11 réponses à ce sujet

[GR Groe]

Not sure if this has already been addressed or discussed, but I'll try it anyway.

This is more a question to the developers than anything, but multiple opinions are nice.  Basically, I'm wondering what the storytelling rationale was for having First Enchanter Orsino die in Dragon Age 2. I'm wondering how the writing team came to that decision, if they'd be willing to share.

Throughout the end of Act 2 and all of Act 3, Orsino comes across as the biggest voice of pure, simple reason in Kirkwall. All through The Last Straw, I believed whole-heartedly that he was going to escape with the his mages and rally the other Circles, at least if you sided with the mages. On the templar side, I imagined he'd be slain by Meredith or something similar. I was very surprised when he turned out to be one of the final bosses, and considering my love of the character, very saddened while killing him.

I'm not criticizing the decision to make him a final boss. I believe the plot works very well as it is, and whatever disappointment I feel stems more from my love for Orsino than any belief that the story would be better off if his fate had played out differently. I'm just wondering WHY the decision was made to kill him off. Was it to illustrate the depths blood magic can penetrate the heart of a Circle? Was it to show just how involved Orsino was with Quentin? Was it to evoke a reaction to Orsino's tragedy, and by extension that of the Kirkwall Circle? Was it to kill off all the "Friends in High Places" people? Was it just to let the Harvester show up in the game?

I'm of the camp that loves the plot of Dragon Age 2. I thoroughly enjoyed playing through it and I'm eager to see what role to Mage-Templar War will play in future installments. Personally, I'd have enjoyed seeing Orsino as the leader of the mage rebellion, but as things stand I love the story regardless and enjoy the tragedy of Orsino. But I find myself once again asking that age-old question always asked when a beloved character meets their end: Why did he have to die?

Thanks!

[sphinxess]

They didn't want a clearcut choice between the Templars and the Mages - Orsano had to be made to look as bad as a insane Meredith.

[ReiSilver]

Crossing the Despair-event-horizon tends to work better when it doesn't come directly after the mage-siding Hawke and friends wipe the floor with every Templar trying to get into the building. It's basically win fight=> Oriso "Oh we're all doomed why don't they drown use as children!" Hawke "WTF are you on about? We're winning!"
They really needed a cutscene of something terrible happening to cause Orsino to Despair-event-horizon or find some other way of getting Orsino out of the way.

[Tommyspa]

If we saw more of Orsino and Meredith the decision would have been a lot better, actually, we saw enough of Meredith to know what she was, as it was talked about a lot. But Orsino was severely under used, so we feel a WTF why would you go all harvester on us? The closet thing we got to knowing Orsino would eff us was him mentioning not stopping Quentin right in front of Hawke (as mentioned) But that really wasn't enough.

How would the ending have changed if you supported the mages and didn't have to kill Orsino?
I don't have an answer for this.

[OBakaSama]

Meredith was painted throughout the game (or for a great deal of it) to be unstable and unnecessarily harsh towards the mages in her supposed care. When siding with the mages Hawke finds no evidence to support the bulk of the accusations Meredith charges the Circle with; though that is not to say she was not justified at all.

Siding with the Templars gives a different complexion to the dynamic (I found myself not even speaking to Orsino at any point), and Meredith comes across as strict. During 'The Last Straw' though it seems the reason why she eventually goes crazy as it were was not only due to the mage situation, but her losing the respect and control of the Templars as well. That Cullen follows Hawke's advice indicates that she is losing power.

Meredith's finale makes sense in either way you play the game.

Orsino's finale by comparison does come across as somewhat abrupt, though I think the seeds were planted there early on in the game with regards to Quentin. We get to see the correspondence that Orsino sends to Quentin; Orsino is actively helping him to achieve his aims which facilitated in Leandra's death. Although Orsino does not use blood magic--and showed no such signs of doing so--throughout the game, he had already been swayed to 'the dark side' as it were. Orsino may have derided blood magic, and fiercely defended mages who didn't use it (and quite rightly so I think), even he was not beyond using blood magic. Basically Orsino I believe typified the good intentioned mage that Fenris speaks of who inevitably succumbs to blood magic.

Now, siding with the Templars Orsino's actions now seem typical of what Fenris would have expected of any mage. Although he seemed to dislike blood magic he was not beyond using it when forced into a corner; which I think is the case if Hawke sides with the Templars.

It is harder to see as to why Orsino resorts to blood magic if Hawke sides with the mages, though not impossible I feel. Consider what I had outlined above regarding Orsino's correspondence with Quentin; it almost seems inevitable that he would go down that route if we carefully look at the situation he appears to be in. The problem seems to me that his use of blood magic was too soon rather than wrong for the character. Though Meredith invokes the Right of Annulment it would depend on how that is enacted. If Meredith plays the waiting game then the mages and their allies will die. Eventually they would run out of food and supplies and are forced to act. Even if we assume no one found the secret passageway, it would seem unlikely they could be covert enough to come out and get the supplies they need to sustain themselves in the long run. Tactically the mages are at a disadvantage, and perhaps Orsino has this in mind when he does resort to blood magic even with Hawke's help.

Storywise it seems no matter what you do the consequences are the same: the Circles throughout Thedas rebel due to Hawke's participation in the events in Kirkwall. If Hawke sides with the mages, it shows that mages have the power to rebel but had chosen not to; a point Anders makes during 'The Last Straw'. If Hawke sides with the Templars I imagine this shows the Templars vulnerability, which then allows the other Circles to realise they can do something about the balance of power.

Now, before Orsino inevitably uses blood magic he had been a voice of reason; probably wanted a compromise from the Templars. However, throughout the game that approach did not work with Meredith. Had Orsino not resorted to blood magic and Meredith was killed, then I would still anticipate him being a voice of reason. Recall Anders' criticism of him as willfully bending before their oppressors; so from this perspective, making the assumption that Orsino does not resort to blood magic and is still a voice of reason, then it seems unlikely (or less likely) that the Circles would rebel. Storywise it needed him and Meredith to be dead for the rebellions to take place.

*Phew* Waffle over.

[jaybee93]

There are some good arguments here. I also think the role of Kirkwall itself has to be noted: like it says in the Enigma of Kirkwall notes, the veil is thin or torn around the city and terrible things have been going on for hundreds of years. It goes some way to explaining why there are so many blood mages around. If the head of the circle of the most damaged and potentially evil city in Thedas doesn't turn out to be at least a little evil, it'd be a surprise.

Orsino disappointed me when he decided to take that route, but it does give his character a much larger and more interesting flaw than just "He was too weak to stand up for his mages."

[jaybee93]

Tommyspa wrote...

How would the ending have changed if you supported the mages and didn't have to kill Orsino?
I don't have an answer for this.

Yeah. Hmm. I guess Orsino would have had some of Hawke's glory, or he would have been blamed for inciting the whole thing and cut down anyway. I wonder.

[brayl]

The town needed a new Viscount. That could have been Aveline, or it could have been Orsino if he hadn't blown it. I think what he did was completely out of character and the worst thing about the game, aside from the buggy programming problems.

I understand Meredith's motivation as the Deep Roads idol pushed her over the edge, but Orsino's actions were totally unexpected and really jarred with my mage's support for the Circle and anti-blood magic stance.

[ReiSilver]

brayl wrote...

The town needed a new Viscount. That could have been Aveline, or it could have been Orsino if he hadn't blown it. I think what he did was completely out of character and the worst thing about the game, aside from the buggy programming problems.

I understand Meredith's motivation as the Deep Roads idol pushed her over the edge, but Orsino's actions were totally unexpected and really jarred with my mage's support for the Circle and anti-blood magic stance.

I don't think having a mage as Viscount would have worked out well... Orsino only seemed to become a more public figure around act3 when Meredith refused to let a new viscount be elected.

I think it stems from the guys at Bioware wanting to make Orsino and Meredith both bosses no matter what you do, looking at the characetrs and as many have pointed out; fighting Orsino makes sense if you side with Templars but not when you side with the mages.
The simple solution would have been to have one boss fight depending on who you aligned yourself with, the only problem being they had created Meredith as someone who needed control and would never allow Hawke to become Viscount after so many years of being the main power in Kirkwall (the old Viscount pretty much did what she wanted whenever she made a demand) add in the instability caused by the Idol and her attacking a Templar siding Hawke still makes sense.
Bioware wanted a situation where neither side was "in the right" since people were mostly siding with Mages in DA:O, the problem being they still had a lop sided situation at the end of DA2

[PARAGON87]

I agree with the OP, the final chapter in Orsino's story is one of the low points in DA2. Personally the whole "siding with the mages" facet in DA2 feels flawed because nothing that you do during the game prevents the mages from going crazy, even though that was your intention all along.

It felt like the actions you took had no effect, and it happened anyway, which isn't like a BioWare game, at all.

Modifié par PARAGON87, 25 juillet 2011 - 02:05 .

[brayl]

ReiSilver:

I wasn't suggesting that my Hawke be Viscount. In fact, in DA, my Alistair wasn't king. We were quite happy and content with a woman on the throne. I thought that Aveline was showing the qualities that make a good head of state (city) and it would have been my choice to make her Viscount. I did think that Meredith had to go (resign/deposed/dead) even before she made all the statues dance.

[RampantAndroid]

Quite frankly, I think it's public knowledge there was meant to be a fourth act in DA2 (I have no confirmation - just what someone else posted online) and another section in kirkwall.

Given this, and the general feel that the game in the end was rushed, I don't think WE can come to any valid conclusions or rationale. I really suspect we were meant to see Orsino's downfall as well as Meridith's, but when it came time for cuts, Orsino's scenes just weren't far enough along to make it into the final product. I think that the entire third act felt rushed, and pretty nearly ruins the entire game as such - I walked away thinking "wait, that's IT?"

Anyway, that's my own guess; I've love to see Bioware talk on the subject but I won't hold my breath.