19 réponses à ce sujet

[ReveurIngenu]

I mean, you were able to cure that one person with the ashes of Andrasté.

I played DAII first and I had the impression that religion was just a belief that you could have your character believe in or not.  Yet in DAO, the game pretty much tells you that the Maker does exist, that Andrasté did exist, and that the religion is a fact and not just a belief.

I would have liked for the game to offer a more...I don't know...scientific or logical explanation as to why giving Andrasté's ashes to that one guy cures him.  Instead, the story pretty much says that yes, the Maker does exist, proof being the curative properties of Andrasté's ashes.


That really is something that I have a problem with.  Why would Bioware have made the religion (which is much too close to Christianity and other modern religions in my taste) seem as if it were factual in the game world instead of leaving it at a simple belief?  I mean, if Andrasté's ashes can cure a seemingly uncurable disease, then that means that the religion is factual and that there's no reason to go against the Chantry's teachings!

Did anybody else have a problem with this?

Coming from DAII, I was sorely disappointed by DAO for several reasons including the reason above.  I really think only those who played DAO before DAII can prefer it to DAII.

[Addai]

No.  Devs have stated that religion is a POV thing only.  If you take Oghren to the temple, he mentions a high lyrium concentration.  So there's your "scientific" magical explanation, if you want one.

DAO is superior to DA2 in so many ways... getting hung up on little stuff like this?    Just my opinion, of course.

Modifié par Addai67, 06 mai 2011 - 07:20 .

[ReveurIngenu]

That's only a small reason I prefer DAII. I'm not going to go into all the reasons, but rest assured that if I prefer DAII to DAO, it's not a result of the religion in the game.

[Addai]

ReveurIngenu wrote...

That's only a small reason I prefer DAII. I'm not going to go into all the reasons, but rest assured that if I prefer DAII to DAO, it's not a result of the religion in the game.

Well, now you've got one less reason. 

Any resemblance to Christianity or other religions is very superficial.  The adherents of those religions could, I imagine, just as easily feel insulted that they're being associated with a made-up religion.  There's always someone offended about something.

Modifié par Addai67, 06 mai 2011 - 07:54 .

[M-Taylor]

Just because Andraste did exist does not conclude that the Chantry is right.

It's a lot like modern day religion, and I think that was intended. Archaelogical records show that there was a prophet Jesus and he did create a wide spread movement around the time the Bible says, yet.. did he perform all those miracles and ascend to Heaven? That's entirely down to the individual and their beliefs.

You could argue that the Archdemons point more towards that the Tevinter Imperium and their old religion scheme was correct. What with the Old Gods, etc etc.

So yes, having the remains of Andraste does not fully conclude the Chantry is right. If anything, as Addai67 pointed out above, it points out a rather funny irony that Andraste herself could have been a mage (the high lyrium concentration). Which puts the Mages subugation into a whole other context.. xD

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Andrasde definitely did exist. We don't know if the Maker does, and I expect we never will for sure. Andraste's ashes might be holy and curative or they might be just altered by nearby lyrium. In my opinion, it seems pretty clear that much of what the Chantry says is untrue. But they appear to be right about a few others.

[Costin_Razvan]

DAO is superior to DA2 in so many ways

Now that is a personal opinion, and I wish people would stop stating these things as being factual.

As for the belief of the Andrastians being factual or not, I think it is factual...we have Justice in Awakening telling us of the beyond where demon/spirits/mortals go to after they depart their bodies ( be it in the mortal real or the fade ).

Then there is the black city in the fade.

I wouldn't use the Ashes as an argument, as Addai pointed out Oghren does sense Lyrium ( and we all know what Lyrium can do..."hint" Meredith "hint".

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 06 mai 2011 - 09:03 .

[GSSAGE7]

There's stuff from all the game religions that shows they may be right.
The Sacred Ashes healing Eamon has some evidence for Andrastism.
The elvish religion is given some strength from some of the things you see in the Brecilian ruin.
Not to mention the... whatever the archdemons were before being corrupted was something unlike other dragons. In Awakening, you fight a few dragons that the Archetict corrupted, and they aren't commanding thousands of darkspawn. Maybe the Tevinters were right about the Old Gods.

[spoe71]

As one other poster so astutely pointed out, the comment Oghren makes offers the other side of the discussion (scientific). You can also consider the Anvil of the Void: Carridan figured out a way to use Lyrium to trap dwarven essence in order to create golems. If lyrium can trap souls, it is possible that anything could be accomplished using it (including infusing ashes with curative powers). For all we know, it could be that lyrium, given its enigmatic nature, is actually the culprit behind the darkspawn and their taint.

Belief systems all over the world work on faith, which is the belief in things not seen. Humans today are far more educated than they used to be; we have explained many things through science that earlier generations contributed to faith. For example, the Egyptians worshipped the sun as a god before humans figured out it was a giant ball of burning hydrogen.

It can easily be argued that faith in Dragon Age works similarly, and the power of lyrium, based on the examples we have of its use, can possibly be attributed to the seemingly "miraculous" things that have happened. The subject has probably been left ambiguous on purpose

[errant_knight]

In DA:O it's set up so you can roleplay it both ways, scientific or religious. It depends on the character. Equal explanation is given on both sides.

[Eber]

Origins has a book that explains it, The Search for the True Prophet.

Description: This tattered tome explores the possibility that Andraste was a powerful mage, not the Maker's Chosen. It seems this book was saved from a fire at some point.

Wynne likes it.

[Vengeful Nature]

Eber wrote...

Origins has a book that explains it, The Search for the True Prophet.

Description: This tattered tome explores the possibility that Andraste was a powerful mage, not the Maker's Chosen. It seems this book was saved from a fire at some point.

Wynne likes it.

There's this, plus the fact that, if you take Oghren with you, he tells you that the the mountain is heavy in lyrium. Any combination of these two things would concievably make the ashes magical in some way.

Personally, I like to think that Andraste was a powerful mage, as the book states, and that her "Maker" was in fact a demon. If Andraste was an abomination, and you've just fed her ashes to Eamon, that leaves some nasty possibilites for Eamon's future. 

Modifié par Vengeful Nature, 07 mai 2011 - 10:36 .

[Big I]

In the mage origin there's a talking statue that sees the future (she was a seer who was cursed by a magister). One of the things she says is "stone I am and stone I shall remain until the Maker returns to light their fires again."


Dwarves believe that the Stone accepts the spirits of the ancestors upon their deaths. In the Dead Trenches you can partake in a ritual that causes a malevolent spirit to appear, which this codex entry (which you receive when it appears) indicates came from the Stone. Therefore, the dwarven belief that the Stone accepts spirits may be genuine.


In the Black Emporium in DA2 there's an item called The Emergent Compendium  which has a picture of "Two shadowed spheres among stars subtitled aboofqp iboxE'kbC px bpmfizb kX." When deciphered the subtitles read "An eclipse as Fen'Harel stirred." So that might mean that Fen'Harel from the elven pantheon is real.


Apart from the Ashes, which Oghren provides an alternate explanation for, these are the only sources I can think of that support the premises of the Dragon Age religions.

[Fylimar]

I never felt that religion was presented as fact inN DAO - for the reasons some people stated here (Andraste being a mage, Lyrium in the mountains etc.). I even recall talking to some NPC (I don't know who it was or in what location - it was at my first playthrough), who was of the opinion, that Andraste was a some kind of benevolent spirit (like the one, who possesed Wynne) and therefore had some powers (i.e. the heailing qualitiy of her ashes). But apart from this: you meet as much people believing in the Maker as those, who don't.

[Chuvvy]

There's plenty of reason to go against the Chantrys teachings. And there's plenty of reasons not to worship the Maker. The Maker's a complete ass that's abandoned not one but two creations. He abandoned the spirits because he didn't make them smart enough. And he abandoned humanity, elves, dwarves and qunari and unleashed a plague that nearly wiped everything out multiple times because a small group humans did a B&E on his house over a thousand years ago. He's a butthurt douche bag that I wouldn't worship.

Modifié par Slidell505, 12 mai 2011 - 07:04 .

[Ferretinabun]

M-Taylor wrote...
It's a lot like modern day religion, and I think that was intended. Archaelogical records show that there was a prophet Jesus and he did create a wide spread movement around the time the Bible says...

Don't want to be a pain, but no that's not true. There is absolutely no evidence at all supporting the existence of Jesus besides the gospels which are, at best, fantastical accounts and should be treated with huge suspicion as historical documents.

[Costin_Razvan]

The thing about Jesus's existence...now that's true, though I would REALLY not call those accounts fantastical. ( As a Historian and Orthodox Christian I find the choice of words there very poor ).

[M-Taylor]

Ferretinabun wrote...

M-Taylor wrote...
It's a lot like modern day religion, and I think that was intended. Archaelogical records show that there was a prophet Jesus and he did create a wide spread movement around the time the Bible says...

Don't want to be a pain, but no that's not true. There is absolutely no evidence at all supporting the existence of Jesus besides the gospels which are, at best, fantastical accounts and should be treated with huge suspicion as historical documents.

I'm currently doing Ancient History as a course, and we've just done a section about what contributed to the fall of Rome/why it remained so strong in the East but completely colapsed in the West (really simple stuff). However, Religion was brought up and documented history names an unamed prophet roughly around the time of Jesus in modern day Israel location who was executed on the cross. Many Historians believe this is the basis of 'Jesus'.

Of course, I'm just a college student. I'm in no-way arguing that he existed or what ever, simply relaying what's being taught in todays curriculum at A levels in the United Kingdom.

[Kevin Lynch]

Please don't turn this topic into a discussion of real world religion. Stick to DA:O. Thanks.

[Ferretinabun]

No, that's fair enough. It's just new information for me. Where is this reference to be found, please?

EDIT: Kevin - fair enough. Taylor, if you have a link or reference point, could you message it to me please? On that note I'll say no more about it.

Modifié par Ferretinabun, 15 mai 2011 - 11:42 .