330 réponses à ce sujet

[mousestalker]

To be fair to Wynne, if you want to see the 'blood mage accusation' in game, you have to use a mod. It's not in the vanilla game at all. Some people think that it isn't there because they ran out of time before release. I dunno. It may be something that the developers and writers came to believe didn't truly reflect Wynne and didn't add to the story. Either way, I don't think it's entirely fair to base your perception of Wynne on a mod. In the vanilla game you can make mages dance to your whim every chance you get right in front of her and she will never call you on it.



I do have the mod and have used it since I first became aware of it. What's interesting is that if you are a blood mage and don't use your bloody spells in front of her, she stills calls you out.

[CalJones]

I think it was removed because it can break the game (at least that's what I heard) due to you having to kill everyone in the tower.

[Avilia]

CalJones wrote...

I think it was removed because it can break the game (at least that's what I heard) due to you having to kill everyone in the tower.

Yep, think so too.  If you don't have high enough persuade you can find yourself battling both the mages and the Templars.

Effectively meaning you can't finish that quest and breaking the game.

That's what I've heard anyways as always prepared to be corrected.

/runs away without revealing her thoughts on Wynne.

[mousestalker]

CalJones wrote...

I think it was removed because it can break the game (at least that's what I heard) due to you having to kill everyone in the tower.

I've heard that as well. My main point still remains. The only fair way to regard Wynne is the way she is presented unmodded.

[Sarah1281]

I've heard that as well. My main point still remains. The only fair way to regard Wynne is the way she is presented unmodded.

It's dialogue that's in the game but needs to be restored. Why can't that be part of it? That's like saying it's not 'fair' to say that Oghren shows that he can be perceptive in his restored banters with Shale or that it's not 'fair' to mention any of the things that had to be restored in the Zevran romance when discussing the merits of it. It's not like some bored modder decided it might be fun to make Wynne freak out about blood magic. It wouldn't be fair to judge Wynne based on a mod that, say, had her attack you if you chose every option about griffons in the story and call her a crazy **** because of it but this is just like taking a deleted scene of a movie into account.

[maxernst]

Sarah1281 wrote...

I've heard that as well. My main point still remains. The only fair way to regard Wynne is the way she is presented unmodded.

It's dialogue that's in the game but needs to be restored. Why can't that be part of it? That's like saying it's not 'fair' to say that Oghren shows that he can be perceptive in his restored banters with Shale or that it's not 'fair' to mention any of the things that had to be restored in the Zevran romance when discussing the merits of it. It's not like some bored modder decided it might be fun to make Wynne freak out about blood magic. It wouldn't be fair to judge Wynne based on a mod that, say, had her attack you if you chose every option about griffons in the story and call her a crazy **** because of it but this is just like taking a deleted scene of a movie into account.

Personally, I don't think taking deleted scenes from movies into account in judging a character is a good idea either, unless you know that the scene was deleted over the objections of the director.  For all you know, the director might have deleted it in part because he felt the portrayal of that character was not what he wanted.

[Addai]

mousestalker wrote...

To be fair to Wynne, if you want to see the 'blood mage accusation' in game, you have to use a mod. It's not in the vanilla game at all. Some people think that it isn't there because they ran out of time before release. I dunno. It may be something that the developers and writers came to believe didn't truly reflect Wynne and didn't add to the story. Either way, I don't think it's entirely fair to base your perception of Wynne on a mod. In the vanilla game you can make mages dance to your whim every chance you get right in front of her and she will never call you on it.

I do have the mod and have used it since I first became aware of it. What's interesting is that if you are a blood mage and don't use your bloody spells in front of her, she stills calls you out.

Not a mod so much as restored dialogue.  And if she is willing to attack you simply for desecrating the urn (blood magic)...?  Seems completely IC to me.

[Dean_the_Young]

Just so I can clarify...



This deleted scene is that if the Warden is a blood mage during the Tower quest, at the end when the Templar asks if all the blood mages/maleficars are dealt with Wynn will call the Grey Warden out as one, possibly leading the Templars and surviving Mages to turn on you and try and kill you as a future threat to Ferelden?



'Ungrateful', perhaps, but Blood Mages are Blood Mages in the eyes of the Tower and the Templars. Whether you're benign like Jowan or the most malevolent sort of all, you're the same sort of criminal to them, the sort that just caused the mess. A lack of distinction in favor of the player, perhaps, but then hardly unique or all-damning.

[Sarah1281]

And yet Irving and Greagoir realize that you're too important, as one of the only GWs in Ferelden during a Blight, to encorce that with (and GWs regularly accept blood mages). Wynne calls you out and with a basic persuade check, you have Irving ANG Greagoir tripping all over themselves to get her to shut up. It's only if you actually admit it that they feel compelled to do something but it's not like you convince them that you're not.

[Addai]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

'Ungrateful', perhaps, but Blood Mages are Blood Mages in the eyes of the Tower and the Templars. Whether you're benign like Jowan or the most malevolent sort of all, you're the same sort of criminal to them, the sort that just caused the mess. A lack of distinction in favor of the player, perhaps, but then hardly unique or all-damning.

Hypocritical, rather.  You're the savior of mankind and oh can you please help me save my precious Circle... ok, thanks, now have a Silver Sword of Mercy for your pains?  LIke I said upthread, Wynne is a Chantry tool and she is the last person who should be.  A bit of Stockholm Syndrome at work, IMO.

I do love hearing Irving tell her to STFU, however.   

[Monica21]

CalJones wrote...

I think it was removed because it can break the game (at least that's what I heard) due to you having to kill everyone in the tower.

I'm not sure if I can buy that. You can, after all, choose not to help Redcliffe and if you don't you don't get Redcliffe soldiers. (That's second-hand, because I haven't done it myself.) It's not game breaking, it just leaves you with fewer choices at the end.

I'm more willing to believe that the developers thought it either wasn't character appropriate or didn't fit the situation.

[Dean_the_Young]

Addai67 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

'Ungrateful', perhaps, but Blood Mages are Blood Mages in the eyes of the Tower and the Templars. Whether you're benign like Jowan or the most malevolent sort of all, you're the same sort of criminal to them, the sort that just caused the mess. A lack of distinction in favor of the player, perhaps, but then hardly unique or all-damning.

Hypocritical, rather.  You're the savior of mankind and oh can you please help me save my precious Circle... ok, thanks, now have a Silver Sword of Mercy for your pains?  LIke I said upthread, Wynne is a Chantry tool and she is the last person who should be.  A bit of Stockholm Syndrome at work, IMO.

I do love hearing Irving tell her to STFU, however.   

That's not hypocrisy: hypocrisy in that case would be if she thought you the blood mage, after working to see them all held responsible as she thinks they should be, were given a free pass. Nothing mandates that she refuse all your help under all circumstances, or that, having accepted your help for a greater problem, she must never, ever then seek to work against that next greater problem afterwards.

Wynn has a view of what Wardens should be, and what Wardens should not be, and being a blood mage is higher on her priorities than your (unknown) claims of indispensibility. That's a position or priorities, not hypocrisy.

[Dean_the_Young]

Sarah1281 wrote...

And yet Irving and Greagoir realize that you're too important, as one of the only GWs in Ferelden during a Blight, to encorce that with (and GWs regularly accept blood mages). Wynne calls you out and with a basic persuade check, you have Irving ANG Greagoir tripping all over themselves to get her to shut up. It's only if you actually admit it that they feel compelled to do something but it's not like you convince them that you're not.

And so... what?

Wynn's feelings and concerns are somehow wrong? Invalid? I haven't heard anything suggesting she refuses to go with you after that point.

I'm rather perplexed at what the issue here is, besides the possibility of some wounded player pride. That you're one of the only Grey Wardens in Ferelden isn't quite so all-important when no one knows the indespinsibility of the Wardens. That the Wardens do accept Blood Mages doesn't mean the Wardens are right to either. 'The Grey Wardens tolerate it' is a overall poor shield against outsider's criticisms and opinons. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Monica21 wrote...

CalJones wrote...

I think it was removed because it can break the game (at least that's what I heard) due to you having to kill everyone in the tower.

I'm not sure if I can buy that. You can, after all, choose not to help Redcliffe and if you don't you don't get Redcliffe soldiers. (That's second-hand, because I haven't done it myself.) It's not game breaking, it just leaves you with fewer choices at the end.

That is incorrect, you still get the soldiers even if redcliff is overrun. They are mostly mercenaries and don't come from the village. And we still get the cutscene of villagers going to war.

[LobselVith8]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

'Ungrateful', perhaps, but Blood Mages are Blood Mages in the eyes of the Tower and the Templars. Whether you're benign like Jowan or the most malevolent sort of all, you're the same sort of criminal to them, the sort that just caused the mess. A lack of distinction in favor of the player, perhaps, but then hardly unique or all-damning.

Hypocritical, rather.  You're the savior of mankind and oh can you please help me save my precious Circle... ok, thanks, now have a Silver Sword of Mercy for your pains?  LIke I said upthread, Wynne is a Chantry tool and she is the last person who should be.  A bit of Stockholm Syndrome at work, IMO.

I do love hearing Irving tell her to STFU, however.   

That's not hypocrisy: hypocrisy in that case would be if she thought you the blood mage, after working to see them all held responsible as she thinks they should be, were given a free pass. Nothing mandates that she refuse all your help under all circumstances, or that, having accepted your help for a greater problem, she must never, ever then seek to work against that next greater problem afterwards.

Wynne has a view of what Wardens should be, and what Wardens should not be, and being a blood mage is higher on her priorities than your (unknown) claims of indispensibility. That's a position or priorities, not hypocrisy.

Considering that Wynne is an abomination, it's ridiculous that she would try to kill the Warden for being a blood mage in the face of the Warden stopping the blood mages, abominations (including Uldred and the Sloth Demon), and saving Irving and the Circle. Being a blood mage isn't the only reason that causes Wynne to try to murder one of the last two Wardens in all of Ferelden. If the Warden decides that the tower needs to be cleansed or pours blood into the ashes she kills the Warden, although she has no problem if the templars decide to murder every last man, woman and child of the tower and will never bother to dissuade the Warden from actually pouring blood onto the ashes, even if the Warden declares their intent to do so beforehand.

Wynne is a doormat for the Chantry who has no issue killing the last bastion of hope for Ferelden. Wynne does nothing to stop the Chantry's abuse of the mages, despite losing her son and her apprentice to this system. The Warden can't argue against the tyranny of Chantry policy with her, she tries to persuade her apprentice to return to the same Circle that almost murdered him when he was a fourteen year old, and Awakening shows that she's still trying to keep the mages under the boot of the templars.

[Zjarcal]

SirOccam wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

I do consider Wynne a terrible person but
for different reasons (read my post in the first page if you're
interested in knowing why I think so terribly of Wynne).

I haven't played a blood mage before, so I haven't seen that conversation. I agree that sounds like it would be annoying. But it makes sense with what I said before, though. The more "ruthless" or pragmatic Wardens are those who are more likely to turn to Blood Magic in the first place. I like to play my characters mostly good-hearted, slightly idealistic...basically wanting to end the Blight but not willing to go to ANY means, necessarily. They steer clear of Blood Magic, and try to help the people they come across, even if those people aren't directly involved in combating the Blight. So this is probably precisely why I haven't had that conversation.

Why do you have to assume that because my character was a blood mage I was playing a "ruthless and pragmatic" warden? My blood mage did pretty much every "good" choice in the game, including helping everyone in Redcliffe, saving both Connor and Isolde, lifting the curse with the Dalish, helping almost everyone (except Brother Burkel) in Orzammar without greed in mind, and of course, saving the stupid Circle.

My mage never used blood magic to do any harm, hell, she never even used the "blood sacrifice" spell because it was wrong (she was only going to use her blood and no one else's).

Blood magic by itself is not evil. You can do bad things with it (just as you can do bad things with any sort of power), but simply being a blood mage should not qualify you as a "ruthless warden".

EDIT: Also, however questionable a character's moral background might be, if that person saves your life (as is the case with Wynne here, because if you didn't save the Circle the Templars would've killed her once the Right of Annulment had been called) the least you can do is keep your mouth shut about their "questionable ethics", especially when surrounded by a group of people who would kill such person.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 26 août 2010 - 05:34 .

[Monica21]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

CalJones wrote...

I think it was removed because it can break the game (at least that's what I heard) due to you having to kill everyone in the tower.

I'm not sure if I can buy that. You can, after all, choose not to help Redcliffe and if you don't you don't get Redcliffe soldiers. (That's second-hand, because I haven't done it myself.) It's not game breaking, it just leaves you with fewer choices at the end.

That is incorrect, you still get the soldiers even if redcliff is overrun. They are mostly mercenaries and don't come from the village. And we still get the cutscene of villagers going to war.

Ah, good to know. Still, have one less option during the last battle isn't something I'd consider game-breaking.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Does sacrificing your own life force via blood magic to heal an injured child, still make blood magic necessarily "evil"? I agree with Zjarcal. Wynne's hatred towards blood magic has nothing to do with morality. And everything to do with her dogmatic blind belief in what the Chantry teaches her.

About Wynne even *daring* to suggest that Anerin (? forgot his name) goes back to the Circle. I find it very appalling. Not only did he become more accomplished and free than any circle magi, but he is trying to revive his people's culture (and probably believes in their gods, making him a non-Andrastrian). And all that Wynne can come up with is tell him to go back to the people who tried to kill him because of her? I am surprised Anerin didn't slap her right there. It was extremily inconsiderate and disrespectful of her to say that. And that's not mentioning how the Chantry does not trust Dalish magic and is trying to learn ways to fight it (Awakening chantry board). So how is it a good idea for a Dalish keeper to go to the Circle?

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 août 2010 - 05:35 .

[Sarah1281]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

And yet Irving and Greagoir realize that you're too important, as one of the only GWs in Ferelden during a Blight, to encorce that with (and GWs regularly accept blood mages). Wynne calls you out and with a basic persuade check, you have Irving ANG Greagoir tripping all over themselves to get her to shut up. It's only if you actually admit it that they feel compelled to do something but it's not like you convince them that you're not.

And so... what?

Wynn's feelings and concerns are somehow wrong? Invalid? I haven't heard anything suggesting she refuses to go with you after that point.

I'm rather perplexed at what the issue here is, besides the possibility of some wounded player pride. That you're one of the only Grey Wardens in Ferelden isn't quite so all-important when no one knows the indespinsibility of the Wardens. That the Wardens do accept Blood Mages doesn't mean the Wardens are right to either. 'The Grey Wardens tolerate it' is a overall poor shield against outsider's criticisms and opinons. 

Have you actually seen that confrontation? It's on Youtube. Wynne doesn't refuse to go with you after that point because either Irving and Greagoir covers for you so she thinks you used 'Grey Warden non-blood magic' or she attacks you along with everyone else and dies. And if you don't restore that content and use blood magic later she simply never notices just like she doesn't notice when she becomes a blood mage.
 
Wounded player pride has nothing to do with it. I'm not the one who decided that, as a GW during the Blight, I should get a free pass for being a blood mage. You said Wynne was acting like everyone else in the Tower and Templars would act but she didn't. Irving and Greagoir, the people in charge, decide that Wynne needs to STFU because while they may not be happy with your 'GW magic' (which Greagoir even says), they're gointg to trust your judgement. They're not going to say 'thanks for saving everything I know and love, now what were those strange spells you were using?' Wynne is the ONLY one who has a problem with it if it's just hinted at. You have to literally confess to being a blood mage (or fail at persuade) in order to get Irving or Greagoir to come after you because they, the characters in the game, realize that what you have to do is more important than making sure only Chantry-sanctioned spells are used.

It's not outsiders that are criticizing; it's Wynne trying to get you killed. What does she honestly think will happen by bringing this up? At best, she gets peace of mind that you aren't really a nasty blood mage who had the audacity to use your illicit spells to save the Circle and at worst? She just doomed Ferelden.

Edit: And the whole 'no one knows why the Wardens are important' argument doesn't apply as Wynne believes that only GW can save Ferelden so even if they weren't actually necessary, she'd still be destroying what she thought Ferelden's only hope was.

Modifié par Sarah1281, 26 août 2010 - 05:49 .

[Zjarcal]

Monica21 wrote...

Ah, good to know. Still, have one less option during the last battle isn't something I'd consider game-breaking.

It's not game-breaking because of that. The problem is that when it's time to call for the Landsmeet, Arl Eamon will ask you if you have completed all the treaty quests. Because you don't have the help of the mages or the templars, the game assumes you haven't completed that quest, so you can't start the Landsmeet quest.

[rak72]

How do you get her to start attacking you because Mori is an Apostate? I've been trying to get that to happen, but have been unsucessful

[Zjarcal]

rak72 wrote...

How do you get her to start attacking you because Mori is an Apostate? I've been trying to get that to happen, but have been unsucessful

Hmm, I don't think you can get that scenario.

[maxernst]

Zjarcal wrote...

rak72 wrote...

How do you get her to start attacking you because Mori is an Apostate? I've been trying to get that to happen, but have been unsucessful

Hmm, I don't think you can get that scenario.

Oh, yes you can.  My very first playthrough I got into that scenario.  I can't recall the full series of dialogue choices I made, but one of them was telling Morrigan that she could have been a circle mage herself had things been different.

[Addai]

rak72 wrote...

How do you get her to start attacking you because Mori is an Apostate? I've been trying to get that to happen, but have been unsucessful

You agree with Morrigan that the mages are living a half-life and deserve a merciful end.  Wynne starts talking about how your companion is dangerous, and if you continue to side with Morrigan, *bam*... fireworks. 

[Zjarcal]

OHHHHH, I get it.

You're talking about when you first meet her at the tower. I thought she meant some conversation you had later on.

Damn it, I have the stupids...

And what has been said is right. Just let Morrigan jump in the conversation at the Circle Tower when you first meet Wynne, agree with Morri, and then things go *bam*.... I posted a screenshot of the aftermath on the first page of this thread.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 26 août 2010 - 07:21 .