317 réponses à ce sujet

[hoorayforicecream]

Xilizhra wrote...

Is there any proof of this?

Yes. In his conversation with Gascard, he says that he was unable to be the teacher that Gascard wanted, and Gascard was always interested in necromancy. This leads me to believe that he already knew it, but was plunged into despair when his wife died, after which he came out of it with his plan to bring her back.

The actual lines in question are:
Quentin: I'm sorry, Gascard. When my wife died, I lost all hope. I wasn't able to be the mentor you deserved.

Gascard: You promised you'd teach me, Quentin! You're going to deliver on that promise!
Quentin: But now my work is finished, and I can teach you as I always meant to. Come back to me, Gascard.

I don't see anything here that indicates that Quentin was into blood magic before then. It seems like Gascard is for the necromancy stuff, but any mage with experience in magic could have said the first line and it would be true.

[Xilizhra]

If you persuade Gascard with diplomacy, he says something about how he'd always imagined coaxing life from dead flesh would be glorious. I'm pretty sure that's what he was always interested in Quentin for.

[hoorayforicecream]

Xilizhra wrote...

If you persuade Gascard with diplomacy, he says something about how he'd always imagined coaxing life from dead flesh would be glorious. I'm pretty sure that's what he was always interested in Quentin for.

That doesn't prove that Quentin knew it when Gascard approached him. It just shows that Gascard wanted to learn it. Quentin was an experienced mage who apparently wasn't in the circle. Why wouldn't Gascard approach such a person to see if he could learn what he wanted?

[Xilizhra]

That seems like a fairly enormous coincidence; also, how logical is it for someone that grief-stricken to start learning a whole new branch of magic? And why the hell would he bother creating a Harvester ritual when he was so obsessed with bringing his wife back?

[IanPolaris]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

That seems like a fairly enormous coincidence; also, how logical is it for someone that grief-stricken to start learning a whole new branch of magic? And why the hell would he bother creating a Harvester ritual when he was so obsessed with bringing his wife back?

Perhaps he stumbled onto the Harvester by accident. Perhaps he thought Orsino would be interested in it, instead *shrug*

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem

-Polaris

[hoorayforicecream]

Xilizhra wrote...

That seems like a fairly enormous coincidence; also, how logical is it for someone that grief-stricken to start learning a whole new branch of magic? And why the hell would he bother creating a Harvester ritual when he was so obsessed with bringing his wife back?

Because it was the only branch of magic that could possibly bring his wife back. You said it yourself, he was obsessed with bringing her back. Why couldn't that jump start obsessive research of the details of blood magic?

Regarding the harvester ritual, it could easily have parts of it being side effects of researching the whole 'restoring the wife' bit, that Orsino picked up on and pieced together from Quentin's research. It's not like we have any proof that Quentin created the ritual, we just know that his research was dangerous, and that he shared it with Orsino.

[Xilizhra]

Oh, I'm sure he'd want to, I just rather doubt that he could in that mental state. It seems that he'd jump to some sort of "familiar" means of saving his wife after she died, and I suspect he only thought he could because he already knew necromancy.

[IanPolaris]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Oh, I'm sure he'd want to, I just rather doubt that he could in that mental state. It seems that he'd jump to some sort of "familiar" means of saving his wife after she died, and I suspect he only thought he could because he already knew necromancy.

Why?

Occam's razor (which was what the latin was above).  While it's not the only explaination, the hypothesis that he already knew bloodmagic and some necromancy is the simpliest one that explains the most with the fewest number of assumptions.

-Polaris

[Paeyne]

IanPolaris wrote...

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Oh, I'm sure he'd want to, I just rather doubt that he could in that mental state. It seems that he'd jump to some sort of "familiar" means of saving his wife after she died, and I suspect he only thought he could because he already knew necromancy.

Why?

Occam's razor (which was what the latin was above).  While it's not the only explaination, the hypothesis that he already knew bloodmagic and some necromancy is the simpliest one that explains the most with the fewest number of assumptions.

-Polaris

Occam's razor very often cannot be applied nor should it be applied to human behaviour, since in the case of human behaviour the simpliest explanation is usually the one hiding the real explanation.

Occam's razor also does not allow the use facts not in evidence.  It may be just as reasonable to say that he tried to use blood magic out of desperation (like so many mages) and when that was not enough he started concentraiting on necromancy research in ernest.  Without sufficient facts everythiing is pure speculation and Occam's razor does not apply.

For the record your latin quote means "beings must not be multiplied beyond necessity" which really is more of a statement for birth control.  The latin Occam most used was Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate, “Plurality must never be posited without necessity"

Since this a thread about romance how about this...

Amare et sapere vix deo conceditur.
Even a god finds it hard to love and be wise at the same time.

-Paeyne

[IanPolaris]

Paeyne,

The latin I used is the most commonly used latin expression for Occam's razor even if William of Occam never used that particular formulation himself. Also 'entia' refers to more than just physical being but also contructs in general and so my formulation is proper. Before you criticize, make sure that you know the full story please.

-Polaris

[Paeyne]

IanPolaris wrote...

Paeyne,

The latin I used is the most commonly used latin expression for Occam's razor even if William of Occam never used that particular formulation himself. Also 'entia' refers to more than just physical being but also contructs in general and so my formulation is proper. Before you criticize, make sure that you know the full story please.

-Polaris

Polaris

I am aware of the common usage, whether I agree with it is another matter.  I find the usage Occam used in his own words far more compelling then what people may have thought he meant centuries later.  "Common use" and "correct" are not the same thing in my mind.

I still stand by the statement that Occam's Razor does not apply in the absence of facts.  Your usage of it without explanation in a forum like this seems like an attempt at intellectual elitism.  I am sure that was not your intent.

-Paeyne

[TEWR]

Can we talk about romances again and not Occam?

[Paeyne]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Can we talk about romances again and not Occam?

I am all for that!

How about... Who would you romance in DA2 if you could?

Cullen seems a given for a lot of people.

Same with Varric.

I really liked Keran.  A young man with a conscience doing his best with the hand he has been delt.

I don't remember many outstanding female characters other than Meridith and I, personally, wouldn't go anywhere near her.

[Xilizhra]

Aveline... maybe. But I like the available women.

[Paeyne]

Xilizhra wrote...

Aveline... maybe. But I like the available women.

A rivalry romance with Aveline would be... interesting.

[Xilizhra]

Yes, if you enjoy being punched in the face.

And I totally agree with you. Maybe... I should write that...

Modifié par Xilizhra, 15 mai 2011 - 10:37 .

[Paeyne]

Xilizhra wrote...

Yes, if you enjoy being punched in the face.

And I totally agree with you. Maybe... I should write that...

Hawke and Aveline making out in the strewn wreckage that was once Hawke's mansion.

It would give new meaning to the "love/hate" relationship.

[Xilizhra]

Isn't the Fenris rivalmance like that already?

[tmp7704]

David Gaider wrote...

I'm going to give you a non-answer and say that it's a rare character in fiction who is both a romance as well as someone you would want to romance in real life and take home to meet the parents. That's why it's fiction.

Doesn't lot of fiction actually include characters you would want to romance in real life and take them home to meet the parents, except obstacles happen and the fiction is then about overcoming them so you can get your 'happily ever after'?

Also the cynical view here would be that it's fiction when character actually is someone you'd want to romance and take home etc. Given how rare that can be, compared to gallery of real life screwballs who can put the hardest trying fiction to shame...

Modifié par tmp7704, 15 mai 2011 - 10:50 .

[Paeyne]

Xilizhra wrote...

Isn't the Fenris rivalmance like that already?

Yeah.  You do have a point.

[TEWR]

Paeyne wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Aveline... maybe. But I like the available women.

A rivalry romance with Aveline would be... interesting.

For women it would be:

• Athenril
• Aveline
• Grace (if she didn't go insane)

hmmm.... I haven't played DA2 for a couple of days so that's all I can think of right now.

[Xilizhra]

Why Athenril/Grace?