1008 replies to this topic

[Augustei]

IanPolaris wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

You made a choice, consequences of said choice doesn't stop you from having made that choice. It was a choice.

Actually it does.  If the choice you have makes absolutely no difference then it isn't a choice at all.

-Polaris

Sounds like voting at election time. But although it makes only a very small difference its still a choice and still has an effect whether it be minor or major.

It is a choice, whats debatable is the level of importance on said choice.

[IanPolaris]

Dave of Canada wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Actually it does.  If the choice you have makes absolutely no difference then it isn't a choice at all.

-Polaris

It does if it establishes who your Hawke is supporting.

No it doesn't.  We have yet to see any evidence that anything that Hawke does actually matters or that any choice Hawke makes has any different outcome.

You are assuming it will make a big difference in a future game, and sir, that's "facts not in evidence".

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

XxDeonxX wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

You made a choice, consequences of said choice doesn't stop you from having made that choice. It was a choice.

Actually it does.  If the choice you have makes absolutely no difference then it isn't a choice at all.

-Polaris

Sounds like voting at election time. But although it makes only a very small difference its still a choice and still has an effect whether it be minor or major.

It is a choice, whats debatable is the level of importance on said choice.

What difference?  Please tell me other than a change in a couple of lines of dialog what difference it makes which side Hawke Supports (and you don't get to use future games that haven't been made yet as evidence).

At least with an election you could point out the difference of the two candidates and say there was a choice (no matter how slight).  Not so here.

-Polaris

[Dave of Canada]

IanPolaris wrote...

You are assuming it will make a big difference in a future game, and sir, that's "facts not in evidence".

-Polaris

... I didn't say that? All I said was that it establishes who Hawke (possibly) supports, which is true? Templar / Mages seeing you as a hero isn't something that's taken out of thin air.

Edited by Dave of Canada, 16 June 2011 - 07:56 AM.

[IanPolaris]

Ryzaki wrote...

Oh yes Bethany must always be a circle mage.

There's no way she could be dead or a warden...oh wait.  

Not to mention there's also the fact that Hawke might not give a hoot about Bethany! 

Hawke not giving a damn about his own sister (to the point of killing her in cold blood) would I think pretty much put Hawke into the heartless, evil, war-criminal category.

As for the others, you are missing ddv's basic point:  You are being asked to support a radical mage revolution, or be a blatent war criminal by helping a Knight Commander who is clearly a Fruit Loop to kill an entire group of people for a crime they did not commit.  What makes this worse, is that Meredith makes no bones about it.  She doesn't care who is actually responsible for the Chantry bombing....as long as she can kill all mages...and she says this very openly and blatently.  I don't see how a Hawke with any sort of conscious or set of postive ethics can support Meredith under those conditions no matter what you think of the mages.

-Polaris

Edited by IanPolaris, 16 June 2011 - 07:58 AM.

[ddv.rsa]

Ryzaki wrote...

Oh yes Bethany must always be a circle mage.

There's no way she could be dead or a warden...oh wait.  

Not to mention there's also the fact that Hawke might not give a hoot about Bethany! 

It's a likely scenario, and one should take it into account when making general statements. If your Hawke doesn't "give a hoot" about the sister (s)he grew up with.. ok. I'm not playing a cartoonishly evil character.

[IanPolaris]

Dave of Canada wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

You are assuming it will make a big difference in a future game, and sir, that's "facts not in evidence".

-Polaris

... I didn't say that? All I said was that it establishes who Hawke (possibly) supports, which is true? Templar / Mages seeing you as a hero isn't something that's taken out of thin air.

Other than one or two lines of dialog that aren't even in the game (it's in the framed narrative), it DOESN"T make any difference who Hawke supports.

-Polaris

[Ryzaki]

ddv.rsa wrote...
It's a likely scenario, and one should take it into account when making general statements. If your Hawke doesn't "give a hoot" about the sister (s)he grew up with.. ok. I'm not playing a cartoonishly evil character.

One doesn't have to be "cartoonishly evil" to hate their siblings. Especially not when that sibling has had you on the run for most of your life. 

That said it is a likely scenario. It's also likely that she'd be dead (I have to wonder how many people really brought Bethany *and* Anders into the deep roads. I saw plenty that brought only Beth) or a Warden (if they brought Anders).And no it still doesn't make Hawke a coward for not protecting her because it's a suicide mission. He/she could see his/herself having a better chance saving Bethany on the templars side where they're not completely outnumbered and outmanned.

People sling around the word coward and monster so often at this point though I might as well done the mark proudly. It's not like the words actually mean anything with the way they're so often slung around. 

Edited by Ryzaki, 16 June 2011 - 08:03 AM.

[Dave of Canada]

IanPolaris wrote...

Other than one or two lines of dialog that aren't even in the game (it's in the framed narrative),

I didn't know the framed narrative wasn't part of the game! Thank god you informed me, I must've gotten a bugged copy.

[IanPolaris]

Dave of Canada wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Other than one or two lines of dialog that aren't even in the game (it's in the framed narrative),

I didn't know the framed narrative wasn't part of the game! Thank god you informed me, I must've gotten a bugged copy.

You've been informed.   The framed narrative it totally beyond your control so it's not in fact part of the game.  I am pleased to have been of service to you.  Unless you ASSUME that it will make a substantative difference in future games (if any which at this point I wouldn't bet on), it's not a difference that makes a difference (and thus isn't a difference).

-Polaris

[Dave of Canada]

Ryzaki wrote...

I[/i] really hate when people try to label an act as defintely anything (cowardly, heroic, whatever). Especially when they themselves don't bother doing it. In RL most people don't go running around saving people that they don't know and break the law to do so. I guess we're all cowards. 

 

I think the problem is mostly the "protagonist power" that most gamers feel when they play, where you can kill people you hate without the law intervening (and people absolutely hate it when the option isn't present, ex: Sister Petrice) or take on entire armies with nothing but your under-garments and come out victorious.

I'm sure if they'd be in the protagonist's shoes doing that decision, they wouldn't be doing it.

[IanPolaris]

Ryzaki wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...
It's a likely scenario, and one should take it into account when making general statements. If your Hawke doesn't "give a hoot" about the sister (s)he grew up with.. ok. I'm not playing a cartoonishly evil character.

One doesn't have to be "cartoonishly evil" to hate their siblings. Especially not when that sibling has had you on the run for most of your life. 

That said it is a likely scenario. It's also likely that she'd be dead (I have to wonder how many people really brought Bethany *and* Anders into the deep roads. I saw plenty that brought only Beth) or a Warden (if they brought Anders).And no it still doesn't make Hawke a coward for not protecting her because it's a suicide mission. He/she could see his/herself having a better chance saving Bethany on the templars side where they're not completely outnumbered and outmanned.  

Not lilking your sibling is one thing.  Hating them enough to willfully kill them for something they didn't do is something else again....that IS cartoonishly evil.  As for the Deep Roads, other than Varric (who is required), Anders is the most logical person you want to take down into the Deep Roads without metagaming.  After all, who other than an ex-Warden has more indepth (and possibly lifesaving) knowledge than a Grey Warden?

If Anders is your main healer, and you have to take Varric, then the logical (non-metagaming) slots for Bethany seem slender.  I suspect that most non-mage Hawkes have Bethany go into the circle.

-Polaris

[Dave of Canada]

IanPolaris wrote...

You've been informed.   The framed narrative it totally beyond your control so it's not in fact part of the game.

Except it changes depending on your choice! Doesn't that do wonders?

I am pleased to have been of service to you.

Thanks, left money on the counter.

Unless you ASSUME that it will make a substantative difference in future games (if any which at this point I wouldn't bet on), it's not a difference that makes a difference (and thus isn't a difference).

-Polaris

But it's still a choice, a choice which results in people percieving you differently. Which still makes it a choice, as it led to different results. It's no different than doing something and getting an epilogue card telling you that you made a choice.

[IanPolaris]

Dave of Canada wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

You've been informed.   The framed narrative it totally beyond your control so it's not in fact part of the game.

Except it changes depending on your choice! Doesn't that do wonders?

Frankly no because it's not a difference that makes a difference.  The political situation at the end of the game is the same, and Hawke is missing just like the Warden.  Basically nothing that matters is different....a couple of lines of dialog don't cut it.

I am pleased to have been of service to you.

Thanks, left money on the counter.

Cheapskate.

Unless you ASSUME that it will make a substantative difference in future games (if any which at this point I wouldn't bet on), it's not a difference that makes a difference (and thus isn't a difference).

-Polaris

But it's still a choice, a choice which results in people percieving you differently. Which still makes it a choice, as it led to different results. It's no different than doing something and getting an epilogue card telling you that you made a choice.

It's not MEANINGFUL choice and thus isn't a choice at all because nothing in the game changes because of that choice.  I may have well read a book.

-POlaris

[Ryzaki]

IanPolaris wrote...
Not lilking your sibling is one thing.  Hating them enough to willfully kill them for something they didn't do is something else again....that IS cartoonishly evil.  As for the Deep Roads, other than Varric (who is required), Anders is the most logical person you want to take down into the Deep Roads without metagaming.  After all, who other than an ex-Warden has more indepth (and possibly lifesaving) knowledge than a Grey Warden?

If Anders is your main healer, and you have to take Varric, then the logical (non-metagaming) slots for Bethany seem slender.  I suspect that most non-mage Hawkes have Bethany go into the circle.

-Polaris

 

When siding with the templars Hawke doesn't haveto kill Bethany. So again that cartoonishly evil option is there but it's not forced on anyone so please stop acting like Hawke has to take it. Hawke can have a very "whatever happens to her happens." attitude. That doesn't make him a coward (makes him a bit harsh and cold though) it doesn't make him MUWAHAHA I'm gonna kill the little chilluns for the lulz! Type of person. I wish people would stop simplifying it. It's not simple. 

Anders would be logical choice...and why would someone not want to take *two* mages? Double the haste? Double the extra boosts? 

And plenty of people who play the game don't bother taking Anders because they dislike his personality. Everyon isn't gonna take someone to the deep roads that's a warden because a. It's not necessary and B. It's not even suggested to take Anders. You just need him for the maps and that's it. 

Bethany can be the healer. At that point in the game Anders' Pancea tree isn't even close to be used to it's maximum potential. The player could also feel more comfortable using Beth rather than Anders. (or have heard Cullen's "I've heard rumors about your sister Hawke." comment) 

I wonder...I have a feeling it's a lot closer than that. 

And again with the you think. That's fine. I think differently. Opinions folks! Opinions! 

Edited by Ryzaki, 16 June 2011 - 08:19 AM.

[Ryzaki]

Dave of Canada wrote...
I think the problem is mostly the "protagonist power" that most gamers feel when they play, where you can kill people you hate without the law intervening (and people absolutely hate it when the option isn't present, ex: Sister Petrice) or take on entire armies with nothing but your under-garments and come out victorious.

I'm sure if they'd be in the protagonist's shoes doing that decision, they wouldn't be doing it.

 

Yeah that's probably the issue. XD 

I sure in heck wouldn't. I'd left Kirkwall as soon as I got rich. 

[IanPolaris]

Ryzaki wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
Not lilking your sibling is one thing.  Hating them enough to willfully kill them for something they didn't do is something else again....that IS cartoonishly evil.  As for the Deep Roads, other than Varric (who is required), Anders is the most logical person you want to take down into the Deep Roads without metagaming.  After all, who other than an ex-Warden has more indepth (and possibly lifesaving) knowledge than a Grey Warden?

If Anders is your main healer, and you have to take Varric, then the logical (non-metagaming) slots for Bethany seem slender.  I suspect that most non-mage Hawkes have Bethany go into the circle.

-Polaris

 

When siding with the templars Hawke doesn't haveto kill Bethany. So again that cartoonishly evil option is there but it's not forced on anyone so please stop acting like Hawke has to take it. 

Yes it does.  WHEN you make the choice, Meredith makes it crystal clear that ALL circle mages (including your sister) are to be executed immediately, and you are told many times both by Ser Cullen, and by in-game lore that the Right of Annulment is uncompromising in this regard.  Indeed this is prime evidence IMO that the Devs are trying to unfairly slant the game to the pro-templar position....they are allowing you to pick the Genocidal option without having to kill little children or kill your own sister and thus suffer from that evil genocidal aftertaste.  Shame on you Bioware.

Anders would be logical choice...and why would someone not want to take *two* mages? Double the haste? Double the extra boosts? 

Really?  Based on what you know, if you want an extra mage, Merrill is a much better choice since her skills better complement Anders than Bethany's, and that only makes sense if Hawke is a fighter.  If Hawke is a rogue himself,then he really can't take both Bethany and Anders because you need at least some beef to survive.

And plenty of people who play the game don't bother taking Anders because they dislike his personality. Everyon isn't gonna take someone to the deep roads that's a warden because a. It's not necessary and B. It's not even suggested to take Anders. You just need him for the maps and that's it. 

Maybe, but I was talking without openly metagaming. 

Bethany can be the healer. At that point in the game Anders' Pancea tree isn't even close to be used to it's maximum potential. The player could also feel more comfortable using Beth rather than Anders.

I wonder...I have a feeling it's a lot closer than that. 

Maybe, but Anders is a Grey Warden and Bethany is not.  Also (and I admit this IS metagaming), it's pretty common knowledge by now that if you take Beth (or Carver) and don't take Anders, you kill Beth/Carver and I don't think most players will do this.  So for a non-mage Hawke, I expect that Circle-Bethany is the 'default' choice.  This is further hinted at in patch 1.03 when you find that Beth's end-game specialization is "Force Mage" which is a Kirkwall specialty.

-Polaris

[Ryzaki]

Genocide?
That's it. I'm finished with this conversation.

This is going nowhere.

BTW it's not genocide. Genocide as defined by agreed upon UN law is the purpose destruction of a in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Mages aren't any of the above considering they can consist of humans and elves and aren't a national group. They also aren't a religion.

Stop throwing around buzzwords and belittling real suffering. It's riduclous. 

Edited by Ryzaki, 16 June 2011 - 08:24 AM.

[IanPolaris]

Ryzaki wrote...

Genocide?
That's it. I'm finished with this conversation.

This is going nowhere.

BTW it's not genocide. Genocide as defined by agreed upon UN law is the purpose destruction of a in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Mages aren't any of the above considering they can consist of humans and elves and aren't a national group. They also aren't a religion.

Stop throwing around buzzwords and belittling real suffering. It's riduclous. 

Mages are treated as a different cultural group by the Chantry and all the nations of thedas with different laws and regualtions governing them.  I assure you that under the UN Charter, the Right of Annulment IS in fact Genocide.  We've all looked up the definitions before, and it fits like a glove.

-Poalris

[Ryzaki]

Oh for the love of *throws up hands*

Right it's totally genocide even though the fictional group actually isn't any of the protected groups given yup. Righto.

Have fun.

[IanPolaris]

Ryzaki wrote...

Oh for the love of *throws up hands*

Right it's totally genocide even though the fictional group actually isn't any of the protected groups given yup. Righto.

Have fun.

Actually I have every right.  Wynne herself uses the term "Genocide" in DAA when discussing the Chantry's reaction to a mage vote for independance (Cumberland) so the concept clearly exists in Thedas.  Futhermore, if a ruler decided to slaughter all elves in a city, I don't think any of us would hesitate to call it genocide, yet the last time I looked, elves were also fictional.

So yes, it's genocide.

-Polaris

[Ryzaki]

At this point I don't even care anymore. Go ahead villify the choice. Try to make it out to be evil and whatnot. I really don't know why I care. I'm sick of defending it too. Not because it's not worth defending but because the same buzzwords get used and it's boring.  Then hearing some of you (not necessarily you Ian) calling people monsters is just...it's ridculous. It's a game and it's not even fun to discuss when some of you guys come rolling in with your "genocide!" and hitler comparisons. There's no discussion to be had. Just mudslinging. 

I'll play the game the way I want to play it and you can do the same.

Edited by Ryzaki, 16 June 2011 - 08:40 AM.

[IanPolaris]

Ryzaki wrote...

At this point I don't even care anymore. Go ahead villify the choice. Try to make it out to be evil and whatnot. I really don't know why I care. I'm sick of defending it too. Not because it's not worth defending but because the same buzzwords get used and it's boring.

I'll play the game the way I want to play it and you can do the same.

It's not villification.  It's calling the Templar ending and approach for what it is.  It IS genocide by the definition of the term.  If that makes siding with the Templars seem more villianous, then perhaps DG needs to work a bit harder at really understand the difference between choices that really are morally grey, and those that only look like they are.

-Polaris

[Ryzaki]

It is not genocide by the definition of the term.

The mages are not a specific in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. They aren't. Saying they are doesn't make it so. They all share a condition but that's all.  

Wynne calling it genocide was in reference to all the mages being hunted down and killed all of them. Not one circle. 

Edited by Ryzaki, 16 June 2011 - 08:48 AM.

[Playest]

Dave of Canada
wrote...



it does if it establishes who your Hawke is supporting.

And that accomplishes what? Do you honestly believe that which side you come
down on will affect the outcome of the conflict?