145 réponses à ce sujet

[Kijin]

PantheraOnca wrote...

Mages need for the creature to be sentient and have connections to the fade. If you believe dragons are sentient this is a fair argument, but canon leaves it undefined so we can discuss it for entire lifetimes and David Gaider can laugh in the meantime.

I don't know that you need fade-yness to wield blood magic. Reaverness is thought to be a form of blood magic, but its not your typical magery.

Reavers gain their power by drinking the blood of a dragon: "A true reaver has tasted the ritually prepared blood of a dragon"

Dragon's blood apparently has supernatural properties - possibly even magical properties. I doubt that drinking the blood of a powerful human mage would convey similar benefits, so evidently dragons are far more than simple animals.

[Blacklash93]

The effects of drinking dragon blood is a primitive form of blood magic, surely. It allows people to tap into their blood for power. It teaches a form of blood magic to non-mages, basically.

But if dragon blood teaches normal people to channel their blood into power, could it teach a mage blood magic?

Modifié par Blacklash93, 02 avril 2011 - 07:34 .

[Kijin]

If a mage were to drink the blood of a dragon that has been ritually prepared, then it probably would grant them the ability to use blood magic. According to the Reaver's description in DAO, the skills of a Reaver were first taught to humanity by demons: "Demonic spirits teach more than blood magic. "

[Blacklash93]

The spec description also says that blood magic was originally taught from demons with no mention of Dumat.

If demons originally taught blood magic, I doubt the first Archon of the Imperium somehow learning it would be a big deal because you would think it would be a lot more common in that case.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 02 avril 2011 - 08:00 .

[Kijin]

True, those little descriptions are hardly reliable.

Feasting on dragon's blood gives a variety of different properties apparently. You gain greater strength and endurance, an increased desire to kill and you can potentially become insane. 

It's true that the blood must be ritually prepared before it is consumed. However, the ritual does not grant the power - the blood must. If the ritual was sufficient enough to grant the power, then they would not use dragon's blood which is incredibly hard to find. I can understand why dragon's blood would grant greater strength and endurance, but potential insanity? That almost sounds like Rage Demons only without the fire.

[Zan Mura]

Rifneno wrote...

I am very disappointed that dragons are only around dolphin intelligence.  Dragons are generally at least at intelligent as humans.  Pretty much the entire RPG genre has spawned from D&D, where dragons are so intelligent that many of them find it downright insulting when a creature as simple and stupid as a human even tries to understand them.

Well, opinions. Right? I'm extremely happy they went with that route. In general fantasy has rehashed the *exact* same BS about elves, dragons, dwarves etc over and over and over and over that people have lost the ability to even expect anything different. In this, BW couldn't have done better. They took up a familiar idea and changed it just enough to make it feel completely fresh and full of new mystery, while still keeping it familiar enough to be easily approached by fans of the genre. I think the whole "dragons are but extraordinary and rare animals" approach is great.

We've seen those sentient talking magical dragons a bazillion times before. It's good that for once there's something different.

[Kijin]

Zan Mura wrote...

]Well, opinions. Right? I'm extremely happy they went with that route. In general fantasy has rehashed the *exact* same BS about elves, dragons, dwarves etc over and over and over and over that people have lost the ability to even expect anything different. In this, BW couldn't have done better. They took up a familiar idea and changed it just enough to make it feel completely fresh and full of new mystery, while still keeping it familiar enough to be easily approached by fans of the genre. I think the whole "dragons are but extraordinary and rare animals" approach is great.

We've seen those sentient talking magical dragons a bazillion times before. It's good that for once there's something different.

Then why call it Dragon Age? Why is it that the Warden can potentially fight 3 High Dragons in DAO? More importantly, why do Archdemons always appear as Dragons? We know the Archdemon of the Fifth Blight appeared as a dragon, and we also know that Dumat - the archdemon of the First Blight - appeared as a dragon. 

Dragons are clearly important in Dragon Age, yet we know almost nothing about them. Dragon Age is many things, but original is not one of them. DAO, you are the last of the Grey Wardens, which means you are the 'chosen one' - your mission is to defend the world from an ancient evil. This is not a unique story. Dragon Age is part of the "General Fantasy" that you are railing against. 

[Zan Mura]

Kijin wrote...

Then why call it Dragon Age? ...

Dragons are clearly important in Dragon Age, yet we know almost nothing about them. Dragon Age is many things, but original is not one of them. ... This is not a unique story. Dragon Age is part of the "General Fantasy" that you are railing against. 

For one, I've never much bought into the whole "if it's in the name, then the whole product needs to be all about it" idea. That's kinda like the people saying MMO's can't have any solo aspects, going "it's massively MULTIPLAYER online", as if that was an argument. There's a *lot* of things in DA we don't know a lot about, it's the theme there, the whole point. Whether that's elves, the old gods, the fade, the nature of blood magic, ancient dwarves, Flemeth, etc.

For two, I'm not railing against anything at all. And yes, considering it's sharing a highly similar setting with LoTR / D&D etc, DA is fairly unique. What do you want, for it to be sci-fi?

[Blacklash93]

Zan Mura wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I am very disappointed that dragons are only around dolphin intelligence.  Dragons are generally at least at intelligent as humans.  Pretty much the entire RPG genre has spawned from D&D, where dragons are so intelligent that many of them find it downright insulting when a creature as simple and stupid as a human even tries to understand them.

Well, opinions. Right? I'm extremely happy they went with that route. In general fantasy has rehashed the *exact* same BS about elves, dragons, dwarves etc over and over and over and over that people have lost the ability to even expect anything different. In this, BW couldn't have done better. They took up a familiar idea and changed it just enough to make it feel completely fresh and full of new mystery, while still keeping it familiar enough to be easily approached by fans of the genre. I think the whole "dragons are but extraordinary and rare animals" approach is great.

We've seen those sentient talking magical dragons a bazillion times before. It's good that for once there's something different.

I agree. The dragons in DA are cool because most of them act like normal animals. It's a refreshing take on them that isn't seen often these days... Not that a few truly sentient ones wouldn't be welcome.

However, I would like dragons to play more of a role in the lore and story. It's possible they could do so as they are known as now, but some may need to be intelligent to pull that off. We already have the old gods and possibly Flemeth, so that's a good starting point.

I only wish they could be more than mini-boss fodder.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 02 avril 2011 - 09:29 .

[Kijin]

Zan Mura wrote...

Kijin wrote...

Then why call it Dragon Age? ...

Dragons are clearly important in Dragon Age, yet we know almost nothing about them. Dragon Age is many things, but original is not one of them. ... This is not a unique story. Dragon Age is part of the "General Fantasy" that you are railing against. 

For one, I've never much bought into the whole "if it's in the name, then the whole product needs to be all about it" idea. That's kinda like the people saying MMO's can't have any solo aspects, going "it's massively MULTIPLAYER online", as if that was an argument. There's a *lot* of things in DA we don't know a lot about, it's the theme there, the whole point. Whether that's elves, the old gods, the fade, the nature of blood magic, ancient dwarves, Flemeth, etc.

For two, I'm not railing against anything at all. And yes, considering it's sharing a highly similar setting with LoTR / D&D etc, DA is fairly unique. What do you want, for it to be sci-fi?

The name of the product represent's its core idea. Star Wars is about an intergalactic conflict in space. Star Trek is about a long voyage of exploration through space. Mass Effect centres around element zero, which when used properly creates a mass effect field - which is the basis for all technology in the Mass Effect universe. Lord of the Rings centres around Sauron, who created the One Ring so he could rule over all of the other ring-bearing races.  Dungeons and Dragons focuses around exploring dungeons and slaying dragons. Do you want me to go on? How about Harry Potter? District 9? Inception? Fallout? Elder Scrolls (which are a series of ancient, archaic prophesies that predict all of the events that take place in the games)? Monkey Island? Day of the Tentacle? Back to the Future? Casablanca? Gone With the Wind? Indiana Jones? Need I continue?

The name of the franchise represents what that world is about. Bioware did not choose the name because it sounded good - they chose the name because dragons are critical within the story they are creating. If Dragons weren't important, then they would have called in Circle Age or Flemeth Age or Fade Age. But they did not - the developers chose DRAGON Age because they felt that the presence of dragons was far more important than the other concepts you mentioned. 

Second, I am not criticizing Dragon Age - I love the Dragon Age series. However, that does not change the fact that it is rather generic fantasy - it just so happens that Dragon Age has an extremely well developed lore, which makes discussing it interesting. The reality is the Dragon Age series has spent far too much time on dragons for them to be unimportant. The Archdemons, the most threatening force in Dragon Age, all appear as dragons. As the main character, you frequently fight against dragons. Flemeth, one of the most important characters of the story, frequently transforms into a dragon. Don't tell me dragons are not important, when they clearly are. 

[Blacklash93]

It might just be a case of Instant Awesome on the title's part.

I hope not, but it's possible.

[Arppis]

Hehe, well the game series IS called Dragon Age. So it might be possible.

[Kijin]

This isn't some dime story fantasy novel - Bioware/EA has put millions of dollars into the Dragon Age series. Maybe I have too much faith in Bioware, but I can't imagine that they would haphazardly name the series Dragon Age simply because the term 'dragon' sounds cool.

This is partly because Bioware has a history of naming their games appropriately. With Bioware's games, there is always a clear connection between the central conflict of the story and the title of the game. Jade Empire and Knights of the Old Republic are proof of that - as is Mass Effect and Baldur's Gate.

[lorvincent]

Blacklash93 wrote...

It might just be a case of Instant Awesome on the title's part.

I hope not, but it's possible.

This post made you instantly heroic.

[Blacklash93]

Kijin wrote...

This isn't some dime story fantasy novel - Bioware/EA has put millions of dollars into the Dragon Age series. Maybe I have too much faith in Bioware, but I can't imagine that they would haphazardly name the series Dragon Age simply because the term 'dragon' sounds cool.

This is partly because Bioware has a history of naming their games appropriately. With Bioware's games, there is always a clear connection between the central conflict of the story and the title of the game. Jade Empire and Knights of the Old Republic are proof of that - as is Mass Effect and Baldur's Gate.

The games are technically about the "Dragon Age", the 9th century in Thedas' history under the Chantry's rule.

I'm not satisfied with that, personally. If I see a game named after dragons with one also being on the cover, I expect them to be important. I expect to see dragons do something in the story. The Archdemon in Origins justified it enough, IMO, but nothing in DA2 warrants the title at all.

The "Dragon Age" in context to the game's setting is something that will fly over half of the players' heads. Most of them don't even bother with the codex. It's rather obscure otherwise and isn't mentioned often at all.

[Kijin]

Blacklash93 wrote...

The games are technically about the "Dragon Age", the 9th century in Thedas' history under the Chantry's rule.

I'm not satisfied with that, personally. If I see a game named after dragons with one also being on the cover, I expect them to be important. I expect to see dragons do something in the story. The Archdemon in Origins justified it enough, IMO, but nothing in DA2 warrants the title at all.

The "Dragon Age" in context to the game's setting is something that will fly over half of the players' heads. Most of them don't even bother with the codex. It's rather obscure otherwise and isn't mentioned often at all.

That is far too incidental for me to accept. I do realize it's the name of the age - but so far dragons have not been all that important in the dragon age. Dragons were thought extinct - then some dragons went on a rampage, and that began the dragon age - in which some dragons cause a bit of chaos, but otherwise do nothing. The Archdemon fight was completely unsatisfying for me, so I can't accept that as the justification  for the title, but I do agree that nothing in DA2 warrants the title. 

And it's a shame that more players don't read the game's detailed codexes - they are by far the best part of the game, imo. 

[Danjaru]

Kijin wrote...

Edit: Humans can cast magic, as can Quanari and Elves. It is not unreasonable to think that a sentient dragon would also be capable of casting magic. If Flemeth is a high dragon, then her human form would be the result of shapeshifting magic. Keep in mind, Flemeth changes the appearance of her human form, even though this cannot be accomplished by a human using shapeshifting magic.

Her being a different breed of Dragon that can use Magic would be rather interesting, goes back to the theory that she might be an old god (as they could use magic). Still defeated by the fact that she's female (Cause old gods are male).. Maybe she's an unrecorded female old god, or she's male but prefers looking like a female o.O.. Who knows..

Modifié par Danjaru, 03 avril 2011 - 01:05 .

[Kijin]

Danjaru wrote...

Kijin wrote...

Edit: Humans can cast magic, as can Quanari and Elves. It is not unreasonable to think that a sentient dragon would also be capable of casting magic. If Flemeth is a high dragon, then her human form would be the result of shapeshifting magic. Keep in mind, Flemeth changes the appearance of her human form, even though this cannot be accomplished by a human using shapeshifting magic.

Her being a different breed of Dragon that can use Magic would be rather interesting, goes back to the theory that she might be an old god (as they could use magic). Still defeated by the fact that she's female (Cause old gods are male).. Maybe she's an unrecorded female old god, or she's male but prefers looking like a female o.O.. Who knows..

You're absolutely right, Danjaru. This same problem exists with the Fen'Harel theory - Fen'Harel is also a man, so any proponent of that theory would have to explain why Fen'Harel appears in female form. 

It should be noted that we don't know if the Old Gods were male - we only know they were worshipped as male Gods. However, if the Old Gods are dragons (and they probably are), then we know they can only be female, as Drakes never grow wings.

[lorvincent]

Kijin wrote...

Danjaru wrote...

Kijin wrote...

Edit: Humans can cast magic, as can Quanari and Elves. It is not unreasonable to think that a sentient dragon would also be capable of casting magic. If Flemeth is a high dragon, then her human form would be the result of shapeshifting magic. Keep in mind, Flemeth changes the appearance of her human form, even though this cannot be accomplished by a human using shapeshifting magic.

Her being a different breed of Dragon that can use Magic would be rather interesting, goes back to the theory that she might be an old god (as they could use magic). Still defeated by the fact that she's female (Cause old gods are male).. Maybe she's an unrecorded female old god, or she's male but prefers looking like a female o.O.. Who knows..

You're absolutely right, Danjaru. This same problem exists with the Fen'Harel theory - Fen'Harel is also a man, so any proponent of that theory would have to explain why Fen'Harel appears in female form. 

It should be noted that we don't know if the Old Gods were male - we only know they were worshipped as male Gods. However, if the Old Gods are dragons (and they probably are), then we know they can only be female, as Drakes never grow wings.

And I will take this opportunity one last time...

http://social.biowar...4/index/6862136

Modifié par lorvincent, 03 avril 2011 - 08:21 .

[Blacklash93]

Maybe Flemeth is immortal, but instead of fully posessing her daughters, she splits her soul and posesses them with that. Basically just making copies of herself.

"Must I only be in one place...? Bodies are such limiting things."

Modifié par Blacklash93, 04 avril 2011 - 09:05 .

[Blacklash93]

Kijin wrote...

It should be noted that we don't know if the Old Gods were male - we only know they were worshipped as male Gods. However, if the Old Gods are dragons (and they probably are), then we know they can only be female, as Drakes never grow wings.

Flemeth doesn't have to be one of the Old Gods. She could just be something like them. What we've been discussing is that she may not be turning into a dragon, but just simply IS one.

Her human form highly resembles her dragon form. That's obvious.

I also find the way she transforms odd. She seems to be straining herself when she turns into a human in DA2's introduction, but doesn't have to move a muscle when turning into a dragon. And when she comes back from the amulet, she still has that dragon image twirling around her. Why that still?

Also, when she dies in Origins, she stays in dragon form when she is slain. Don't you need to be alive and aware, constantly summoning mana to sustain shapeshifting?

Modifié par Blacklash93, 15 avril 2011 - 10:45 .