75 réponses à ce sujet

[Burdokva]

Seeing quite a few threads about whether or not people are going to side with the Chantry or the Old Gods followers, humans or elves etc. made me wonder something - those of you who are importing a save, will your personal Hawke follow the moral stance and the decisions of your Grey Warden from Origins?  Or will you go the opposite?

It's one thing to continue with the same character and established morality, but an existing setting with a brand new persona? Personally, I think I would go for the opposite choice compared to my Warden, at least when it comes to choosing warring factions. It seems like a fun concept to pit two characters I've played against each other based on their allegiances . 

[DarthCaine]

Seeing as how I'm playing both, yes, probably

[Dave of Canada]

Depends entirely on the scenario that presents Hawke. I'm making Hawke a sarcastic joking guy but if his family gets hurt or something then that might shape his personality.

[Lord Gremlin]

Well, my "canon" characters:
Origins: Amoral, selfish male human mage.
DA2: Amoral, selfish female human (duh) mage.

Bottom line: take their gold, then kill them anyway - because setting people on fire is funny. As far as I understood those characters of my choice will be relatives as well.

Modifié par Lord Gremlin, 26 octobre 2010 - 09:12 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

Depends on how my Hawke will experience the world.

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 26 octobre 2010 - 09:14 .

[Tranceptor]

I'm tempted to play opposites, but I just hate the chantry too much and will always fight against them. I think the characters might different in how they approach/handle situations, but on the 'big' issues they will probably be on the same page unless whoever is opposing teh chantry turns out to be unimaginably evil.



Even then I might have to be convinced that the chantry is the lesser of two evils.

[Blastback]

For my definative playthrough, my Hawke will have the same basic personality as my warden, and every other cRPG charater I play when I have the choice. Funny, nice do gooder. I have trouble playing meaner characters. Even though they are only hurting digital people I still feel guilty. The plot and circumstances of the game will determine how I react to diffrent factions however, I'm not siding with a group just because my Warden did.

[Aermas]

I play out as many decisions as I can so I'll be playing out all decisions again

[KhorinShizucor]

Blastback wrote...

For my definative playthrough, my Hawke will have the same basic personality as my warden, and every other cRPG charater I play when I have the choice. Funny, nice do gooder. I have trouble playing meaner characters. Even though they are only hurting digital people I still feel guilty. The plot and circumstances of the game will determine how I react to diffrent factions however, I'm not siding with a group just because my Warden did.

Pretty much describes how I play. 

[FellowerOfOdin]

Same. Lawful good all the way folks!

[Blastback]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

Same. Lawful good all the way folks!

Neutral good for me.  Which can be a pain, cause some of the best prestige classes for my 3.5 fighter in D&D have lawful alignment restrictions.

[Aermas]

Lawful Good also, I am a manipulative bastard to my companions though, I make sure they have high approvals & only disagree with them for the important game decisions, like sparing a life.

[FellowerOfOdin]

Hey, sharing gifts is lawful good-like. And disagreeing with people is totally in order when those people clearly offend innocents or violate your ideals. This being said, we lawful good players need a way to slay Morrigan - heard that Bioware?

[Taiyama]

My Hawke will pretty much be just as good-natured as my Warden, but he'll differ in some pretty profound ways. Jade Hawke, for example, believes blood magic is a useful tool while Taiyama abhorred it. Very importantly, Jade is an agnostic (and hates the Chantry) while Taiyama was an Andrastian (and liked the Chantry). Judging by how things are going down, that'll be important. Also, Jade is a Jerk with a Heart of Gold who will always couch his do-gooding behind such qualifiers as "I'm not doing this for your sake!" or "I was just in the area!" etc. while Taiyama was a Hot-blooded Knight Errant (sorry, I'm in a rather Tropey mood today).



Either way, they'll handle some situations similarly and some differently. Both, in the end, will still be heroes, though.

[errant_knight]

I never play amoral, immoral, or selfish characters, although I do let them have human flaws. I just don't enjoy spending time with characters who aren't basically good. I don't like them, I don't want to know them, and I don't want to inflict them on the world. I just don't find it enjoyable. The only exception to that is if I'm trying to understand certain kinds of decisions and I want to see how that would work. I never play a whole game that way, though. I just can't stand it--or the character.

So yeah, my Hawke will have a similar moral compass to my warden.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I don't find moral questions that interesting, so I rarely build a character around them.

That said, I played Wardens of varying moral stances, and I'll likely do the same with Hawke should I be able to replay the game.

[Dave of Canada]

errant_knight wrote...

I never play amoral, immoral, or selfish characters, although I do let them have human flaws. I just don't enjoy spending time with characters who aren't basically good. I don't like them, I don't want to know them, and I don't want to inflict them on the world. I just don't find it enjoyable. The only exception to that is if I'm trying to understand certain kinds of decisions and I want to see how that would work. I never play a whole game that way, though. I just can't stand it--or the character.

Pretty much. I can't leave Jim to starve or kill Tommy's parents, I always need to help them. The only "flaws" I have on most my characters is pragmatism and become extremely angry if insulted / betrayed.

[errant_knight]

Taiyama wrote...

My Hawke will pretty much be just as good-natured as my Warden, but he'll differ in some pretty profound ways. Jade Hawke, for example, believes blood magic is a useful tool while Taiyama abhorred it. Very importantly, Jade is an agnostic (and hates the Chantry) while Taiyama was an Andrastian (and liked the Chantry). Judging by how things are going down, that'll be important. Also, Jade is a Jerk with a Heart of Gold who will always couch his do-gooding behind such qualifiers as "I'm not doing this for your sake!" or "I was just in the area!" etc. while Taiyama was a Hot-blooded Knight Errant (sorry, I'm in a rather Tropey mood today).

Either way, they'll handle some situations similarly and some differently. Both, in the end, will still be heroes, though.

Gah! I just lost an hour in TV trope land, and it's all your fault!

[stormrain]

I have 2 canons:

Rogue Female Tabris ----->  Male Mage Hawke
Rogue Male Cousland ----> Rogue Lady Hawke


They are all varying degrees of sarcastic, chaotic good, knight in sour armor, nutjobs. They're good, but not nice.

As for alliegances, both my Wardens could care less about the Chantry/Mage issue, they had bigger things to worry about. So far, I'm thinking Lady Hawke will want to be left alone by the Chantry and/or reform for the better. Male Hawke... not sure yet, but I doubt his intentions will be as favorable.

errant_knight wrote...

Gah! I just lost an hour in TV trope land, and it's all your fault!

It's the most wonderful black hole in the 'verse. You can't escape.

Modifié par Captain Uccisore, 26 octobre 2010 - 10:51 .

[Riona45]

My Hawke will be a benevolent trickster mage (pretty much Neutral Good).  My Warden was also Neutral Good and she certainly had a dollop of smartass in her, but you could be a "trickster" only to a certain point.  Hopefully DA2 will let me play that aspect up.

[Wulfram]

The only thing that's really likely to be different would be the attitude towards the chantry. Hawke's opinion is likely to be pretty negative.

[AlanC9]

Warden, singular? Hawke, singular? I've got several of the first an I expect I'll have several of the second.

[Perfecti0nist]

A sarcastic, cynical, cocky badass. Deadpan Snarker.  Heroic sociopath. Doesn't have a conscience. He's the type of guy who will start a fight just because he's bored.

Even though he's a bastard, he's a fantastic leader who can make you want to follow him into hell and most importantly, he's very loyal to his partners in crime.

My Warden was pretty much the same. Actually, all my RPG characters are similar.

Modifié par Perfecti0nist, 27 octobre 2010 - 12:17 .

[Nyaore]

Honestly? I have no clue how I'm going to role play Hawke at this moment in time, especially since we know next to nothing about his/her upbringing beyond a few scant details. Chances are I'll probably default to a personality similar to that of my City Elf from the previous game, as it tends to be the one I'm most comfortable roleplaying with for my initial playthrough. However even then there's bound to be variations between the two of them because of the differing circumstances. Once I've finished my initial playthrough however, which will be made with my goody-two shoes HNF Origins save, all bets are off.

Modifié par Nyaore, 27 octobre 2010 - 12:21 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

AlanC9 wrote...

Warden, singular? Hawke, singular? I've got several of the first an I expect I'll have several of the second.

Not for me.  Just one of each.  The only game I've every replayed with different characters was the Baldur's Gate series.  And arguably KOTOR 2 as well, though the second time I was just being as awful as I possibly could...because I could 

Warden: In D&D terms, a chaotic good female mage, one of my few truly more chaotic characters.  Independent, feisty, snarky, determined, and pretty ignorant in terms of politics and the wider world.

Hawke: In D&D terms, a lawful evil female mage.  So the polar opposite of my Warden morally.  Personality-wise, they share the same strong determinator streak, but Hawke will be much more ruthless, ambitious, and politically savvy.