachia enough and how similar it was to Ferelden to comment. Though I doubt I would consider Vlad a great state builder. We also can't know if his methods would have been sustainable. I'd much rather have the Augustan way of reform.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 janvier 2012 - 09:16 .

[Costin_Razvan]

He killed a great deal of them, I can't give precise numbers since there aren't many of them.

I would however argue that Fereldan is very much like how Wallachia was at the time, embroiled in civil strife, with a lot of nobles that held power and a monarch that had very little power ( and which the Ottomans used as a puppet anyway ).

That Tepes took the throne, by force, managed to gain power, hold power, be LOVED ( yes loved, he is regarded as one of our greatest national heroes here ) by the peasants ( some owned land some didn't, it was as it was, but I don't really want to get into how much peasants cared about the land ) even though he used force, even excessively as you might say, and was known to be cruel to those unjust.

As for the nobles, he built one of his greatest fortress using JUST nobles as a workforce, I am not sure about the numbers but suffice to say it was a lot.

He destroyed crime in a nation rife with it, he struck fear into the very hearts of one of the best Ottoman leaders, and he fell only because of one **** king.

Edit: He was exceptionally cruel to the nobles who had ploted directly against him, but he hated the vast majority of them.

And we talk of a guy who once killed a poor soldier for one remark he made about the smell of spiked people.

Without wishing to discredit Augustus, I'd argue that Tepes was just a great man as he was except under different ( and much worse at the end ) circumstances. He also didn't have the allies Augustus had.

Of course I'd also argue that Ghenkis Khan beats the living crap out of all of them, and you don't want me to get into the details of how HE ruled now do you? 

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 11 janvier 2012 - 09:30 .