414 réponses à ce sujet

[MichaelFinnegan]

Deztyn wrote...

Word of God. If David Gaider for instance, stepped in and said "yes, this manual is a gameplay mechanic, but that manual exists in the story." we'd know for sure what was intended.

Agreed.

The manuals are a game mechanic, and they're no longer available once the specialization is unlocked. So you can't say you bought the book in the storyline after the first time. But learning from Zev, Isabella, Morrigan, Alistair etc. is part of the storyline and it can be roleplayed on repeated playthroughs within the game if the player chooses.

You may be right. It could also be an oversight from the developers to tie those manuals to the first unlocking, but I'll not bet on it.

[Sajuro]

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

What needs to happen is blood mage Hawke, Merrill, and Thaddeus Gigantus Crumbum the Third adventuring across the Free Marches on a quest for the enigmatic Xenon the Antiquarian.

I'd probably buy that. But why not the Nexus Golem? And why would they look for Xenon? He's trapped in the Black Emporium.

I was thinking more along the lines of a quest at the behest of Xeon, and the Nexus Golem knows too much...

Nexus Golem for LI?

[TEWR]

Nexus Golem and Shale in Golem form for 3 way

[dragonflight288]

It is not bloodmagic to use Adrallas scroll thou bloodmagic may have been part of it's creation. Bloodmagic was defenitly needed for testing purpuses during it's development. In DA2 one can choose to capture rather then kill the bloodmage Idunna and then later she send you a letter where she tells us that she repented her sins and impore Hawke to find and destroy Tharones tomes. Apperently the templars do not need to execute all bloodmages they find, they can choose to just inprison them. Adralla could herself been a captured rependant bloodmage or have had access to other such.

Uh huh. I'm skeptical of the fact that the templars would allow a blood mage to walk free. In fact, I'm quite skeptical of the templar order allowing any mage, bloodmage or not, to walk free.

[Sajuro]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Nexus Golem and Shale in Golem form for 3 way

Or pull a jade empire and have them make out.

[Mickespel]

dragonflight288 wrote...

It is not bloodmagic to use Adrallas scroll thou bloodmagic may have been part of it's creation. Bloodmagic was defenitly needed for testing purpuses during it's development. In DA2 one can choose to capture rather then kill the bloodmage Idunna and then later she send you a letter where she tells us that she repented her sins and impore Hawke to find and destroy Tharones tomes. Apperently the templars do not need to execute all bloodmages they find, they can choose to just inprison them. Adralla could herself been a captured rependant bloodmage or have had access to other such.

Uh huh. I'm skeptical of the fact that the templars would allow a blood mage to walk free. In fact, I'm quite skeptical of the templar order allowing any mage, bloodmage or not, to walk free.

Of course they would not let them walk free. My argument was about allowing prisoners to aid in the construction of Adrallas scroll. They would still be prisoners but by assisting in this way they would earn certain favors. This is how it often work in normal prisons, cooperate and earn better treatment.

[dragonflight288]

Hm. Yeah, I can see that happening...kind of. If Adralla had to use bloodmagic in the testing, I don't see many Knight-Commanders being reasonable.

[IanPolaris]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

I suppose I should add something in the favor of "blood magic is only taught by demons" side, if I'm remembering correctly. If you have the blood mage spec when confronting the demon in lady Hariman's estate, she will tell you that "she feels one of her brethren's touch on you". Like it's taken for granted that you must have dealt with a demon to get blood magic.

I've played that confrontation many times with bloodmages and I've never had that come up.  In any event it is game lore that you don't have to make a deal with a demon to learn bloodmagic (although it does seem to be the most common).  Indeed it is disputed whether bloodmagic came from demons or some other source.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

We know that you can become a bloodmage without a demon. Anders in DAA can become a bloodmage without a demon if the Warden commander teaches him. That's just one example, but I only need one.

-Polaris

[sphinxess]

It actually places demons in a better light if you can only learn blood magic from them - proof that trading with a Demon doesn't always involve the whole "give me a body thing".

[EmperorSahlertz]

I wouldn't say it puts demons in a better light exactly, it just nuances the demons' light a bit more. And I doubt you can expect a demon to ever offer a deal that isn't to its own advantage.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 17 juin 2011 - 10:41 .

[Giggles_Manically]

Want to know why people use blood magic?

Use the Wounds of the past spell that Merrill has.
Or as I like to call it: INSTANT MOB DEATH.

[MinotaurWarrior]

My take on the issue is that blood magic is the non-addictive alternative to lyrium potions. Jowan clearly learned his art from a book, so regardless of where blood magic lore originally comes from, you can learn it without bargaining with demons. Once you've done that, you have three options:

A) Continue to use the dangerous and addictive lyrium potions the chantry holds a legal (if not real) monopoly on, allowing them to control you.
Use your blood to fuel your magic.
C) Use the blood of others to fuel your magic.

Option A is stupid, and C is evil, but B? What issue could you reasonably have with B? Are you afraid that just because someone uses their own blood to fuel magic, it will inevitably lead to sacrificing children for your dark rituals? That's like if I searched through your browser history, and concluded you were going to eventually become a rapist.

In ancient Tevinter, they had no concept of "blood magic." There was just "magic, which, y'know, we mostly fueled with blood." Healers were blood mages. Abjurers were blood mages. Noncombat mages were blood mages. Everything was done with blood magic. The issue with the Tevinter was that most of what they did was really terrible anyway. They kept slaves, conquered nations, and did not care for human life. Because that was the sort of stuff they were up to, they kept blood slaves, used blood magic to destroy cities, and sacrificed humans and elves to further their goals.

But imagine a good Tevinter. A civilization with less overtly evil values. You go to the doctor, he cuts himself, casts "heal" and sends you on your way. At a construction site, you see a man covered in blood compacting the earth with magic from the primal school. A fire has broken out, and a man with a nail through his hand is causing a great mass of ice to fall from the sky, extinguishing the flames. Absolutely all of this is possible in the game. I played as a blood mage, in DA:O and DA][, and I never used blood sacrifice.

[dragonflight288]

I agree. But good luck convincing people who only see the potential danger, and not the individual willpower of the wielder.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The problem is that there isn't a big gap between option and C)

[MinotaurWarrior]

Yes there is big gap between and C). It's the gap between working hard and working your slaves hard. It's the gap between selling your possessions, and fencing stolen goods. It's the gap between self-sacrifice, and human sacrifice. If that doesn't seem like a huge gap from where you stand, I'm very glad I don't live in the hellscape you must inhabit.

Now, in game terms, yes, I'll give you that there isn't a huge gap between getting the BM specialization, and sacrificing bloothralls, but in game terms, there isn't a huge gap between "travelling through the city" and "rivers of blood carrying corpses to the sea." Most of the characters you interact with in DA][ are murderous sociopaths, and yeah, those guys shouldn't be allowed BM. They also shouldn't be allowed basic freedoms, because they're murderous sociopaths, unlike the vast majority of people.

[Sarielle]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

what else could the demons want in return for that knowledge? "Show me your ****** and I'll teach you blood magic?"

I lol'd heartily over this.

[EmperorSahlertz]

MinotaurWarrior wrote...

Yes there is big gap between and C). It's the gap between working hard and working your slaves hard. It's the gap between selling your possessions, and fencing stolen goods. It's the gap between self-sacrifice, and human sacrifice. If that doesn't seem like a huge gap from where you stand, I'm very glad I don't live in the hellscape you must inhabit.

Now, in game terms, yes, I'll give you that there isn't a huge gap between getting the BM specialization, and sacrificing bloothralls, but in game terms, there isn't a huge gap between "travelling through the city" and "rivers of blood carrying corpses to the sea." Most of the characters you interact with in DA][ are murderous sociopaths, and yeah, those guys shouldn't be allowed BM. They also shouldn't be allowed basic freedoms, because they're murderous sociopaths, unlike the vast majority of people.

If you can use your own blood for fuel, you can also use another person's blood for fuel. Then all that is keeping you from using another person's blood is your own morals. And morals are one of the weakest barriers when it comes to power. That is the issue.

[LobselVith8]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

I suppose I should add something in the favor of "blood magic is only taught by demons" side, if I'm remembering correctly. If you have the blood mage spec when confronting the demon in lady Hariman's estate, she will tell you that "she feels one of her brethren's touch on you". Like it's taken for granted that you must have dealt with a demon to get blood magic.

She says that if you made a deal with Torpor for Feynriel's soul.

[MinotaurWarrior]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

If you can use your own blood for fuel, you can also use another person's blood for fuel. Then all that is keeping you from using another person's blood is your own morals. And morals are one of the weakest barriers when it comes to power. That is the issue.

If you can use flammable materials for fuel, and humans are flammable, you can use humans for fuel. The problem is, that's just a really stupid idea.

Now, blood magic is a bit more efficient than burning people for firewood, I'll give you that, but there still are a lot of issues. As you said, there's morality, which I think you're underestimating. If I gave you a gun, and told you to kill someone for a hundred thousand dollars, do you really think you could pull the trigger? Unless you've been through some hardening experiences, I very much doubt it. But morality isn't the only issue. Nobody volunteers to get sacrificed, so a crazy blood mage is going to have to, y'know, murder people. Every society has anti-murdering systems in place. You try that stuff in Kirkwall, and Aveline will have your head, be you a mage, or otherwise. And finally, it's actually not that efficient. In a normal society (where there aren't a bunch of sociopathic thugs throwing themselves at you in waves) who are you going to sacrifice? If your allies didn't get back up after every fight, would it ever be worth it to blood sacrifice them? Would you sacrifice your employee to ensure success at one task, when that employee could keep on working for you, if, yknow, you let him live?

I'll give you that, say, terrorists, revolutionaries, and outlaws have very good reasons to abuse blood magic, but such people also have very strong motivations to abuse knives.

[LobselVith8]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

She says that if you made a deal with Torpor for Feynriel's soul.

Seriously? But I backstabbed him. Aw, that's a disappointment. Why does no one care that I'm a blood mage when it's supposed to be such a huge deal? Gosh.

It sucks. You'd think Hawke at least being an apostate would actually matter and provide us with an illegal mage POV, rather than the protagonist being an invisible mage for most of Acts I and II.

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

Where is it stated that he learned from a book? Irving had to hide the books he had on blood magic from curious apprentices, but I can never imagine that those books described how to learn it, or the Chantry would have had them destroyed. But the books might have encouraged apprentices to go and seek out that power for themselves.

At any rate, I'm not sure how it matters if one has to learn it from a demon or not, unless you think dealing with a demon is inherently an evil act. Which is a little silly. Personally, I think the risk for failiure is so high and the consequences for failing so great that in a lot of cases dealing with a demon not really worth it, and in the cases where it is, it should happen in strictly controlled enviroments. But inherently evil? I don't see it.

It's implied Jowan learned it from the books on blood magic in the library, which is likely why Irving's removal of the books coincides with the Rite of Tranquility being signed against Jowan. The codex "Irving's Mistake" addresses that Irving let Uldred manipulate him on certain issues without realizing it.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 17 juin 2011 - 04:12 .