randName wrote...
Lethvienne wrote...
Wow. Do you even try to think about your arguments before posting them? The level the player has reached in a game has NOTHING to do with the character's strength. Level is a game mechanic to show your progress throughout the game. You thinking a game mechanic has anything to do with the character is ludicrous, The two are not connected in any way. Though I suppose as a RPer I can grasp that concept more easily than you.
You are throwing accusations, why?
I have been pnp roleplaying from that I was 7*, I was a GM from 11 to 15 before the group dissolved due to parties and girls, and from which point I've played cRPGs instead, and I always roleplay them.
I never cared for numbers or charts, but always roleplaying and good stories.
And I'm simply saying that the level, not as in my warrior is level 68, but as in the wardens level of might, or power, in DA:A is so staggering that it would be hard to continue that character.
And if they decided to drain that power away, they change the character and I have no interest in that, even less if they would drain the old party down to the tatters of rags you normally start cRPGs in.
That's like saying it'd be pointless to make a superhero game (with superman or some other super-powered character) because a guy who do all the things Superman can do would never start off as a level 1.
If they continue the Warden tale, and the might and power of the character is equal that of the end of DA:A, so the character would be able to do what she did in DA:A sure, as I said I never talked about the arbitrary charcter level numeric, but used level as a comparison to the surrounding.
Once again, LEVEL is just another way to measure a player's progress through the game. It's got absolutely nothing do with the actual character.
lev·el (l
v
l)n.1. a. Relative position or rank on a scale.
We use level to talk of our position relative to reference objects all the time, and this was how I used level.
If that's your only argument, your only reason for insisting the Warden can't return, then I really have nothing more to say to you because it's aburd, plain and simple.
Obviously you misread and thought only I meant the more specific character level numeric tied to a character in a cRPG, I never did.
Edit: And having the Warden, if he/she returns, start the game at level one as a game mechanic hardly constitutes 'ridicule', which means: to reduce or dismiss the importance or quality of somebody or something in a contemptuous way OR to engage in mocking laughter, mimicry, or comments intended to make fun of somebody in a contemptuous way.
This hardly needs commenting, since you and I talked about different things in regards of the word level.
Making the Warden a level 1 (game mechanic) to start off the game is hardly ridicule. Nor does it diminish his/her importance as a character. Please, don't be so dramatic.
Since a characters mechanical level says nothing about the character level, as in how you stand relative to the world, no I would agree.
Removing the character level relative to the world would.
* Some older kids/Teens were running the group, and I played either halflings or children.
EDIT: Nor do I care if a character, like the Warden, don't get the same talents, or the same level number - just a power that is more or less the same relative to the world as she had. Thus Hawk would fit better, since in the story of DA2 at most she killed some daemons, a ton of bandits, a crazed daemonic Templar and a High Dragon, and way too many golems.
Continuing Hawk, is akin to continuing the Warden if DA:O ended after the Sacred Ashes.
I'm not going to bother going through everything and adjusting the quotes and whatnot. Too much hassle. I'll just address everything in the order in which it appeared.
1. I did not hurl any accusation. I just asked if you actually took the time to think about your arguments before posting them, but at first you came off not only as very hostile, but overly proud as well. At least that is how you seemed to me and I responded accordingly.
2. The Warden's 'might' as you say does not mean they aren't a plausible main protagonist for DA3. Especially if you consider what Morrigan said at the end of Witch Hunt. She said that Flemeth would be a terrible threat to the world. Even more so than the darkspawn.
If that's the case, Flemeth would squash Hawke like a bug with minimal effort. For a threat like that, the world
needs a mighty hero such as Warden. Now, this is just my argument if I agreed that the Warden is, by reputation and deed, too mighty to be feasible. Which isn't true. Yes, he/she slayed the archdemon, but that was with an entire army at his/her back. The Warden could never have accomplished it alone and that's only if you chose to let the Warden strike the final blow. Some people chose to let Alistair or Loghain make the final sacrifice.
The Warden is impressive regardless, to be sure, but not some godly character that's so super and invincible that they can crush all who oppose them with less effort than it would take me to step on an ant. That just isn't the case. And as mentioned previously, the Warden has, as far as we know, been inactive for 10 years. If he/she hasn't been training that entire time it's more than reasonable to assume that they may have gotten a bit rusty over the years.
3. My Superman example stands. Or any Superhero. That doesn't prevent them from making Superhero games in which we can play the hero just because in the stories, these characters are almost godlike in their ability.
I think I pretty much addressed the Warden power thing already. It's not reason to keep him/her from returning. All it means is that the threat (probably Flemeth, which would be very interesting) would be even greater than the darkspawn and the archdemon.
4. The whole level thing. Still moot, The players level is never referred to in the game as part of the story. Whether you personally use it to rank your character is irrelevant. That
isn't what levels are in the game. They're just a mechanic to measure progress and have no impact on the 'in character' story, if you will. It shouldn't hinder the Warden's return.
5. The character's, to put it as you did, level in relation to world - as in the Warden being this unbeatable, Godlike hero - is just a perception. He/she is still flesh and blood. He/she can be injured, fall ill, get killed. They're mortal just like anyone else. A particularly capable mortal, yes, but still a mortal. The Warden is not an unbeatable god and was never portrayed as such, even at the end of Awakening. They are, simply put, a hero. That's
why they're the main character of Origins.
Origins was all about showing that your Warden was extraordinary in some way even before they became a hero. That's why they were chosen to be a Warden. That's why they survived the joining. In DA:O, you'd learn of what happened to the other 'origins' characters that you weren't playing because they did not have that certain, indefinable quality that set them apart. That's often how it is with the hero of the story. They possess some special trait that can't quite be pinpointed, And it is this trait that makes
them the hero.
It's not different with the Warden. Has the Warden done remarkable things? Absolutely. Because he/she is the hero. And that's not a viable reason for not allowing those of us that would like to continue with our Wardens from doing so. After all, it's not as though
You would be forced to play the Warden. For those, like you, who don't want to use the Warden, there is Hawke. Compromise.
But anyway, back to the point of power. While I agree that the Warden is impressive (he/she was impressive even more he/she became famous, if you think about it), I don't agree that this makes her/him too powerful (by deed) to be a main, playable character. No matter how strong the hero is, something or someone more powerful to challenge them and push them to their limits and beyond will always appear. And the Warden's been MIA for roughly 10 years. As I mentioned a littler earlier, he/she could be out of practice by now.
6 and final. Hawke is not a better option. Not in any way, shape or form. It was just BioWare's cookie-cutter character that talked, created as part of their attempt to turn Dragon Age 2 into a ME2 replica with swords and bows instead of blasters and lasers whatever else ME2 used. They thought it would appeal to the action crowd more than the more RP based Warden and thus make them more money. Plain and simple.
Hawke is a very static and weak character. Weak as in its development is very poor - practically nonexistent. There's nothing compelling about it, at least not in my estimation. The Warden I cared about. I worried about the Warden, I actually a pang of hurt when the Warden was betrayed. I felt happy when the one my Warden loved finally returned his affections. Even if the Warden was a silent character, he/she had the sort of depth that Hawke is sorely lacking in.
Personally, I still maintain that Hawke should have never been created in the first place, but that's another discussion entirely. Hawke's weakness in comparison to the Warden does not make it the better choice. Especially not if what Morrigan said about Flemeth is at all true.
Another reason Hawke is not a better choice . . . You mentioned the level and power of the Warden damaging the continuity and integrity of the story. I feel that Hawke does that far more.The Warden is the original hero and his/her story was left with many questions unanswered. Hawke's introduction into the series did nothing to answer any of those questions and ended in a way that just left you with more.
As a character Hawke is very weak and underdeveloped. But it is no so endearing that it stirs me to have
an desire to learn more about .
So maintain that the Warden is not godlike - certainly nowhere near enough to justify not allowing her/him to return - and they're, I feel, a better hero for the Dragon Age universe than Hawke. Even the name 'Hawke' is a terrible cliche.
I greatly prefer furthering the Warden's story over continuing with an empty, static character that has the depth of a teaspoon. However, regardless of
my feelings I want to be fair. Thus my compromise.
ADDITION: I missed a few things in my first go through. Allow me to rectify that right now.
randName wrote...
Having her return at a level where grunt darkspawns would be an
issue would, since it would change her role relative to the world, and
thus change who she is, would be an issue.
There are solutions
for this, one would have her so wounded that she would have to fight to
regain strength, an old fallen hero now back on her feet and trying to
regain herself.
That mostly works for Warriors and Rogues on the
other hand, you would have to resort to brain damage for the mages, one
either caused by accident, or forced upon the character.
Just
taking a demigod and making her a low level grunt won’t do without a
valid explanation, and the positives of such doesn’t outweigh the
negatives of using the old and worn method of yet an other amnesia.
You seem to be mixing up game mechanics with the actual character again. In the story the Warden defeated all these powerful enemies and became a hero (with the aid of his/her companions, you must remember. Never alone), yes. But even if, in DA3, the Warden came back as a level 1 mage, rogue or warrior - depending on what you chose to make them - changes nothing storywise because it's just a game mechanic.
Fighting darkspawn grunts to level up doesn't change who or what the Warden is in the story. And no, coming up with some contrived reason for any supposed 'weakness', the level drop, is not necessary. Because a drop in level is a game mechanic and is of no relation to the story. I have seen other games do this. The hero wins the day, et cetera. Next game comes around, the hero returns, but of course game-wise the hero can't be the same level as they were. You could import your last save from the previous game, but the level was not one of the things that came over. The hero started again at level one. It did not change who there are as a person, a character. They were
not perceived as being any weaker in character than they had been at the end of the previous game.
Heck, take Mass Effect as an example. Of we can have Shephard as the returning hero for that game,
why is so difficult to imagine a return of the Warden? Do you start Mass Effect 2 off as strong - in level - as you were in the first game? I highly doubt. This is
no different. There is
no reason for the Warden nor to reason. And certainly for something like level.
Modifié par Lethvienne, 11 avril 2011 - 02:03 .
Retour en haut
