256 réponses à ce sujet

[elikal71]

You see, if I were a person who really would have lived in Kirkwall those 6 years, and the only thing about Magic I would know are the mages you meet in DA2, I would rightfully have to assume that magic is so evil, it must be forbidden. That would be the only logical consequence, because a mage that is NOT insane and a murderer is a 1 of 100 exception!

And that is what I found absurd in the storytelling of DA2. It makes the choice in the end totally unplausible. With those Fascist Templars and the mass-murdering mages... how would any sane person take ANY side? How could a sane person in a place like that do anything else but leave those madmen behind? That is were this entire story just doesn't make sense to me.

[randomcheeses]

elikal71 wrote...

You see, if I were a person who really would have lived in Kirkwall those 6 years, and the only thing about Magic I would know are the mages you meet in DA2, I would rightfully have to assume that magic is so evil, it must be forbidden. That would be the only logical consequence, because a mage that is NOT insane and a murderer is a 1 of 100 exception!

And that is what I found absurd in the storytelling of DA2. It makes the choice in the end totally unplausible. With those Fascist Templars and the mass-murdering mages... how would any sane person take ANY side? How could a sane person in a place like that do anything else but leave those madmen behind? That is were this entire story just doesn't make sense to me.

This.

Given the choice between supporting Templars or supporting the mages, my Hawke wanted to say "Screw you guys, I'm going home."

[Shadow Fox]

elikal71 wrote...

You see, if I were a person who really would have lived in Kirkwall those 6 years, and the only thing about Magic I would know are the mages you meet in DA2, I would rightfully have to assume that magic is so evil, it must be forbidden. That would be the only logical consequence, because a mage that is NOT insane and a murderer is a 1 of 100 exception!

And that is what I found absurd in the storytelling of DA2. It makes the choice in the end totally unplausible. With those Fascist Templars and the mass-murdering mages... how would any sane person take ANY side? How could a sane person in a place like that do anything else but leave those madmen behind? That is were this entire story just doesn't make sense to me.

This oh so much infact I wish they made it where Hawke could form a third faction with his/her group and the guards.

Modifié par Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke, 24 juillet 2011 - 04:19 .

[Sidney]

Except you run into mages that aren't crazy - Alain IIRC is with Denarius and walks away from him. The mage hunting the serial killer is a good guy. The mage who tells you about the templar that Carver is named after...and so on. People apparently just choose to ignore them.

Dwarves are overwhelmingly in the Carta based on a % of people you meet. Heck, based on the piles of dead I'd suspect most humans in game terms are bandits, thieves, thugs and such.

[White_Jedi]

There are no mages of both *Integrity* and *Power* in DA2 because is doesn't serve to advance the story as it was played out in front of the PC over the course of the 3 acts. Perhaps Hawke, Bethany, Merril and/or Anders may fit that characterization in the view of some people, but considering the number of mages who try to kill Hawke and/or the characters with Hawke, I would be hard pressed to keep a straight face and say the majority of mages act out of concern for anyone but their own self or the good (In their own view) of other mages. It's a bit of a shame that the various npc's in the game can be so easily pigeon-holed into stereotypes based on their class. Fenris hates mages, though not without reason based on his life experiences. Anders, by the end of the game has come to serve *only* the interest's (in his view) of mages. Both can be viewed as right, and equally viewed as wrong. Almost the entirety of the game paints the moral decisions based on an individual's viewpoint, though to be honest most of the games main characters have very narrow frames of reference. At least for the first 2 acts we see characters who don't seem to be blinded by their personal views. By the 3rd act however all attempts to serve some higher moral compass seem to get tossed out the window, in some cases with any sense of logic as well. I tend to agree with others, if it was an option in act 3 I probably would have abandoned the city to it's fate, letting the fools who so want control of the city fix their own mess. Who would suffer through the third act of DA 2 of their own free will instead of leaving if leaving was an option? Maybe a future expansion will shed some light on why Kirkwall went to hell in a handbasket so fast, but until then the city seems to have been doomed before you even arrived.

[Shadow Fox]

Sidney wrote...

Except you run into mages that aren't crazy - Alain IIRC is with Denarius and walks away from him. The mage hunting the serial killer is a good guy. The mage who tells you about the templar that Carver is named after...and so on. People apparently just choose to ignore them.

Dwarves are overwhelmingly in the Carta based on a % of people you meet. Heck, based on the piles of dead I'd suspect most humans in game terms are bandits, thieves, thugs and such.

the guy after the serial killer is NOT a good guy he's only hunting the guy to steal his knowledge infact he joins the guy unless Varric kills him or your Hawke is a diplomat.

and even so we have 3 good Templars 4 if Carver joins them and you fight more mages then Templars throught the game.

[Huntress]

elikal71 wrote...

You see, if I were a person who really would have lived in Kirkwall those 6 years, and the only thing about Magic I would know are the mages you meet in DA2, I would rightfully have to assume that magic is so evil, it must be forbidden. That would be the only logical consequence, because a mage that is NOT insane and a murderer is a 1 of 100 exception!

And that is what I found absurd in the storytelling of DA2. It makes the choice in the end totally unplausible. With those Fascist Templars and the mass-murdering mages... how would any sane person take ANY side? How could a sane person in a place like that do anything else but leave those madmen behind? That is were this entire story just doesn't make sense to me.

Yes if you live outside the gallows you'll  only see that mages are bad, now if you are a mage in the gallows and hear templars talking of turning every single mage in there to tranquil that will change you're views. If you read carver letter to Hawke as templar you'll learn that not even him is happy of whats going on in the gallows.

Keep in mind that the veil is torn in Kirkwall, so demon's are able to posses anyone 3 times faster that any were also.

One of my problem with with Da2 is that, we only see 90% of mages gone nuts and only 1% of templars side are shown.. people do not go to extremes because is just cool or make them look dashing, it have to be something that make them  nuts and they want to flee from that place or die.

To me the only thing I saw from this mages was despair, hopelessness.

[Shadow Fox]

Rifneno wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

So what you're saying OP is that we need less Osama bin Anders and more Mohandas Anders or Martin Luther Anders Jr.

But seriously, of course I agree with you 100% OP.

Martin Luther Anders Jr. wouldn't have a dream, because they'd tranquil his ass as soon as he got on the public soapbox.

The Chantry removed the possibility of peaceful protest when they decided it was okay to steal the soul of anyone who says the chicken at the Gallows cafeteria is dry.  So I pose this question:  Where is the CHANTRY with integrity?

You do realize there's a difference between peaceful demonstration and trying to instigate a rebellion right?

[CrimsonZephyr]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

So what you're saying OP is that we need less Osama bin Anders and more Mohandas Anders or Martin Luther Anders Jr.

But seriously, of course I agree with you 100% OP.

Martin Luther Anders Jr. wouldn't have a dream, because they'd tranquil his ass as soon as he got on the public soapbox.

The Chantry removed the possibility of peaceful protest when they decided it was okay to steal the soul of anyone who says the chicken at the Gallows cafeteria is dry.  So I pose this question:  Where is the CHANTRY with integrity?

You do realize there's a difference between peaceful demonstration and trying to instigate a rebellion right?

I'm pretty sure he does. He's saying there really isn't any way to bring about peaceful change because any time a mage gets even a little bit uppity about their lot in life, they are made Tranquil. Peaceful demonstration doesn't work in an Orwellian nightmare.

[Sepewrath]

elikal71 wrote...
You see, if I were a person who really would have lived in Kirkwall those 6 years, and the only thing about Magic I would know are the mages you meet in DA2, I would rightfully have to assume that magic is so evil, it must be forbidden. That would be the only logical consequence, because a mage that is NOT insane and a murderer is a 1 of 100 exception!

Those mages you were killing were the exception, its a video game, it would be rather boring I think if 9 out of 10 mages you met just said "I'm happy" and walked away whistling. You fought all the bad mages, but that doesn't mean you fought every mage in Kirkwall. There were what, like 8 mages(many children) in all of Circle Tower in Origins not trying to kill with blood magic or being abominations, does that mean in that entire tower, that's all was left? Clearly not, since you had more mages than that in the last battle. You fought lots of dirtbag Templar's but you didn't fight every Templar in Thedas. These people were the exceptions, that each side used to prove their point of how the other side was evil.

That last choice, your not suppose to take it as "Oh I killed more mages than Templar's, so that makes mages evil" The point is there was no right choice there, the Templar's are necessary, but the way they and the Chantry operate crosses the line, Mages can get out of hand, their powerful and can be dangerous, but power comes in a lot of forms and anyone CAN be dangerous, its not fair to stuff someone in prison for what MIGHT happen. That's where the choice comes in, throughtout the series, not just this game, you've seen the best and worst of both and its time to pick a side.

White_Jedi wrote...Almost the entirety of the game paints the
moral decisions based on an individual's viewpoint, though to be honest
most of the games main characters have very narrow frames of reference.
At least for the first 2 acts we see characters who don't seem to be
blinded by their personal views. By the 3rd act however all attempts to
serve some higher moral compass seem to get tossed out the window, in
some cases with any sense of logic as well.

Welcome to people, right and wrong is subjective, it depends solely on the person who is making the decision. Take capital punishment, lots of people say that its wrong and just as many say that its the right. Or take something as simple as the effects of video games, where people will do studies solely with the purpose of proving their point about how bad video games are, to be true. People will always be blinded by their own personal views on right and wrong and the more extreme the situation, the more blinded they will become.

Anders, Merrill, Meredith, they kept getting pushed, the more they got pushed, the more the retreated behind their ideals, it makes perfect sense. And there doesn't need to be expansion to explain why Kirkwall went, all of Thedas has gone. Simply put, a thousand years of subjugation will do that for you. The situation was a powder keg and Anders simply sped it up, but it was going to happen one day. The same way the slaves revolted in Tevinter, the mages would not have taken it forever.

[Rifneno]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

You do realize there's a difference between peaceful demonstration and trying to instigate a rebellion right?

I do. The templars don't.

[Harid]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

So what you're saying OP is that we need less Osama bin Anders and more Mohandas Anders or Martin Luther Anders Jr.

But seriously, of course I agree with you 100% OP.

Martin Luther Anders Jr. wouldn't have a dream, because they'd tranquil his ass as soon as he got on the public soapbox.

The Chantry removed the possibility of peaceful protest when they decided it was okay to steal the soul of anyone who says the chicken at the Gallows cafeteria is dry.  So I pose this question:  Where is the CHANTRY with integrity?

You do realize there's a difference between peaceful demonstration and trying to instigate a rebellion right?

Can someone tell me when this happened?  Because it honestly escapes me.  And please don't cite examples where people wanting 'peace' are really Blood mages.

[Shadow Fox]

Harid wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

So what you're saying OP is that we need less Osama bin Anders and more Mohandas Anders or Martin Luther Anders Jr.

But seriously, of course I agree with you 100% OP.

Martin Luther Anders Jr. wouldn't have a dream, because they'd tranquil his ass as soon as he got on the public soapbox.

The Chantry removed the possibility of peaceful protest when they decided it was okay to steal the soul of anyone who says the chicken at the Gallows cafeteria is dry.  So I pose this question:  Where is the CHANTRY with integrity?

You do realize there's a difference between peaceful demonstration and trying to instigate a rebellion right?

Can someone tell me when this happened?  Because it honestly escapes me.  And please don't cite examples where people wanting 'peace' are really Blood mages.

Here's  what I was saying most of the mages we see aren't trying to change people's opinions of mages*Like King did with his demonstrations* but are instead proving the Templars right through they're actions.

[Harid]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Harid wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

So what you're saying OP is that we need less Osama bin Anders and more Mohandas Anders or Martin Luther Anders Jr.

But seriously, of course I agree with you 100% OP.

Martin Luther Anders Jr. wouldn't have a dream, because they'd tranquil his ass as soon as he got on the public soapbox.

The Chantry removed the possibility of peaceful protest when they decided it was okay to steal the soul of anyone who says the chicken at the Gallows cafeteria is dry.  So I pose this question:  Where is the CHANTRY with integrity?

You do realize there's a difference between peaceful demonstration and trying to instigate a rebellion right?

Can someone tell me when this happened?  Because it honestly escapes me.  And please don't cite examples where people wanting 'peace' are really Blood mages.

Here's  what I was saying most of the mages we see aren't trying to change people's opinions of mages*Like King did with his demonstrations* but are instead proving the Templars right through they're actions.

Wouldn't have taken much to build one mage to do this through Dragon Age II.  These types of conflicts always work better when one group leader takes the high road, and the other the low road.  You get fear from the low road leader, but you garner respect through the high road leader, which can lead to public support.  I have no idea why they chose not to.  I have to figure because Bioware doesn't know how to write grey anything.

When mages are showing as so far that the Templars are right, they are going to have issues pulling off their war; mages will need lodging, will need farmed goods/food, and will need weapons, and they will need these common people not dropping dimes on them, things that the regular people will not want to do outside of under duress; and mages aren't trying to take over Thedas.

Modifié par Harid, 25 juillet 2011 - 03:04 .

[elikal71]

White_Jedi wrote...

There are no mages of both *Integrity* and *Power* in DA2 because is doesn't serve to advance the story as it was played out in front of the PC over the course of the 3 acts. Perhaps Hawke, Bethany, Merril and/or Anders may fit that characterization in the view of some people, but considering the number of mages who try to kill Hawke and/or the characters with Hawke, I would be hard pressed to keep a straight face and say the majority of mages act out of concern for anyone but their own self or the good (In their own view) of other mages. It's a bit of a shame that the various npc's in the game can be so easily pigeon-holed into stereotypes based on their class. Fenris hates mages, though not without reason based on his life experiences. Anders, by the end of the game has come to serve *only* the interest's (in his view) of mages. Both can be viewed as right, and equally viewed as wrong. Almost the entirety of the game paints the moral decisions based on an individual's viewpoint, though to be honest most of the games main characters have very narrow frames of reference. At least for the first 2 acts we see characters who don't seem to be blinded by their personal views. By the 3rd act however all attempts to serve some higher moral compass seem to get tossed out the window, in some cases with any sense of logic as well. I tend to agree with others, if it was an option in act 3 I probably would have abandoned the city to it's fate, letting the fools who so want control of the city fix their own mess. Who would suffer through the third act of DA 2 of their own free will instead of leaving if leaving was an option? Maybe a future expansion will shed some light on why Kirkwall went to hell in a handbasket so fast, but until then the city seems to have been doomed before you even arrived.

Indeed. It is just absurd! I am attacked by "Apostate Mages" all along the 3rd act, even though I spoke agains Meredith and the Templars in every possible opportunity! When this group of Templars and Mages who allied in the 3rd act meet me, they address me as puppet of the Templars! It is just absurd! I spoke out loud against the Templars and her leader all the time and yet they attack me and treat me as enemy. And it didnt't even make sense because I was a Mage as well!

This happened to me so often in DA2, and I noticed this much more in my 2nd run through the game. It was so often just entirely ignoring my decisions or what I had say, and it was railroading me along some line. In some moments Hawke started to say something in a dialogue to twist things towards one direction even without a dialogue choice entirley. And of couse sometimes I had chosen something from the dialogue wheel, and the reply was something entirely different that I WANTED to say. OR all too often what I WANTED to say was not in the dialogue options at all.

THAT however was an issue I already had with DA1. I recall Morrigan made a nasty comment when I wanted to help find that daughter of the blacksmith, and she gave me -5 or so, and I WANTED to say: Well dammit I do all the quests bcause I need the XP! But of course that was no dialogue option.

[elikal71]

Huntress wrote...

elikal71 wrote...

You see, if I were a person who really would have lived in Kirkwall those 6 years, and the only thing about Magic I would know are the mages you meet in DA2, I would rightfully have to assume that magic is so evil, it must be forbidden. That would be the only logical consequence, because a mage that is NOT insane and a murderer is a 1 of 100 exception!

And that is what I found absurd in the storytelling of DA2. It makes the choice in the end totally unplausible. With those Fascist Templars and the mass-murdering mages... how would any sane person take ANY side? How could a sane person in a place like that do anything else but leave those madmen behind? That is were this entire story just doesn't make sense to me.

Yes if you live outside the gallows you'll  only see that mages are bad, now if you are a mage in the gallows and hear templars talking of turning every single mage in there to tranquil that will change you're views. If you read carver letter to Hawke as templar you'll learn that not even him is happy of whats going on in the gallows.

Keep in mind that the veil is torn in Kirkwall, so demon's are able to posses anyone 3 times faster that any were also.

One of my problem with with Da2 is that, we only see 90% of mages gone nuts and only 1% of templars side are shown.. people do not go to extremes because is just cool or make them look dashing, it have to be something that make them  nuts and they want to flee from that place or die.

To me the only thing I saw from this mages was despair, hopelessness.

For a time I felt like that too. But then I realized that being a minority in RL blinded me to the truth here. Magic as we see it presented in DA2 just IS very dangerous. The downer is, you can't take the magic away from a mage without destroying his personality. so the entire setting of the world as presented in DA2 sets the player in a situation like the famous Kobayashi Maru test from Star Trek: you are destined to lose. And I just don't find such a setting plausible nor do I like a story where the end is destined for total disaster, no matter what I do. This is, IMPVO the flaw of the DA2 setting. You just can't win.

If you play the Templar side end, you find that even Orsinio covered this mage who murdered Hawkes mother! So no... those mages are all nutcases, as the setting of DA2 is. And that is what IMVPO is just WRONG with the setting as the developers made it. Every single attempt to make good is systematically and unplausible undermined to force this end.

[Rifneno]

elikal71 wrote...

Indeed. It is just absurd! I am attacked by "Apostate Mages" all along the 3rd act, even though I spoke agains Meredith and the Templars in every possible opportunity! When this group of Templars and Mages who allied in the 3rd act meet me, they address me as puppet of the Templars! It is just absurd! I spoke out loud against the Templars and her leader all the time and yet they attack me and treat me as enemy. And it didnt't even make sense because I was a Mage as well!

Indeed. If logic was given rights under the Geneva Conventions, Act III would've been a war crime. There's plenty of other examples too of course. "The Keeper's dead!" "Yes, I'm sorry but she became an abomination--" "GRAG DALISH SMASH!" "What the hell? I've helped you all time and again, now you're--" "DALISH HATE ALL SHEM!" "Arianni? I saved your son's life! Twice!" "Yes, but you must understand that DALISH MURDER SHEM!"

We get to meet Leliana, who is alive even if she died in DAO with no explanation, and suddenly she hates mages, even if the Warden mage is still "close to her heart." But I guess that's explained by the hints that she was just a spy and her time with the Warden was a total act, thus destroying one of the most popular characters in DAO. Oh, and she's there about all the mage trouble but Hawke can't think to say "the mages are pissy because your Knight-Commander is brutal tyrant whose only copy of both Chantry and Municipal law is next to her chamberpot."

Of course, I suppose the templar side has its own idiocy, albeit earlier. Like Merrill. "You're a blood mage!" "Yeah but it's okay, I know how to control the demons. Except when I don't." "I'm taking you to the templars!" "I'd prefer you just take me to the alienage and trust me not to accidentally rip open a portal into a screaming nightmare realm from which there is no escape." "Okay, I'll do that instead I guess." ... Ditto for Anders after he kills or nearly kills Ella.

If you play the Templar side end, you find that even Orsinio covered this mage who murdered Hawkes mother! So no... those mages are all nutcases, as the setting of DA2 is.

I seriously doubt people would give a damn about Quentin if he didn't kill Hawke's ******-poor excuse for a mother. Fenris killed a bunch of people who defended him against Danarius and that's been mentioned like twice in the history of the boards.

The problem with the amount of nutcase mages is that they hid at least half of the explanation in some obscure codexes. Well known to forum-goers and such, but the average DA2 player has no idea why there's a mage sacrificing a goat and doing demony things on every street corner.

[elikal71]

Rifneno wrote...

elikal71 wrote...

Indeed. It is just absurd! I am attacked by "Apostate Mages" all along the 3rd act, even though I spoke agains Meredith and the Templars in every possible opportunity! When this group of Templars and Mages who allied in the 3rd act meet me, they address me as puppet of the Templars! It is just absurd! I spoke out loud against the Templars and her leader all the time and yet they attack me and treat me as enemy. And it didnt't even make sense because I was a Mage as well!

Indeed. If logic was given rights under the Geneva Conventions, Act III would've been a war crime. There's plenty of other examples too of course. "The Keeper's dead!" "Yes, I'm sorry but she became an abomination--" "GRAG DALISH SMASH!" "What the hell? I've helped you all time and again, now you're--" "DALISH HATE ALL SHEM!" "Arianni? I saved your son's life! Twice!" "Yes, but you must understand that DALISH MURDER SHEM!"

We get to meet Leliana, who is alive even if she died in DAO with no explanation, and suddenly she hates mages, even if the Warden mage is still "close to her heart." But I guess that's explained by the hints that she was just a spy and her time with the Warden was a total act, thus destroying one of the most popular characters in DAO. Oh, and she's there about all the mage trouble but Hawke can't think to say "the mages are pissy because your Knight-Commander is brutal tyrant whose only copy of both Chantry and Municipal law is next to her chamberpot."

Of course, I suppose the templar side has its own idiocy, albeit earlier. Like Merrill. "You're a blood mage!" "Yeah but it's okay, I know how to control the demons. Except when I don't." "I'm taking you to the templars!" "I'd prefer you just take me to the alienage and trust me not to accidentally rip open a portal into a screaming nightmare realm from which there is no escape." "Okay, I'll do that instead I guess." ... Ditto for Anders after he kills or nearly kills Ella.

If you play the Templar side end, you find that even Orsinio covered this mage who murdered Hawkes mother! So no... those mages are all nutcases, as the setting of DA2 is.

I seriously doubt people would give a damn about Quentin if he didn't kill Hawke's ******-poor excuse for a mother. Fenris killed a bunch of people who defended him against Danarius and that's been mentioned like twice in the history of the boards.

The problem with the amount of nutcase mages is that they hid at least half of the explanation in some obscure codexes. Well known to forum-goers and such, but the average DA2 player has no idea why there's a mage sacrificing a goat and doing demony things on every street corner.

The odd thing is: apparently every mage can practice blood magic without any training, or "explode" into an Abomination just so. It's as if a person could burtst into spontaneous combustion out of the blue. It sorta makes no sense, for again, if magic where THAT dangerous, it must be forbidden, end of story. Orsinio claims never to have practiced blood magic, and yet he has an elaborate monster transformation like the best of them. Mages can just be aggressive or cornered and ALL of a sudden transform into monsters! I just found this so unplausible.

In DA:O a mage would become an abomination when he deals with demons, and only after a long descent into evil. It would be a long road from nice person to exploding monster. In DA2 this change can happen from one second to another just so. *snap* Hey I was a nice mage all my life, but you pissed me off and BLAM I become a monster-thing. It's just making no sense.


(EDIT: Heh, good to see some other people than me never cared much about this mother.)

Modifié par elikal71, 25 juillet 2011 - 04:27 .

[Sidney]

elikal71 wrote...

The odd thing is: apparently every mage can practice blood magic without any training, or "explode" into an Abomination just so. It's as if a person could burtst into spontaneous combustion out of the blue. It sorta makes no sense, for again, if magic where THAT dangerous, it must be forbidden, end of story. Orsinio claims never to have practiced blood magic, and yet he has an elaborate monster transformation like the best of them. Mages can just be aggressive or cornered and ALL of a sudden transform into monsters! I just found this so unplausible.

Orsino says he never USED Blood Magic not that he never studied it. As his letters make clear he was following the "research" quite closely.

I'm not sure why the abomination transformation is so implausible. They're all already possessed is my understanding. They don't just become a demon. Cullen's charge is already possessed but is incognito until he gets pushed too far for example.

[Rifneno]

elikal71 wrote...

The odd thing is: apparently every mage can practice blood magic without any training, or "explode" into an Abomination just so. It's as if a person could burtst into spontaneous combustion out of the blue. It sorta makes no sense, for again, if magic where THAT dangerous, it must be forbidden, end of story. Orsinio claims never to have practiced blood magic, and yet he has an elaborate monster transformation like the best of them. Mages can just be aggressive or cornered and ALL of a sudden transform into monsters! I just found this so unplausible.

In DA:O a mage would become an abomination when he deals with demons, and only after a long descent into evil. It would be a long road from nice person to exploding monster. In DA2 this change can happen from one second to another just so. *snap* Hey I was a nice mage all my life, but you pissed me off and BLAM I become a monster-thing. It's just making no sense.


(EDIT: Heh, good to see some other people than me never cared much about this mother.)

I blame it on Kirkwall's paper-mache veil. It's plausible that the crazy abomination rules would be such at Kirkwall. The part that's retarded beyond comprehension is that a) they hid it in some obscure codexes so most players had no idea about an essential piece of the story, that nobody seems to notice the entire city is a portal to Hell. I'd blame it on a Chantry conspiracy to drive the mages nuts so they could use it as an example of why they have to lock them up, but even if that was true the Circle mages should've known. The second the Starkhaven mages, or even Bethany got to Kirkwall they should've realized the entire city was damned.

And yeah, I don't care for Leandra. First she blames Hawke for Bethany or Carver's death. What the HELL? That's the kind of thing that can scar someone for life. Then she decides laying low and not attracting the templars to her mage child is no fun so she starts petitioning to get her family's land back (which her family rightfully lost).

[elikal71]

Rifneno wrote...

elikal71 wrote...

The odd thing is: apparently every mage can practice blood magic without any training, or "explode" into an Abomination just so. It's as if a person could burtst into spontaneous combustion out of the blue. It sorta makes no sense, for again, if magic where THAT dangerous, it must be forbidden, end of story. Orsinio claims never to have practiced blood magic, and yet he has an elaborate monster transformation like the best of them. Mages can just be aggressive or cornered and ALL of a sudden transform into monsters! I just found this so unplausible.

In DA:O a mage would become an abomination when he deals with demons, and only after a long descent into evil. It would be a long road from nice person to exploding monster. In DA2 this change can happen from one second to another just so. *snap* Hey I was a nice mage all my life, but you pissed me off and BLAM I become a monster-thing. It's just making no sense.


(EDIT: Heh, good to see some other people than me never cared much about this mother.)

I blame it on Kirkwall's paper-mache veil. It's plausible that the crazy abomination rules would be such at Kirkwall. The part that's retarded beyond comprehension is that a) they hid it in some obscure codexes so most players had no idea about an essential piece of the story, that nobody seems to notice the entire city is a portal to Hell. I'd blame it on a Chantry conspiracy to drive the mages nuts so they could use it as an example of why they have to lock them up, but even if that was true the Circle mages should've known. The second the Starkhaven mages, or even Bethany got to Kirkwall they should've realized the entire city was damned.

And yeah, I don't care for Leandra. First she blames Hawke for Bethany or Carver's death. What the HELL? That's the kind of thing that can scar someone for life. Then she decides laying low and not attracting the templars to her mage child is no fun so she starts petitioning to get her family's land back (which her family rightfully lost).

Fascinating. Even I, after 2 play throughs, had no clue about the Obscure Codexes and that Kirkwall was some sort of Lovecraftian place!

Guess Bioware really screwd their story, teh.

[Morroian]

elikal71 wrote...

Fascinating. Even I, after 2 play throughs, had no clue about the Obscure Codexes and that Kirkwall was some sort of Lovecraftian place!

Guess Bioware really screwd their story, teh.

Or they expect people to read more carefully, those codexes are pretty interesting.

elikal71 wrote...

Indeed. It is just absurd! I am attacked by "Apostate Mages" all along the 3rd act, even though I spoke agains Meredith and the Templars in every possible opportunity! When this group of Templars and Mages who allied in the 3rd act meet me, they address me as puppet of the Templars! It is just absurd! I spoke out loud against the Templars and her leader all the time and yet they attack me and treat me as enemy. And it didnt't even make sense because I was a Mage as well!

They were brainwashed by Grace, it wasn't presented very well but Thrask and Alain do come back to your side once you explain. 

Modifié par Morroian, 25 juillet 2011 - 05:25 .

[Morroian]

Rifneno wrote...

We get to meet Leliana, who is alive even if she died in DAO with no explanation, and suddenly she hates mages, even if the Warden mage is still "close to her heart." But I guess that's explained by the hints that she was just a spy and her time with the Warden was a total act, thus destroying one of the most popular characters in DAO. Oh, and she's there about all the mage trouble but Hawke can't think to say "the mages are pissy because your Knight-Commander is brutal tyrant whose only copy of both Chantry and Municipal law is next to her chamberpot."

Did you kill Leliana in DAO? And there is an explanation its in the codices you might not like it but its there.

As for her opinion on mages maybe I chose different dialogue options but I didn't get the feeling that she hated all mages.

[Harid]

I never got the impression she hated all mages either.

[Rifneno]

elikal71 wrote...

Fascinating. Even I, after 2 play throughs, had no clue about the Obscure Codexes and that Kirkwall was some sort of Lovecraftian place!

Guess Bioware really screwd their story, teh.

Yeah, I was curious if you knew about it hehe. It's definitely very interesting, just a big fail in how no NPC knows about it and even if Hawke knows from the codexes, s/he can't say anything. I mean it'd be an entire town not realizing their beds were made out of barbed wire. ... About the same amount of blood too, come to think of it.

Morroian wrote...

Or they expect people to read more carefully, those codexes are pretty interesting.

Not realistic. The game has TONS of codexes. There's like a full sized book's worth of text in the codexes. The average player isn't going to read all that.

They were brainwashed by Grace, it wasn't presented very well but Thrask and Alain do come back to your side once you explain.

Since the last patch, they introduced another way to make Act III make less sense. The initial fight with the onspirators (not Thrask and Grace, the one in Hightown) they say "We know you're spying for Orsino!" instead of Meredith. It was a bug that they always thought Hawke was pro-templar. So apparently they do know that Hawke is pro-mage. Why do they attack then? "There must be something in the water..." - Isabela

Did you kill Leliana in DAO? And there is an explanation its in the codices you might not like it but its there.

David Gaider even said that they haven't given an explanation yet. They're not even going to pretend that Leliana's "the Maker decided to bring me back even though he abandoned the world when we killed his beloved whom he didn't care about to resurrect" explanation. Which is good, because that would just ****** people off.

As for her opinion on mages maybe I chose different dialogue options but I didn't get the feeling that she hated all mages.

Maybe hated is too strong a word, but it was a vast change from her view on mages in DAO.