115 réponses à ce sujet

[whykikyouwhy]

@LobselVith8 - Wouldn't that then liken the compulsion of the darkspawn to find old gods, and the calling for the grey wardens, with possession? I see those examples, and the idol, as compulsion, intense drive, versus the taking over of the mind, body and potentially soul.

[LobselVith8]

The darkspawn are following the Song, while Bartrand was conversing with a voice in his head that was compelling him to commit certain actions. Hawke witnesses Bartrand talking to this voice when Varric and him defeat Bartrand, since at one point Bartrand concedes to the voice that he shouldn't have sold the lyrium idol.

[whykikyouwhy]

Right. And if memory serves, Bartrand's servant says something about Bartrand trying to make the other servants "hear the song."

I guess for me, that doesn't equate to possession. Maybe it's how I define possession vs compulsion. I could compel you to eat a slice of chocolate cake by telling you over and over again how rich and decadent it is, and how it would be super tasty with a glass of milk. And you may eventually eat the slice of cake, either because you really want to or you want me to shut up. But that would not be possession.

Again, semantics and perspective. I'm not trying to liken the idol's song to cake temptation btw, unless that is what Bartrand was hearing all along.

[TEWR]

I have to agree with whykikyouwhy on the idol. Even Anders says "If he wasn't a dwarf, I'd think he was possessed by a demon".

The idol doesn't possess someone. It just makes them go bat**** insane.

[LobselVith8]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I have to agree with whykikyouwhy on the idol. Even Anders says "If he wasn't a dwarf, I'd think he was possessed by a demon".

The idol doesn't possess someone. It just makes them go bat**** insane.

Except Bartrand seems to be speaking to someone that nobody else sees, he's not simply insane like Starkhaven Circle mages Decimus, Quentin, and Grace are.

[whykikyouwhy]

Speaking to someone does not mean possession. Possession would most likely not allow someone to talk to that which is possessing them - that implies a battle of wills, no? And that would mean that some control is still being exercised by the victim.

Bartrand is losing his mind. He is under the influence and thrall of the idol, or something within it. But he has moments of lucidity. His hold on reality is slipping, yes, but he is still, at his core, himself. There isn't another entity within him, but an entity/power pushing him along. It's still different than possession.

But again, this probably boils down to semantics. And chocolate cake.

[LobselVith8]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Speaking to someone does not mean possession. Possession would most likely not allow someone to talk to that which is possessing them - that implies a battle of wills, no? And that would mean that some control is still being exercised by the victim.

Doesn't Anders comment that it looks like possession to him, but dismisses it because Bartrand is a dwarf?

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Bartrand is losing his mind. He is under the influence and thrall of the idol, or something within it. But he has moments of lucidity. His hold on reality is slipping, yes, but he is still, at his core, himself. There isn't another entity within him, but an entity/power pushing him along. It's still different than possession.

But again, this probably boils down to semantics. And chocolate cake.

It's an issue of perception; you don't think Bartrand is possessed, while I do. I see it as fundamentally different to simply listening to the Song that the Mother discusses in Awakening. There's not enough evidence to really support an argument either way.

[whykikyouwhy]

So perhaps the idol is not the best example to bring to the table as an example of possession then.

I have to agree with Filament- he brings up an excellent point. If Corypheus seemed to be defeated, fell to the ground in a shredded heap , gave some sort of death rattle, and then didn't twitch when Hawke rifled through his body for goodies and treats of the loot variety, why would Hawke think "hmm, I'll bet he hopped bodies and possessed that dodgy warden."

And while Hawke asks Larius why he sounds different, that dead body over in the corner would erase those suspicions.

[LobselVith8]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Hawke is being proactive. At first, he's investigating why the Carta is attacking him. When he finds out why they're attacking him (doing the bidding of Corypheus) he has all the answers he wanted.

"Why am I being attacked? Oh ok, because they're crazy dwarves serving some weirdo. Gotcha."

Then, he decides to find out who Corypheus is. I'd call that proactive, as at that point he makes a decision to find out more about this Corypheus.

I see that as Hawke reacting to the situation at hand. He never demonstrates any intellect, and there aren't any decisions made to make him seem proactive. For example, in F:NV, the Courier can be proactive about how he treats the tribes of the Mojave, what factions he'll support, what he'll do to shape the future of New Vegas. The Courier can make decisions that are proactive, that have an impact within the context of the narrative. Even the DLC has the Courier having the chance to make decisions that have an immediate consequence. In contrast, Hawke is reactive, and solves virtually every problem by (in Carver's words) "punching [his] way to Champion."

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Lob, DLC cannot address a choice right away. That's the point I'm trying to drive home.

Out of curiosity, would you not have a problem with it if Hawke tried to kill Larius/Janeka 2.0 and failed?

I'd have no problem at all if Hawke did something other than acknowledge an extremely odd situation and simply drop the matter while the dying Grey Warden who could barely stand or speak suddenly starting talking coherently and similarly to Corypheus. It's like if Hawke stumbled onto Quentin doing something odd, then gave Hawke a flimsy explanation, and he simply accepted it. Whatever damage Corypheus causes is directly Hawke's fault for, once again, doing nothing. And doing nothing seems to be what Hawke does best, aside from killing things.

[Rifneno]

I still wonder if Bartrand stole the idol of his own free will... the piece of it in Act III took hold on Varric before Varric even touched it, so it's not out of the realm of possibility that Bartrand's mind was already being poisoned when he locked them in there.

[TEWR]

I see that as Hawke reacting to the situation at hand. He never demonstrates any intellect, and there aren't any decisions made to make him seem proactive. For example, in F:NV, the Courier can be proactive about how he treats the tribes of the Mojave, what factions he'll support, what he'll do to shape the future of New Vegas. The Courier can make decisions that are proactive, that have an impact within the context of the narrative. Even the DLC has the Courier having the chance to make decisions that have an immediate consequence. In contrast, Hawke is reactive, and solves virtually every problem by (in Carver's words) "punching [his] way to Champion."

No, it's Hawke being proactive. The definition of proactive is:

Acting in advance to deal with an expected difficulty

Hawke knows that if he doesn't find out more and deal with this Corypheus and the Dwarves under his command, they'll keep coming after him. It also allows him to learn secrets his father kept from the family. If the blood of a Hawke is so important, it's another reason he needs to take matters into his own hands instead of waiting for the Carta to do something bolder.

I'd have no problem at all if Hawke did something other than acknowledge an extremely odd situation and simply drop the matter while the dying Grey Warden who could barely stand or speak suddenly starting talking coherently and similarly to Corypheus. It's like if Hawke stumbled onto Quentin doing something odd, then gave Hawke a flimsy explanation, and he simply accepted it. Whatever damage Corypheus causes is directly Hawke's fault for, once again, doing nothing. And doing nothing seems to be what Hawke does best, aside from killing things.

I just don't think it fits. While the player certainly knows something is off, Hawke may not. In fact, I don't think the Wardens know what the taint does to the body after 30 years because they decide to go and die before they find out. If that's the case, then no one would be able to know that the taint makes someone limp like that. Obviously it deforms the body, but that has nothing to do with how Larius is moving. Sophia Dryden was much the same way.

So, if both Hawke and his allies know nothing about the taint's affects after the 30 year limit, then Hawke's reaction is justified because it can be chalked up to Corypheus being defeated.

Now, would it have been nice to have the option to attack him/her and fail? Certainly. I could have roleplayed my Hawke as suspicious of everything that has to do with this adventure and just want to get it over with already. Or show him writing a letter to the Wardens of Amaranthine where he tells them of Corypheus and voices his suspicion (that would've been something that fit imo). It doesn't have to be action then and there.

I still wonder if Bartrand stole the idol of his own free will... the piece of it in Act III took hold on Varric before Varric even touched it, so it's not out of the realm of possibility that Bartrand's mind was already being poisoned when he locked them in there.

Anders said the idol was more potent when it was broken, so that's why it affected Varric then.

[LobselVith8]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

No, it's Hawke being proactive. The definition of proactive is:

Acting in advance to deal with an expected difficulty

Hawke knows that if he doesn't find out more and deal with this Corypheus and the Dwarves under his command, they'll keep coming after him. It also allows him to learn secrets his father kept from the family. If the blood of a Hawke is so important, it's another reason he needs to take matters into his own hands instead of waiting for the Carta to do something bolder.

Hawke is reacting to the fact that the carta is trying to kill him. The main story of Legacy has the same problem as the conclusion of Dragon Age 2 and it's entire narrative, where Hawke is given a choice that leads to the same outcome with some superfical differences.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I just don't think it fits. While the player certainly knows something is off, Hawke may not.

Which makes Hawke look like an idiot for not realizing that the Grey Warden Larius, who was dying and incoherent is now standing tall, is now speaking coherently, and moreso, speaking almost exactly in the same manner as the darkspawn who he was dealing with a few moments ago.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

In fact, I don't think the Wardens know what the taint does to the body after 30 years because they decide to go and die before they find out. If that's the case, then no one would be able to know that the taint makes someone limp like that. Obviously it deforms the body, but that has nothing to do with how Larius is moving. Sophia Dryden was much the same way.

They know, which is why the Wardens go to the Deep Roads to die. Besides that, my problem is that Hawke looks dim witted for not doing anything about his suspicions. Once again, Hawke does absolutely nothing. I don't see any reason to applaud the writers for lying to us once again about addressing the issues with narrative or the significance of choice when the "two choices" presented gave us, once again, the same result.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

So, if both Hawke and his allies know nothing about the taint's affects after the 30 year limit, then Hawke's reaction is justified because it can be chalked up to Corypheus being defeated.

Hawke's reaction isn't justified. He doesn't do anything yet again. That's the crux of the problem with Hawke throughout the entire storyline of Dragon Age 2. He does nothing. Cullen takes away Bethany? Hawke does nothing. A killer is on the loose and using lilies to lure his victims? Hawke doesn't tell anyone, including his mother. Hawke finds a note from Quentin's accomplice? Hawke never investigates it. Meredith becomes a dictator? Hawke does nothing for three whole years. My problem is that Hawke is still the same protagonist who goes into three year comas between each Act and ignores the Knight-Commander becoming a dictator illegally until he stumbles upon Orsino giving a speech; even Carver notes that he punched his way to becoming Champion. I was hoping that the DLC would deliver an intelligent protagonist, but it didn't, which is evidently clear given how Hawke handles the situation at the end of Legacy where he realizes that something is suspicious with Larius, and he does nothing about it.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Now, would it have been nice to have the option to attack him/her and fail? Certainly. I could have roleplayed my Hawke as suspicious of everything that has to do with this adventure and just want to get it over with already. Or show him writing a letter to the Wardens of Amaranthine where he tells them of Corypheus and voices his suspicion (that would've been something that fit imo). It doesn't have to be action then and there.

I think if I'm expecting a proactive or intelligent character, I'd be better suited to Fallout or an actual RPG, because that's evidently never going to be Hawke, no matter how much I wish otherwise.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 09 août 2011 - 05:58 .

[TEWR]

Hawke is reacting to the fact that the carta is trying to kill him. The main story of Legacy has the same problem as the conclusion of Dragon Age 2 and it's entire narrative, where Hawke is given a choice that leads to the same outcome with some superfical differences.

Hawke reacts to the carta attacking him and wants to know why they're attacking him. The moment he has that answer, he is no longer reacting to the situation. He has his answers, and he can either leave it at that or pursue it. It is then his choice. As such, he decides to do something proactive.

This just goes along with my idea of reactive at first, proactive later on with more information.

Which makes Hawke look like an idiot for not realizing that the Grey Warden Larius, who was dying and incoherent is now standing tall, is now speaking coherently, and moreso, speaking almost exactly in the same manner as the darkspawn who he was dealing with a few moments ago.

The manner of speech didn't seem the same, and Larius sounded the same.

They know, which is why the Wardens go to the Deep Roads to die. Besides that, my problem is that Hawke looks dim witted for not doing anything about his suspicions. Once again, Hawke does absolutely nothing. I don't see any reason to applaud the writers for lying to us once again about addressing the issues with narrative or the significance of choice when the "two choices" presented gave us, once again, the same result

They know they can only live for 30 years, because as they approach their last year the song of the Old Gods gets louder and louder. To some, it's like a screaming that they can't ignore. But... it's when they live past that 30th year that they start to deteriorate in body, because they haven't died yet (which is why Larius looks like he does).


Now, while you may not see Hawke as proactive in this DLC (at the very least to me he is), he most certainly is in Legacy. It's about the only time he's done something proactive worth noting. And for the record, if he had tried to attack Larius/Janeka, that's him reacting to a change in demeanor.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 09 août 2011 - 07:03 .

[LobselVith8]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Hawke reacts to the carta attacking him and wants to know why they're attacking him. The moment he has that answer, he is no longer reacting to the situation. He has his answers, and he can either leave it at that or pursue it. It is then his choice. As such, he decides to do something proactive.

A choice that's already out of our hands, and where we only see Hawke reacting to the situation. There's no room for the player to have any real agency, there's no significance of choice in the narrative, and when Hawke has an opportunity to be proactive about a threat that doesn't explicitly involve a threat to him, he does nothing about it. All Legacy showed me is that the writers are going to continue to depict Hawke as a fool. 

Legacy's story starts off where Hawke has already decided to pursue the issue, so how are we privy to seeing Hawke being proactive when the choice is already made? It's not like we're seeing Hawke being proactive throughout the narrative, and the only time Hawke makes a choice that doesn't end in virtually the same way is the small side quest involving the Old God Dumat.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

This just goes along with my idea of reactive at first, proactive later on with more information.

Hawke is killing his enemies - that's pretty much all Dragon Age 2 was about. It's not like we see a particularly bright or cunning Hawke depicted here, especially given what he does at the end.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The manner of speech didn't seem the same, and Larius sounded the same.

I disagree, and I'm not the only one who noticed the similarity.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

They know they can only live for 30 years, because as they approach their last year the song of the Old Gods gets louder and louder. To some, it's like a screaming that they can't ignore. But... it's when they live past that 30th year that they start to deteriorate in body, because they haven't died yet (which is why Larius looks like he does).

Now, while you may not see Hawke as proactive in this DLC (at the very least to me he is), he most certainly is in Legacy. It's about the only time he's done something proactive worth noting. And for the record, if he had tried to attack Larius/Janeka, that's him reacting to a change in demeanor.

That would be Hawke being concerned about a potential threat to people other than himself and without being instructed on dealing with the particular threat. Unlike the times where he was sent on an errand regarding the Bone Pit or dealing with one of his comrades' problems, it would be Hawke using his wits to recognize that something was off with the Warden, realizing the similar vocal tones between the darkspawn and the changed Warden, and addressing the problem instead of ignoring it entirely. As it stands, all Legacy showed me is that Hawke is going to be depicted as a fool who will always fail.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 09 août 2011 - 07:19 .

[Gunderic]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

There was a choice that I thought mattered in Legacy - Hawke had to choose between Larius and Janeka. When I chose Janeka, I went through a different story than I did when I chose Larius

Nope.
 
You get a different puzzle for each side with little plot relevance, and if you team up with Janeka, the wardens under her command simply betray her to provide a challenge for the player ( which feels rather artificial, to be honest ), while the outcome after dealing with the final boss is virtually the same, except with a different character. That's as illusory of a 'choice' as you can get.

[whykikyouwhy]

Gunderic wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

There was a choice that I thought mattered in Legacy - Hawke had to choose between Larius and Janeka. When I chose Janeka, I went through a different story than I did when I chose Larius

Nope.
 
You get a different puzzle for each side with little plot relevance, and if you team up with Janeka, the wardens under her command simply betray her to provide a challenge for the player ( which feels rather artificial, to be honest ), while the outcome after dealing with the final boss is virtually the same, except with a different character. That's as illusory of a 'choice' as you can get.

Just curious, does having a "choice" imply that based on the decision, you'll have a unique outcome? Sometimes, in a situation with two choices, you may wind up at the same outcome, but it's the journey there that is different and significant. Does this diminish the choice, or make it illusory? I don't think so. And that may simply be my opinion.

For example, if I am deciding what to have for dinner, I can go with either Italian food or Japanese. Those are the two restaurant options before me. I wind up choosing Japanese, have a wonderful meal and leave the restaurant full. Now, had I picked Italian, I might have achieved the same result - a wonderful meal and the state of fullness. But my sensory experience would be different. The people I meet, see or eavesdrop on in the restaurant would be different. Two choices, same outcome, but different paths to get there.

Larius and Janeka aren't food, no. And that example may not be best in the grand scheme, but I think that choice was evident in Legacy. The path you pick is indicative of the Hawke you are playing - where your sympathies lie, where your moral compass is directed, etc.

[FieryDove]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Having recently purchased and finished Legacy, I have to say I'm disappointed that, once again, choice doesn't seem to matter. Regardless of who Hawke sides with, it's the same conclusion - the darkspawn seems to have possessed the surviving Grey Warden, and Hawke isn't capable of realizing this as a possibility, probably for the same reason he didn't do anything about Meredith becoming a dictator for three years in the city-state he was living in. Is there a reason that Mike Laidlaw mentioned that there was an issue about the significance of choice in Dragon Age 2, that they were going to rectify those issues, and then we were providing with a DLC where choice, once again, didn't matter?

I would imagine any DLC will not include anything earth shattering in choices simply because not everyone has the dlc.

As far as Hawke not noticing, well mine said something about why was Larius talking that way now...so it did get a nod. But nothing we could act on because we don't know for sure what happened.

[nitefyre410]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Gunderic wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

There was a choice that I thought mattered in Legacy - Hawke had to choose between Larius and Janeka. When I chose Janeka, I went through a different story than I did when I chose Larius

Nope.
 
You get a different puzzle for each side with little plot relevance, and if you team up with Janeka, the wardens under her command simply betray her to provide a challenge for the player ( which feels rather artificial, to be honest ), while the outcome after dealing with the final boss is virtually the same, except with a different character. That's as illusory of a 'choice' as you can get.

Just curious, does having a "choice" imply that based on the decision, you'll have a unique outcome? Sometimes, in a situation with two choices, you may wind up at the same outcome, but it's the journey there that is different and significant. Does this diminish the choice, or make it illusory? I don't think so. And that may simply be my opinion.

For example, if I am deciding what to have for dinner, I can go with either Italian food or Japanese. Those are the two restaurant options before me. I wind up choosing Japanese, have a wonderful meal and leave the restaurant full. Now, had I picked Italian, I might have achieved the same result - a wonderful meal and the state of fullness. But my sensory experience would be different. The people I meet, see or eavesdrop on in the restaurant would be different. Two choices, same outcome, but different paths to get there.

Larius and Janeka aren't food, no. And that example may not be best in the grand scheme, but I think that choice was evident in Legacy. The path you pick is indicative of the Hawke you are playing - where your sympathies lie, where your moral compass is directed, etc.

 


That is a great way of putting  it -  All  Dragon Age  and Mass Effect do is give  multiple paths to get same   conclusion. 

[hoorayforicecream]

Gunderic wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

There was a choice that I thought mattered in Legacy - Hawke had to choose between Larius and Janeka. When I chose Janeka, I went through a different story than I did when I chose Larius

Nope.
 
You get a different puzzle for each side with little plot relevance, and if you team up with Janeka, the wardens under her command simply betray her to provide a challenge for the player ( which feels rather artificial, to be honest ), while the outcome after dealing with the final boss is virtually the same, except with a different character. That's as illusory of a 'choice' as you can get.

When I sided with Larius, I found codex entries that supported that I made the right choice. They talked about how the warden mages set to bind Corypheus were continuously being affected by his whispering, and that many of them became convinced that they needed to release him for some reason or other. I got a different puzzle, and I got to see things from one perspective and parts of the map that were different.

When I sided with Janeka, I *also* found codex entries that supported that I made the right choice. They talked about how Larius, as former Warden-Commander, wrote about the calling, and how he hoped to go into it with a clean and good death, and wished the other wardens under his command would have a similar attitude. It provided a really nice contrast to the broken, tainted man we met in the tomb. I got a different puzzle, and I got to see things from a different perspective and a different part of the map.

The story being told seems pretty different to me. What example would you give of a choice that would matter that would not fall into this same category? DAO, Witcher 2, DA2 all had this same issue - the endings are all virtually the same, except with different characters. That didn't make the choices during the journey there matter any less, it just meant that the scope of most of said choices end with the game.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 09 août 2011 - 04:54 .

[Vormaerin]

I guess I just find it funny that people go into a Bioware game expecting a sandbox. They've never made a sandbox game as far as I am aware (I haven't played the Star Wars games, but I don't think they are different in this regard).. All the "choices" are illusory if you use the definitions provided by naysayers in this thread. There are no choices in the BG series that change the plot more than "take the left corridor" or "take the right corridor". The NWN campaigns are at least as linear as the Dragon Age ones, with even fewer meaningful decisions.

Everyone loved DA:O, but there were no decisions there that made any difference to the game play beyond the same "go left" or "go right" that features throughout DA2.

You really think there was any "fake choice" in DA2 more annoying and frustrating than the whole pointless Landsmeet chapter of DAO? Ugh. The DA2 "fake choices" at least feel like they'll matter in DA3. Which may or may not be true, but so it goes.

[KnightofPhoenix]

nitefyre410 wrote...
That is a great way of putting  it -  All  Dragon Age  and Mass Effect do is give  multiple paths to get same   conclusion. 

I would not call them "paths". It implies a different route with its own story / characters / quests...etc that is different if you made another choice. They do not give us paths, for our choices change nothing in the narrative or in the game.
They are simply inconsequential choices in the game itself, and you would proceed in the exact same way had you done another choice. I'll add even that they are bad at showing consequences that do not change the game either, they usually resort to telling and not showing (see meaningless cameos in ME2.

The Witcher 2 gave 2 paths to reach a similar (albeit not identical) conclusion. Something that to my knowledge has not been done by any recent RPG, and blows everything Bioware did when it comes to choices out of the water. Can't talk about Legacy of course.
And for the choices that do not change the game, they have consequences that are shown. A city can end up in a festival, or in a pogrom, that you actually see and are not told about.


Having watched vids of Cory, I am dissapointed that we can't talk with him. Why not make him like the Architect? Why not give us a choice to not fight him? I mean he survives anyways, so why force the same old "big bad evil" boss fight on us?

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 09 août 2011 - 05:13 .

[TEWR]

A choice that's already out of our hands, and where we only see Hawke reacting to the situation. There's no room for the player to have any real agency, there's no significance of choice in the narrative, and when Hawke has an opportunity to be proactive about a threat that doesn't explicitly involve a threat to him, he does nothing about it. All Legacy showed me is that the writers are going to continue to depict Hawke as a fool.

That the player cannot choose to make him say what he does that ends up making him proactive does not diminish the fact that he is indeed being proactive.

DLC cannot address a choice made just yet. There won't be anything earth shattering regarding the nature of who you sided with, but that doesn't mean that there won't ever be.

As I said, Avernus was the same way. The Warden has no idea how much longer he'll live. For all we knew, he could've croaked the minute we left the Keep. It wasn't until DA2 that we realized that choice has some major significance.

Legacy's story starts off where Hawke has already decided to pursue the issue, so how are we privy to seeing Hawke being proactive when the choice is already made? It's not like we're seeing Hawke being proactive throughout the narrative, and the only time Hawke makes a choice that doesn't end in virtually the same way is the small side quest involving the Old God Dumat.

Where he wants to find out why the Carta has been attacking him. He says "I want to find out why they're attacking me".

When he finds out about Corypheus, he then says in banter "I want to find out just who this Corypheus is", and this is well before he was trapped in the prison.

Hawke is killing his enemies - that's pretty much all Dragon Age 2 was about. It's not like we see a particularly bright or cunning Hawke depicted here, especially given what he does at the end.

Lob, they're crazed carta dwarves who drunk Darkspawn blood. It's kinda hard for Hawke to talk to someone who's not only a ghoul but attacks Hawke on sight. There are also mindless Darkspawn. Hard to talk to them, as well as Profane and demons. Again, it's hard to talk to those groups.

I disagree, and I'm not the only one who noticed the similarity.

Be this some dream I wake from? Am I in dwarven lands? Why seem their roads so empty? --- Corypheus

He feels the seals weaken. He knows you are close by. You must be ready...---Larius

The Golden City. The first violation. The magisters who brought the Blight.


Rewatching the scenes, there are some instances where possessed Larius speaks that keep to the odd manner of speech of Corypheus. But very few. However, Larius was lucid prior to the possession.

That would be Hawke being concerned about a potential threat to people other than himself and without being instructed on dealing with the particular threat. Unlike the times where he was sent on an errand regarding the Bone Pit or dealing with one of his comrades' problems, it would be Hawke using his wits to recognize that something was off with the Warden, realizing the similar vocal tones between the darkspawn and the changed Warden, and addressing the problem instead of ignoring it entirely. As it stands, all Legacy showed me is that Hawke is going to be depicted as a fool who will always fail.

The accents were different. Larius' voice is different from Corypheus', so there was no difference when Hawke spoke to Larius before and after.

Now, I enjoy Corypheus. As he doesn't know what's happened, I'm wondering if he'll try to learn more about the world he is now in. Maybe he'll be harmless. Maybe he won't. I'm glad he'll still play a part. I wouldn't want Hawke to succeed at killing him.

And while I don't agree that it would've fit in perfectly, it would've been nice to attack him afterwards for roleplaying purposes of a Hawke that's suspicious of everything that deals with that place and fail anyway.

And what would've fit is to have Hawke write a letter to the Wardens. Or talk about it with Carver/Bethany if they're a Warden.

One thing that bugs me is people say Hawke only kills, and then they say "He should've killed this person". I don't get it.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 09 août 2011 - 05:42 .

[Daithin]

I probably shouldn’t weigh in on this subject as really it’s just headscratchingly bizarre that one person, here… Lob. Is dead set on saying Hawk is an idiot when the narrative clearly shows exactly what the player knows and what it doesn’t. What Hawke Knows, and what he doesn’t.

The entirety of Dragon Age II, more or less takes place in Kirkwall, unlike in Dragon Age, Hawke only encounters Darkspawn maybe five or six times. You need to remember that Knowledge about the Darkspawn is limited at best, hell even some that knowledge given till later, or once you have reached the proper rank. Few outside the Greywardens know the Archdemon can only be killed with another Greywarden sacrificing himself to suck the demon’s soul into himself thus cancelling each other out.

Hawke despite the fact that he is well traveled is not a Greywarden. Even if Carver or Bethany are, they have only been in the Order for a handful of years. They wouldn’t have been given knowledge of the Archdemon, hell they even went against the Code of the Greywarden by letting Hawke know about the Joining. The information about the Archdemon was only given to Alistair and our Warden, at the very end of the game. Just like how they spring the fact that you might not survive the Joining, and how your lifespan is cut to 20 years depending on age, or how after that 20 years or so you will start to go batsh*t insane because of the Calling.

As a Player we know these things, as the character IE. Hawke, we do not.

When you frame the narrative in the context of the story being given it makes sense.

If you frame the Narrative, Hawke would only have a sidelines view of possession in general, and absolutely zero understanding of the Archdemons body jump. As far as Hawke knows, only Mage’s can be possessed when they consort with Demon’s or are to week to handle the Fade. Again this context is set up in Prince DLC, where they talk about not understanding how a normal women was Possessed by demon, or why or how it happened. Sure outside of the story we know that if a demon gets out, they can try and sometimes secede in possessing any creature, if they are strong enough. Hawke only barely knows that. Infact it was an earth shattering realization that Demons could posses Normal Humans. If you remember the line of quests dealing with the Templar recruits.

Within the stories context, Corypheus is consistently called a Darkspawn. Not a Demon, not an Archdemon, not once were we or even Hawke ever lead to believe that this Corypheus is anything more than a Darkspawn that talks with massive Magical powers till the very end, and even at that end he’s still just considered a Darkspawn. As we go on, we come to find out that this Corypheus is actually one of the Great Tivinter Magisters, the very ones that defiled the Golden City (Or was it Black all along?) and let lose the first Darkspawn which eventually rose into the first Blight when they corrupted the Old God. I had actually wondered what became of the Magisters. I thought they simple became hurlock’s and dragged woman off to become the first Brood Mothers. It seems that was not all that happened.

My first play threw, I was so focused on the kill I didn’t noticed that toward the end, the Look that is given, then the cut away to see over Hawke’s shoulder Larius/Jenica shaking their heads in the background. I just found it odd the way Larius suddenly changed speech patterns, and kept talking about his freedom, considering he never once mentioned it. However, he managed to explain it. I figured it was something to do with the Calling, and how it was suddenly gone. There was no reason for Hawke to doubt it at the time, at least not enough to turn around and suddenly butcher the new Corypheus. From the look on my Hawke’s face he thought something was wrong, but like me it was probably just a gut reaction, not enough to butcher someone over.

I realized on my second play through about the switch up, and realized Corypheus literally acted just like the Archdemon. It’s not so much a possession, as a body swap. His first shell was destroyed, and the closest Darkspawn shell, was a Greywarden. It’s likely the same reason a NORMAL mage was needed to seal Corypheus in the first place; which is never fully explained to Hawke.

I get the feeling there is a loophole in the Destruction of an Archdemon. You notice at the end of Dragon Age, they mention ONLY a Warden can kill an Archdemon, because by having the Warden lay the final blow, thus being the closest thing to the Archdemon when it dies. It kills Both the Old God and Warden.

When Corypheus dies, he is killed by Hawke, someone untainted. So he gets the chance to Jump to the next most Tainted. Larius, or Jenica. If you have your Sister or Brother with you, they might have run the risk as well, but I think Age of the Taint/Greywarden has a role to play. So a Greywarden new to the Order is less likely to be used because taint it is not deep enough and likely, will cause problems perhaps even kill the two. I get the feeling the other Tivinter Magister’s are either Trapped, or dead, likely killed by Greywarden’s before they even realized what was happening.