227 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

IanPolaris wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Give me a specific dev or writer quote indicating that they designed [persuade] [intimidate] options to not be taken literally, but others have to.

If you can't, then I am not obliged to agree with your assumptions as if they are facts.
Play that way if you want, I on the otherhand am not going to take most lines literally.

I take it you never harden Alistair then?  If you do, then you are agreeing with my position as I pointed out to Addai earlier.  There are several places in the game where the persuade line description does not match what you really say.

-Polaris

I did. It's still handwaving and it can apply to any line of dialogue within reasonable limits, so long as they conform with what happens in the game next and don't contradict it (my handwaving of the Cauthrien scene does not in any way contradict what happens next).

In short, you have no proof for your assumption. I feel there is no more need to continue the discussion.

[IanPolaris]

ejoslin wrote...
Warden: The werewolves will make better allies.
Zevran: So it is to be a Grey Warden sacrifice. I see. (icy)

That only happens if you fail a persuade and it's arguably true.  Whatever their faults, the werewolves didn't lie to you or use you.  Zathrian has done both.

We are also getting pretty far afield.  Do you agree or disagree that you don't have to be mind-numbinly evil to pick the werewolves...merely mistaken.

If so, then what are we talking about?

-Polaris

[KnightofPhoenix]

ejoslin wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Give me a specific dev or writer quote indicating that they designed [persuade] [intimidate] options to not be taken literally, but others have to.

If you can't, then I am not obliged to agree with your assumptions as if they are facts.
Play that way if you want, I on the otherhand am not going to take most lines literally.

I take it you never harden Alistair then?  If you do, then you are agreeing with my position as I pointed out to Addai earlier.  There are several places in the game where the persuade line description does not match what you really say.

-Polaris

Alistair hardening line is NOT a persuade check....  

Oh I forgot. Well thank you. Case closed.

[IanPolaris]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I did. It's still handwaving and it can apply to any line of dialogue within reasonable limits, so long as they conform with what happens in the game next and don't contradict it (my handwaving of the Cauthrien scene does not in any way contradict what happens next).

In short, you have no proof for your assumption. I feel there is no more need to continue the discussion.

It's hypocritical to handwave that and not handwave this.  Enough said.

-Poalris

[ejoslin]

IanPolaris wrote...

ejoslin wrote...

zevran doesn't approve if he passes the check -- he just accepts it.  You just don't get one of the disapprovals that you would get if you fail (it's not the only disapproval in that conversation).  

Yes he does.  You get +1 approval.

And see, you're confusing the lady's motivations with the warden.  The warden says, straight out, that they would prefer the werewolves over the elves.  That is one of the arguments -- that the werewolves are stronger than the elves.  That the lady wants to end the curse is not in dispute.  what the warden says, however, shows that they have a different motivation.

The Warden is letting the lady handle the attack and negotiation or are you going to pretend the scene in the camp doesn't happen at all.  If so, it's my turn to call foul. 

-Polaris

I suggest you look at the dialog again.  He does not approve.  the line has NO approval attached to it at all.

see, this is a FRUSTRATING argument because I can quote you the dialog straight from the toolset and you will jsut say, "I think the dialog itself is not right and so i assume that what is written and actually means something else."

Again, I don't care HOW you RP a conversation.  but you are ignoring most lines from a conversation or saying they actually mean something totally different than what they say and people should agree with you because...  why?  I'll go with the actual dialog and toolset notes for my forum arguments and have my RP for my game and if I ever get around to writing a fanfic.

[KnightofPhoenix]

IanPolaris wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I did. It's still handwaving and it can apply to any line of dialogue within reasonable limits, so long as they conform with what happens in the game next and don't contradict it (my handwaving of the Cauthrien scene does not in any way contradict what happens next).

In short, you have no proof for your assumption. I feel there is no more need to continue the discussion.

It's hypocritical to handwave that and not handwave this.  Enough said.

-Poalris

I just said, I don't mind handwaving that line of dialogue with the werewolves, I find it within reasonable limits. And it conforms with what happens next.

[IanPolaris]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I did. It's still handwaving and it can apply to any line of dialogue within reasonable limits, so long as they conform with what happens in the game next and don't contradict it (my handwaving of the Cauthrien scene does not in any way contradict what happens next).

In short, you have no proof for your assumption. I feel there is no more need to continue the discussion.

It's hypocritical to handwave that and not handwave this.  Enough said.

-Poalris

I just said, I don't mind handwaving that line of dialogue with the werewolves, I find it within reasonable limits. And it conforms with what happens next.

I was taling more towards Addai than at you.  My only real point is while choosing the wolves is a cruddy choice that I don't do often, you don't have to be Hannibal Lector to make it.

-Polaris

[KnightofPhoenix]

IanPolaris wrote...
I was taling more towards Addai than at you.  My only real point is while choosing the wolves is a cruddy choice that I don't do often, you don't have to be Hannibal Lector to make it.

-Polaris

Agreed.

[ejoslin]

IanPolaris wrote...

ejoslin wrote...
Warden: The werewolves will make better allies.
Zevran: So it is to be a Grey Warden sacrifice. I see. (icy)

That only happens if you fail a persuade and it's arguably true.  Whatever their faults, the werewolves didn't lie to you or use you.  Zathrian has done both.

We are also getting pretty far afield.  Do you agree or disagree that you don't have to be mind-numbinly evil to pick the werewolves...merely mistaken.

If so, then what are we talking about?

-Polaris

I think killing the Dalish is...  chaotic stupid tbh.  You have no treaty with the werewolves.  You're picking them because you think they'll be stronger fighters, but the lady and the werewolves never agree to fight on your side if you kill the Dalish.  And that doesn't even bring into the fact that the Dalish can and will call other Dalish clans if you help them so they have the strength of numbers.  If you attack the Dalish, you better HOPE that the curse doesn't end because then you have neither Dalish elves nor werewolves to fight with you -- only some humans who have not lived as humans and have no clue nor desire to fight.  That is, if they would even fight with you.

[IanPolaris]

ejoslin wrote...

I suggest you look at the dialog again.  He does not approve.  the line has NO approval attached to it at all.

I seem to remember a +1 when I did it, but that might have come from a minor gift.  Even so, acceptance is acceptance.  I'll take it.

see, this is a FRUSTRATING argument because I can quote you the dialog straight from the toolset and you will jsut say, "I think the dialog itself is not right and so i assume that what is written and actually means something else."

I don't willy nilly.  I do when the game evidence itself shows that you said and agreed to something else.  This is such a case.  The Alistair hardening is another such a case.  I don't accept the Ser Cauthrian surrender as such a case since it's perfectly plausible to explain her precise words without it.

You can't here because both swiftrunner and the Lady make it perfectly and abundantly clear that you are agreeing to attack the Dalish in order to FORCE Zathrian to break the curse.  Actually do that scene in the Dalish camp, and you will see that the Lady controls the battle and she gives Zathrian one last chance (and his clan one last chance by telling them everything).

You go into this battle knowing this and going along with it.  This open game fact trumps any specific dialog line that disagrees with it.

Again, I don't care HOW you RP a conversation.  but you are ignoring most lines from a conversation or saying they actually mean something totally different than what they say and people should agree with you because...  why?  I'll go with the actual dialog and toolset notes for my forum arguments and have my RP for my game and if I ever get around to writing a fanfic.

I am not ignoring them.  I am placing them in context.  When game reality contraindicates a specific line of dialog with no other explaination, then the line of dialog loses.  That was established with Alistair.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

ejoslin wrote...

I think killing the Dalish is...  chaotic stupid tbh.  You have no treaty with the werewolves.  You're picking them because you think they'll be stronger fighters, but the lady and the werewolves never agree to fight on your side if you kill the Dalish.  And that doesn't even bring into the fact that the Dalish can and will call other Dalish clans if you help them so they have the strength of numbers.  If you attack the Dalish, you better HOPE that the curse doesn't end because then you have neither Dalish elves nor werewolves to fight with you -- only some humans who have not lived as humans and have no clue nor desire to fight.  That is, if they would even fight with you.

Read the rest of the thread.  I don't think that overall picking the wolves is a very good idea.  In fact I think it's a cruddy idea and definately non-good, but it's not mind-numbingly evil as some would have you believe.  There are many good reasons why one might justify this decision and we've gone over them here.  The big one concerning the treaty is this:

Zathrian by lying to you and putting you in this situation has arguably already broken the treaty with the Wardens and in any event has proven that he can not be trusted.  If you can't trust him in this, how much do you think that treaty is worth?  (Wet Toilet paper comes to mind).  That's a cold way of looking at it, but it's not evil.

-Polaris

Edit:  It's not even necessarily true that if the curse is broken the Dalish would refuse to fight with you.  After all (if you speak with the Dalish hunters after the mission in the Brecilian forest) there are dark stories and dark rumors about Zathrian that have existed for centuries.  A more reasonable keeper (like the one your Dalish PC came from) would have a strong probablity of at least hearing you out in which case you can still appeal to the treaty.

Yeah it becomes a longshot or crapshoot depending on how you look at it, but that become true the moment you found out that Zathrian lied to you in spite of the treaty.

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 24 décembre 2010 - 01:57 .

[ejoslin]

IanPolaris wrote...

ejoslin wrote...

I suggest you look at the dialog again.  He does not approve.  the line has NO approval attached to it at all.

I seem to remember a +1 when I did it, but that might have come from a minor gift.  Even so, acceptance is acceptance.  I'll take it.

see, this is a FRUSTRATING argument because I can quote you the dialog straight from the toolset and you will jsut say, "I think the dialog itself is not right and so i assume that what is written and actually means something else."

I don't willy nilly.  I do when the game evidence itself shows that you said and agreed to something else.  This is such a case.  The Alistair hardening is another such a case.  I don't accept the Ser Cauthrian surrender as such a case since it's perfectly plausible to explain her precise words without it.

You can't here because both swiftrunner and the Lady make it perfectly and abundantly clear that you are agreeing to attack the Dalish in order to FORCE Zathrian to break the curse.  Actually do that scene in the Dalish camp, and you will see that the Lady controls the battle and she gives Zathrian one last chance (and his clan one last chance by telling them everything).

You go into this battle knowing this and going along with it.  This open game fact trumps any specific dialog line that disagrees with it.

Again, I don't care HOW you RP a conversation.  but you are ignoring most lines from a conversation or saying they actually mean something totally different than what they say and people should agree with you because...  why?  I'll go with the actual dialog and toolset notes for my forum arguments and have my RP for my game and if I ever get around to writing a fanfic.

I am not ignoring them.  I am placing them in context.  When game reality contraindicates a specific line of dialog with no other explaination, then the line of dialog loses.  That was established with Alistair.

-Polaris

But...  see...  sputter...  Look, you are looking at one line, and you ARE interpreting it and discounting several other lines.

swiftrunner wants the curse ended.  The lady wants the curse ended.  The gray warden wants the strongest army for the blight.  you cannot take what swiftrunner says and extrapolate it to what the warden is thinking -- I think what the warden says shows the warden's motivations far more than what an NPC who has an entirely different agenda says.

As far as Alistair and hardening him?  I don't think you established anything other than the hardening line is not particularly well written.  I think even the writers would agree with that.  It's not a [persuade] check so your argument regarding [persuade] checks being different than other lines falls.

However, DAO does allow for a lot of interpretation.  It's part of what makes the game so good -- you can actually put yourself into your warden and the conversations can take on different meanings no matter what.

I personally think killing the Dalish is stupid on many levels.  I don't think it's evil -- I think it's stupid.  I suppose you can look at it as evil -- trapping the werewolves in a curse forever for a stronger army -- but even that doesn't strike me as very evil as your goal is to have the strongest army to save the land.

[IanPolaris]

ejoslin wrote...

But...  see...  sputter...  Look, you are looking at one line, and you ARE interpreting it and discounting several other lines.

swiftrunner wants the curse ended.  The lady wants the curse ended.  The gray warden wants the strongest army for the blight.  you cannot take what swiftrunner says and extrapolate it to what the warden is thinking -- I think what the warden says shows the warden's motivations far more than what an NPC who has an entirely different agenda says.

I am not.  I am using game evidence.  Go on and play the next scene in the Dalish camp.  It's not fall on the camp and slaughter every elf you see.

No, it's, "Were here and you will end this curse"  [That's the short version but the Lady, not you leads it and she clearly is trying to convince Zathrian to end the curse and explain to the clan what he has done presumably in the hope that they can pressure him as well.]

It is this ENTIRE SCENE as a game fact which invalidates all the dialog lines that diagree.

As far as Alistair and hardening him?  I don't think you established anything other than the hardening line is not particularly well written.  I think even the writers would agree with that.  It's not a [persuade] check so your argument regarding [persuade] checks being different than other lines falls.

There are other persuade checks that also aren't precisely as written, but you do have a point.  I'll even agree that interpreting lines should be done sparingly and only if the game itself directly contradicts the line.  That happens in the case of Alistair and it also happens here (see the scene in the Dalish camp).

However, DAO does allow for a lot of interpretation.  It's part of what makes the game so good -- you can actually put yourself into your warden and the conversations can take on different meanings no matter what.

I personally think killing the Dalish is stupid on many levels.  I don't think it's evil -- I think it's stupid.  I suppose you can look at it as evil -- trapping the werewolves in a curse forever for a stronger army -- but even that doesn't strike me as very evil as your goal is to have the strongest army to save the land.

The original argument was that only an evil and stupid warden would make this choice and I contest this.  That is not the same as condoning it.  I merely am saying and will continue to say that the choice in some cases is not only defensible but understandable.

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 24 décembre 2010 - 02:15 .

[ejoslin]

The lady wants the curse ended and says so. The warden wants the strongest army and says so. The lines of both of them back them up.

As far as would only a evil and stupid warden try to kill the Dalish? I think it's stupid, yes. I suppose you could rp it that you had an agreement with the lady, in which case you wouldn't necessarily have to be stupid. As far as evil? If your goal is to save the land by whatever means necessary and you think the werewolves would be stronger, then no, you're not being evil.

Modifié par ejoslin, 24 décembre 2010 - 02:25 .

[Ollymandias]

As far as evil? If your goal is to save the land by whatever means necessary and you think the werewolves would be stronger, then no, you're not being evil

"Evil" is a loaded, emotive term and means different things to different people. It might not be the most useful word to use.



I can see how the Warden could see a practical outcome to siding with the werewolves in terms of saving the land, but it isn't "nice".

[ejoslin]

Ollymandias wrote...

As far as evil? If your goal is to save the land by whatever means necessary and you think the werewolves would be stronger, then no, you're not being evil

"Evil" is a loaded, emotive term and means different things to different people. It might not be the most useful word to use.

I can see how the Warden could see a practical outcome to siding with the werewolves in terms of saving the land, but it isn't "nice".

I don't recall saying it was nice.  I certainly don't think it's nice at all.  But gray wardens don't confine themselves to doing what is nice -- they do what is needed.

whether you believe the werewolves are needed is a whole different issue.  I still think it's stupid to kill the Dalish so I never do

Edit: Looking at the camp dialog if you come up to attack them, you CAN say that Zathrien will end the curse, one way or the other.  You can also say that you're in it for the stronger army.  Or that he deserves what he gets (so revenge).  OR that your'e doing it for the lulz.  Gotta love the game sometimes.

Still, your initial comment was that you want to kill the Dalish (and your party reacts to that).  And it's stupid to go up to the camp with the werewolves and threaten the man who has kept the curse going for centuries and think that he'll end the curse because you say so.  If I ever do this choice again (did it once for the achievement) it will be for the lulz.  

Modifié par ejoslin, 24 décembre 2010 - 02:43 .

[Ollymandias]

I didn't intend to imply you meant it was nice. Though I can see why you assumed that when I put quotation marks around "nice". Apologies for the confusion.
Just saying that "evil" can be defined in so many different ways, and has connotations of simplistic black/white morality which might not be very meaningful in the context of the Dragon Age world where just about everyone except the Darkspawn are depicted in shades of grey.

But gray wardens don't confine themselves to doing what is nice -- they do what is needed.

Alistair would disagree, straight before he throws his toys out of the pram and storms out of the Landsmeet. But yeah, I agree with you that GWs should do whatever it takes to end the Blight.
Some would say that the "ends justify the means" approach can lead to "evil" actions for "good" ends though.

Edit for: Bah.  I think I just don't like using the word "evil" or "good" outside of philosophy lectures.  I may have been over-preoccupied with semantics.

Modifié par Ollymandias, 24 décembre 2010 - 02:49 .

[ejoslin]

Ollymandias wrote...

I didn't intend to imply you meant it was nice. Though I can see why you assumed that when I put quotation marks around "nice". Apologies for the confusion.
Just saying that "evil" can be defined in so many different ways, and has connotations of simplistic black/white morality which might not be very meaningful in the context of the Dragon Age world where just about everyone except the Darkspawn are depicted in shades of grey.

But gray wardens don't confine themselves to doing what is nice -- they do what is needed.

Alistair would disagree, straight before he throws his toys out of the pram and storms out of the Landsmeet. But yeah, I agree with you that GWs should do whatever it takes to end the Blight.
Some would say that the "ends justify the means" approach can lead to "evil" actions for "good" ends though.

Edit for: Bah.  I think I just don't like using the word "evil" or "good" outside of philosophy lectures.  I may have been over-preoccupied with semantics.

Oh, I agree with you here.  I was actually trying to put the whole "is it evil" into a different perspective.  In DAO, it really is hard to be evil -- there are too many ambiguities.  You're faced with overcoming a horrible evil and you are young and inexperienced and most of your choices aren't clear cut.  What may seem 'nice" may also seem dangerous and some of your choices will end up with very unintended consequences.

[Ollymandias]

You're faced with overcoming a horrible evil and you are young and inexperienced and most of your choices aren't clear cut. What may seem 'nice" may also seem dangerous and some of your choices will end up with very unintended consequences.

Yeah. An example is when you're faced with Abomination Connor and you have the choice between doing something about him then and there with Jowan's blood magic, or making the journey over to the Circle who may or may not decide to help him. (They are obliged to help the Warden, but whether they will be willing to help an abomination and the woman who tried to raise an apostate is not known.) It seemed pretty dangerous to me the first time I played to leave Connor in Redcliffe Castle and hope that he would be docile until I got back... but for all I knew, the minute I walked out he could have decided to eat every living person in there!



I like the "nicest guy =/= best king" in Orzammar too. If I was choosing a guy to take my kids fishing, it would be Harrowmont over Bhelen for sure. But Bhelen has better policies (according to general gossip around town and the biased town criers in the game as well as the epilogue slides after it) and is just what a stagnant and declining dwarven culture needs in a king.

[Costin_Razvan]

I don't think it is stupid to side with the Werewolves. The conversation with the Lady before making a choice does imply quite greatly that if Zathrian does not perform a ritual to end the curse then it won't end.



As for convincing them....well you just helped them out greatly ( or at least THEY think you helped them out greatly ) by killing Zathrian. Is it so much of a stretch of the situation to think that you could convince them to help you in turn after?

[Joy Divison]

When I played a Dalish elf I had a hard time not siding with the werewolves. I do not think siding with the werewolves is a dicey proposition as far as receiving their aid in the Blight; you must take certain liberties with the dialogue options and it seems pretty clear to me it is quid pro quo - you assist them vs Zathrian and they help you with the Blight. The Lady is a much more trustworthy entity than Zathrian and she has a big advantage of not being one of the biggest sack of ****s in the game unlike Zathrian. I find the darkspawn slightly more endearing.



To me anyway, the Dalish have allowed their own prejudices and hatred to delude themselves as being the eternal victims. Zathrian is the only keeper who has discovered the ancient magic and lived hundreds of years...right. Enough of them are suspicious of Zathrian's handling of the werewolf attack such as the hunter who lost his wife and Sarel and Lanaya want to believe he is a revered figure who does not wrong rather than question things that are suspicious even in their starry eyes. And the hunter who relishes the opportunity to mercilessly hunt down the werewolves you freed from the curse ("they will be easier to kill") is not exactly a ringing endorsement for these folks who sing a song everyday about the humans would not let them be when it is they who start wars. It was bad enough my Keeper just took the clan north and said, "Let the humans fight the Blight," even though she has an obligation to assist the Grey Wardens and if the darkspawn win it's not like hiding in her little cart will make them go away.



Swiftrunner gets priority as to the "Well, who can blame them?" rejoinder, at least for me.

[Addai]

My Dalish PCs were very pissed with Zathrian, moreso I think than my other PCs would have been, who were used to being screwed around by everyone. I still can't imagine a plausible scenario where a Dalish Warden would agree to slaughter an entire clan because of the misdeeds of the elders, without some serious mental malfunction going on. Velanna is exiled from her clan for breaking with the elders and bringing the clan into serious danger. She and her supporters aren't executed for it. I could see it if you're roleplaying a Dalish Warden who has so severely rejected her upbringing that she's just that crazy, but there again I consider it stupid evil and not a rational or pragmatic choice.

As for whether the werewolf or Dalish army are the better fighters, that's debatable. You have a finite number of werewolves (especially since you just ran through the forest killing every one you saw) unless you intend to spread the curse to other humans. I could maybe see roleplaying a ruthless pragmatist who considers a certain number of infections to be worth ending the Blight. Sort of a case of sparing the Anvil knowing that people are going to be forced to become golems. If you save the Anvil and put Bhelen on the throne, you can pretty much guarantee that will happen (and it does). So I guess I could see it in that light.

Modifié par Addai67, 24 décembre 2010 - 05:45 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...
As for whether the werewolf or Dalish army are the better fighters, that's debatable. You have a finite number of werewolves (especially since you just ran through the forest killing every one you saw).

The same can be said about the Dalish and that's what I disliked about the whole situation. None of them seemed that crucial.

Barring the fact that the Dalish sustained casualties from the werewolves, how do we even know that there are any other clan nearby? Wouldn't they all leave Ferelden because there is a Blight (something that Zathrian says he would have done)? We ran into Zathrian's clan by sheer coincidence, because they stopped at one place (and Leliana implies that they let us find them). What's to say that there are any clans nearby? And even if there was one or two additional clans, will that provide sufficient numbers for them to be worthwhile?

That's one flaw of DA:O. Quests taken individually are fine and fun. Taken in the context of preparing for war, well I didn't feel that as much as I would have liked. The exception is Orzammar, because you would get a city state to fight for you.

In the Circle quest, most Templars and mages are dead. Ok, I guess Templars can be summoned from nearby chantries (that was also part of my rational as to why I picked them). But most mages are dead and we are given no indication that they have sufficient numbers to be of any use (7 mages at Ostagar were useless). Redcliffe, most of the soldiers at the castle were killed and many knights went missing.

The Dalish quest has the same problem and I am not given enough information and incentives to even care about either faction, in the context of a Blight.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 24 décembre 2010 - 05:59 .

[IanPolaris]

Addai,



Ideally I would (esp for a Dalish PC) would have liked an option to explicitly force the issue in front of the clan and have him either remove the curse or be exiled from the clan. However, it would wind up being the same (the slaughter of the clan) since even when the truth is revealed in front of the whole clan AND Zathrian doesn't deny it, NOT ONE Dalish in the camp stands against Zathrian. Not One.



Frankly that tells me everything I need to know about the Dalish.



-Polaris

[Addai]

It's a little frustrating for the Dalish fan that the game lore seems to be of two minds about them. On the one hand, they are supposed to be fearsome warriors, and you would expect a people that intent on pure survival would be. Granted, their martial skills are more towards hunting and defensive warfare, but the game shows them as rather whimsical and insipid even for that. In a forum in the old thread I saw Gaider correcting someone who thought the wars against the elves must have been easily won. He said the opposite was true, and that's why the Dalish are hated so much, because they're feared. But then you meet Cammen. *sigh*

As for numbers, that's iffy too. It might have been more appropriate if the Warden had, say, heard of an emergency meeting of the clans called together to talk about the Blight and shown up for it.

Modifié par Addai67, 24 décembre 2010 - 06:10 .