144 réponses à ce sujet

[Black Arachnia]

Serpieri Nei wrote...

xkg wrote...

Oh cmon - You don't know ? ? ?

It's so obvious - Varric's "The Unreliable Narrator" fault.

Stop Blaming Varic...or his Chest Hair will get you !!!

It's MOVING........

[b09boy]

jlb524 wrote...

b09boy wrote...
Aye, but in the same breath you can't create an entire world lore which you have to be skeptical of from the very start.  There's also a difference in the codex entries between "The chantry teaches us" and "in -305 Ancient the Wardens were formed.

Why not? 

Because it's a terrible way to build a world that you have to question each individual piece of history and lore given to you.  Technically yes, they could do it.  But that's just a tedious way of annoying a fanbase so you can logically rule it out.  Aside from which, good as Bioware's writers are, they aren't anywhere near good enough to handle that much depth.  DA2 showed us what happens when they try to take on complex story points and it came out as a technical mess.

[TEWR]

b09boy wrote...

I really hope Bioware didn't just screw up their own lore again.  This quote is from the Legacy trailer, presumably from the big bad sealed away in what has been described as a Grey Warden prison.

How would this screw up lore, one might ask?  The Grey Wardens were created 1200 years ago, a century into the first blight.  Whatever is trapped in there, by lore it shouldn't have been by the magic of any Warden.

The Darkspawn is 2000 years old. Some other entity may have trapped it there when this place wasn't a prison (if that's the case), and the Wardens stumbled upon it, so they built a more elaborate prison around it and continued to magically trap it, since even the best magic fades.

Also, this proves even moreso that the Chantry's story regarding the emergence of Darkspawn is a lie. What they claim is that the Magisters entered the Golden City 1000 or so years prior to Dragon Age. 

Remember the Dwarven codex on Darkspawn. They were the first to fight them and what they fought were the Genlocks.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 09 juillet 2011 - 01:41 .

[Mr.House]

Savber100 wrote...

Great... another retcon.


Ugh and here I thought the writer of Baldur's Gate 2 will be better than this.

It's not a retcon, well maybe it is if you beleive the Chantry lies.

[In Exile]

xkg wrote...

Lmao ok, same ol'BS. Varric is unrelibale - that was before , now - The chantry is unreliable - yeah no point in any discussion.

The chantry being unrealiable about the blight, though, was a big deal in DA:O. You could bring that up each time someone mentioned the origin of the darkspawn.

Not that the DA2 timeline isn't 100% b0rked.

[Mr.House]

b09boy wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

b09boy wrote...
Aye, but in the same breath you can't create an entire world lore which you have to be skeptical of from the very start.  There's also a difference in the codex entries between "The chantry teaches us" and "in -305 Ancient the Wardens were formed.

Why not? 

Because it's a terrible way to build a world that you have to question each individual piece of history and lore given to you.  Technically yes, they could do it.  But that's just a tedious way of annoying a fanbase so you can logically rule it out.  Aside from which, good as Bioware's writers are, they aren't anywhere near good enough to handle that much depth.  DA2 showed us what happens when they try to take on complex story points and it came out as a technical mess.

The Chantries claim about darskapwn was always been wavy, that's the whole point of the Chantry. Is what they saying true and mages are a risk or is the Chantry lying and leashing mages to build a monolopy on lyruim.

Many peopel point out the Chantry might be lying, tehre is a record from a Shaparte that details the first ever Darkspawn attack, which contradicts the Chantry version. It's not a retcon, history is never 100% true.

[xkg]

You guys need to separate historical facts from the Chantry teachings - like OP said.
The Wardens were founded 1245 years ago and you should take this as a historical fact (there may be some slight mistake, like 50 even 100 years but not 755 years)

Do you belive when they teach you in the school that The Teutonic Order were founded in 1190y ?
Just go to your teacher and tell her "Hey Miss, this is complete BS and i don't want to learn about it".

[Mr.House]

xkg wrote...

You guys need to separate historical facts from the Chantry teachings - like OP said.
The Wardens were founded 1245 years ago and you should take this as a historical fact (there may be some slight mistake, like 50 even 100 years but not 755 years)

Do you belive when they teach you in the school that The Teutonic Order were founded in 1190y ?
Just go to your teacher and tell her "Hey Miss, this is complete BS and i don't want to learn about it".

Warden creation is a fact, the darkspawn origin is not.

[In Exile]

Here is what the dwarves say:

''The surfacers claim that the first darkspawn fell from heaven. They spin tales of magic and sin. But the Children of the Stone know better. The darkspawn rose up out of the earth. For it was in the Deep Roads they first appeared. Creatures in our own likeness, armed and armored, but with no more intelligence than tezpadam, bestial and savage.

At first they were few, easily hunted and slain by our warriors. But in the recesses of the Deep Roads, they grew in numbers and in courage. Our distant thaigs came under attack, and now it was the army, not a few warriors, being sent to deal with the creatures. Victories still came easily, though, and we thought the threat would soon be over.''

They outright say the Chantry is full of ****.

[TEWR]

As I said, the dwarves were the first ones to fight the Darkspawn. Genlocks specifically.



Add into that 2 things from DA2 and I think the Dwarves of old are responsible for what made Darkspawn (no spoiler section restricts me from mentioning the 2 things, but it should be obvious)

[In Exile]

xkg wrote...
You guys need to separate historical facts from the Chantry teachings - like OP said.
The Wardens were founded 1245 years ago and you should take this as a historical fact (there may be some slight mistake, like 50 even 100 years but not 755 years)

Oh, the timeline looks totally b0rked. But that's independent of the issue with the Chantry.

Do you belive when they teach you in the school that The Teutonic Order were founded in 1190y ?
Just go to your teacher and tell her "Hey Miss, this is complete BS and i don't want to learn about it".

Well, people believed Jesus was born in 1 CE instead of 35 BC, which is more accurate. We know a tremendous amount of information was lost during the first blight. So those documents could still be inaccurate - that's Bioware's way out.

[jlb524]

b09boy wrote...

Because it's a terrible way to build a world that you have to question each individual piece of history and lore given to you.  Technically yes, they could do it.  But that's just a tedious way of annoying a fanbase so you can logically rule it out.  Aside from which, good as Bioware's writers are, they aren't anywhere near good enough to handle that much depth.  DA2 showed us what happens when they try to take on complex story points and it came out as a technical mess.

I'm saying all history is questionable, whether it's in DA or real life.  That doesn't mean any of it is necessarily false, just that it's good to be skeptical considering the nature of what it is and how it's transfered through time.  We can never know what actually happened nor know all the details involved unless we were there.

A portion of the world's history includes the Warden (or a Warden) killing Urthemiel to end the 5th Blight...we know that's fact b/c the writers showed this to us via DA:O.  We also know about the deal that the Warden possibly made with Morrigan before hand.  However, others that hear about these events second hand through story-tellers/historians won't know about the Morrigan bit (and the possiblilty of the Old God living on).   That's an example of not knowing all the details.

We also know for a fact that The Architect started the 5th Blight, as the writers showed that to us in The Calling.  Most of the Codex entries are about events we've never witnessed first hand through any media (video game/novel) so we have to take it with a grain of salt and if we are shown facts that contradict the stories well...then the stories weren't accurate.

Modifié par jlb524, 09 juillet 2011 - 01:47 .

[Firky]

Filament wrote...
As far as the Wardens factoring in, I would have to guess he was imprisoned first by someone other than the Wardens, and then the Wardens took over 'guard' duties over the course of time.

That's what I was thinking.

(Also, this Warden prison thing totally reminds me of Watcher's Keep from BG2. There better be a dragon at the bottom of it. Or top. I'm not fussy.)

[Saphara]

xkg wrote...

You guys need to separate historical facts from the Chantry teachings - like OP said.
The Wardens were founded 1245 years ago and you should take this as a historical fact (there may be some slight mistake, like 50 even 100 years but not 755 years)

Do you belive when they teach you in the school that The Teutonic Order were founded in 1190y ?
Just go to your teacher and tell her "Hey Miss, this is complete BS and i don't want to learn about it".

Thats fine and dandy, but the question proposed is that 1) darkspawn cant be 2000 years old because the CHANTRY tells us otherwise and 2) That only the Grey Wardens could bind something like that.

1 is based on faith,  2 is based on the belief that only the Grey Wardens could bind something, when a perfectly capable and powerful Tevinter mage may have done the same thing a LONG time ago before the place became a Warden prison.

History can only be close to correct when a general consensus is made by a majority of peers and posterity backed by facts like archeological evidence, not when 1 man says this happened.

Modifié par Saphara, 09 juillet 2011 - 01:49 .

[TEWR]

Well, people believed Jesus was born in 1 CE instead of 35 BC, which is more accurate. We know a tremendous amount of information was lost during the first blight. So those documents could still be inaccurate - that's Bioware's way out.

Yup. I made that point on another thread about how the First Blight destroyed much of the land and with it countless amounts of information. Darkspawn aren't ones to preserve old records.

[TEWR]

jlb524 wrote...

b09boy wrote...

Because it's a terrible way to build a world that you have to question each individual piece of history and lore given to you.  Technically yes, they could do it.  But that's just a tedious way of annoying a fanbase so you can logically rule it out.  Aside from which, good as Bioware's writers are, they aren't anywhere near good enough to handle that much depth.  DA2 showed us what happens when they try to take on complex story points and it came out as a technical mess.

I'm saying all history is questionable, whether it's in DA or real life.  That doesn't mean any of it is necessarily false, just that it's good to be skeptical considering the nature of what it is and how it's transfered through time.  We can never know what actually happened nor know all the details involved unless we were there.

A portion of the world's history includes the Warden (or a Warden) killing Urthemiel to end the 5th Blight...we know that's fact b/c the writers showed this to us via DA:O.  We also know about the deal that the Warden possibly made with Morrigan before hand.  However, others that hear about these events second hand through story-tellers/historians won't know about the Morrigan bit (and the possiblilty of the Old God living on).   That's an example of not knowing all the details.

We also know for a fact that The Architect started the 5th Blight, as the writers showed that to us in The Calling.  Most of the Codex entries are about events we've never witnessed first hand through any media (video game/novel) so we have to take it with a grain of salt and if we are shown facts that contradict the stories well...then the stories weren't accurate.

Indeed. That's why I take very few codexes to be the truth. Sister Petrine and Brother Genitivi seem to record the truth as they know it because they do research, but even then they could be wrong.

I refuse to believe the Exalted March of the Dales was called for because the elves started the conflict. Just doesn't add up.

[oldmansavage]

Hmmm this whole theme sounds familiar...Maybe something I've played in another Bioware game expansion.

[Theagg]

b09boy wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
It's because historical accounts are never 100% accurate and we never see the 'full picture' of what happened...there's always a bias depending on who wrote the historical account.

Aye, but in the same breath you can't create an entire world lore which you have to be skeptical of from the very start.  There's also a difference in the codex entries between "The chantry teaches us" and "in -305 Ancient the Wardens were formed.

Of course you can. In the same way we humans once considered mythical texts and tales handed down to be the truth but guess what, they were not.

Many of the codex entries are just that. Tales and myths that your 'in game' character knows. That doesn't mean they convey an absolute truth abouth Thedas. The writers are still free to play with that as they see fit.

[Theagg]

jlb524 wrote...

b09boy wrote...

Aye, we have one source of information.  If you have some proof as to why we should be skeptical of that information then go ahead with it.  Otherwise you're basically snubbing the entirety of the world's lore.

It's because historical accounts are never 100% accurate and we never see the 'full picture' of what happened...there's always a bias depending on who wrote the historical account.

Remember in DA:O how we heard two conflicting stories about Flemeth from Morrigan and Leliana.  Both are part of the world's lore and neither could be accurate.  Only the writers know who/what Flemeth actually is and they will divulge that info to us when they're ready for it (if they ever do).

Also, read how the Codex entry on Darkspawn changes based on the Warden's race (it's different for a dwarf as the story comes from a Shaper instead of the Chant of Light). 

This and so I am surprised that when something in game clashes with something mentioned in the codex, (given the nature of the Thedan authors behind the codex entries) some people are nonetheless up in arms as though a great truth has been violated.

Perhaps they carry their roleplaying too far and instead of it being their PC who might see the codex as truth, in the way humans have often seen mythical texts as truth, they themselves conflate it with real truth about aspects of Thedas (which of course, is not fully known until Gaider and co choose to rveal that)

[xkg]

 nvm - no point in trying, i am done here

Modifié par xkg, 12 juillet 2011 - 10:06 .

[TEWR]

Hey everyone, did you know the world is flat? I mean, that's what people said was the case centuries ago, so they couldn't possibly have been wrong.

[/snark]


The Chantry is mired in hypocrisy and deliberate lies, and I bet they know what is actually factual but are keeping the records hidden away because it might threaten their stranglehold over Thedas.

[Theagg]

xkg wrote...

You guys need to separate historical facts from the Chantry teachings - like OP said.
The Wardens were founded 1245 years ago and you should take this as a historical fact (there may be some slight mistake, like 50 even 100 years but not 755 years)

Do you belive when they teach you in the school that The Teutonic Order were founded in 1190y ?
Just go to your teacher and tell her "Hey Miss, this is complete BS and i don't want to learn about it".

"Historical fact" alters.....take a brief look at the disagreements as regards the chronological timelines in Egypts history for an example of that.

http://en.wikipedia....tian_chronology

[Theagg]

b09boy wrote...


Because it's a terrible way to build a world that you have to question each individual piece of history and lore given to you.  Technically yes, they could do it.  But that's just a tedious way of annoying a fanbase so you can logically rule it out.  Aside from which, good as Bioware's writers are, they aren't anywhere near good enough to handle that much depth.  DA2 showed us what happens when they try to take on complex story points and it came out as a technical mess.

No, as a fan of both games, I consider it rather fitting and excellent that the in game history and mythological writings are dubious to say the least. Doesn't annoy me at all.

[TEWR]

I'd also like to point out that the DA universe wouldn't be as interesting if everything turned out to be true. If there were no historical inaccuracies and deliberate lies.


Why would I care about Darkspawn if they actually were the result of Tevinter Magisters?


I'm glad the Darkspawn origins are not what the Chantry claims. I'm glad the Darkspawn seem to be tied more to the Dwarves than to anything else, because much of their records were destroyed as well. And we know very little regarding the Dwarves.


history is inaccurate. And when records are destroyed, it's even more inaccurate. The First Blight destroyed much of the land and with it many records, so what is perceived to be the truth of the matter may very well just be what people grew up with and over time the real truth was forgotten, if it was even still remembered.


Also, David Gaider said that not all codexes are actual fact.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 09 juillet 2011 - 02:17 .

[Northern Sun]

Maybe he was just rounding up to the next number with a lot of zeros. People do that all the time.