250 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

This is an issue that bothers me about the protagonist of Dragon Age 2, especially given the ending for Legacy with Larius, but I don't understand why the writers chose for Hawke to consistently do nothing when it's within his power to actually do something. Some have argued that it's about feeling helpless, but Hawke doesn't even try. When Hawke is faced with Petrice and her revelation about trying to start a religious war against the Qunari, he does nothing about it, leading to the deaths of many and the Arishok trying to commander control of Kirkwall. When Hawke is faced with Knight-Captain Cullen come to take his sister away, he does nothing, despite knowing about the illegal tranquility that's going on in the Gallows in the mandatory quest "Tranquility." When Hawke becomes Champion and Meredith becomes dictator over Kirkwall, he doesn't do anything about her reign for three years. When Hawke is confronting Grace, he does nothing as she kills Thrask. Even Legacy seems to be continiuing this trend of Hawke doing nothing, when he questions why the surviving Warden is different, and proceeds to do nothing. It's difficult to get engaged in a protagonist who is constantly doing nothing throughout the storyline. I get the feeling from Legacy that this is going to continue in future DLC, where Hawke does nothing even when it's within his power to be proactive and do something.

[whykikyouwhy]

Maybe Hawke is doing plenty of something. (S)he just isn't telling you about it.

[naledgeborn]

Blame Varric. It's his story.

[Xilizhra]

Actually, it's not true that Hawke must do nothing about Petrice's religious warfare thing; she can inform the Arishok. She can't inform the viscount because she can't get an audience, she can't inform Elthina because Elthina is flipping useless, and I think there's a reason given why she can't just kill her.

Bethany tells Hawke not to interfere with Cullen taking her; I doubt that it was really only two templars who came there, and if they didn't return in sufficient time, there'd probably be a lot of reinforcements coming to probably do bad things to the entire Hawke family. The only way out is to flee to a ship leaving right at that instant, and there may well be none at all.

Meredith as dictator is explained in my timeskip thread. Though she could be still doing something, enough so that Meredith doesn't have total power. It's just not directly shown.

Grace is I think just an artifact of how fast the event moves in reality vs. how we see it. Gameplay/story segregation.

[Augustei]

Xilizhra wrote...

Actually, it's not true that Hawke must do nothing about Petrice's religious warfare thing; she can inform the Arishok. She can't inform the viscount because she can't get an audience, she can't inform Elthina because Elthina is flipping useless, and I think there's a reason given why she can't just kill her.

Bethany tells Hawke not to interfere with Cullen taking her; I doubt that it was really only two templars who came there, and if they didn't return in sufficient time, there'd probably be a lot of reinforcements coming to probably do bad things to the entire Hawke family. The only way out is to flee to a ship leaving right at that instant, and there may well be none at all.

Meredith as dictator is explained in my timeskip thread. Though she could be still doing something, enough so that Meredith doesn't have total power. It's just not directly shown.

Grace is I think just an artifact of how fast the event moves in reality vs. how we see it. Gameplay/story segregation.

Warning everyone wouldn't be necessary if Hawke just killed petrice though..

As for backlash from killing the templars so bethany doesn't have to go to the circle.. Hawke didn't seem to mind killing templars and dealing with the backlash in the gallows at the end.. Good to know the champion cares more about a bunch of random mages over his own sister =P Hawke had already faced down far worse then a squad of templars by the time he got back from that expedition so it didn't make much sense for them to be to much of a challenge for him. And Bethany telling hawke not to interfere shouldn't matter since Kirkwalls circles is full of rapists and overzealous insane templars who lash and tranquilise any who question them, not fact at that point but he still heard things about it

Meredith essentially had complete power by the time Hawke did anything, he didn't take any measures to deal with it.. The only thing keeping her from killing all the mages was Grand cleric elthina being alive, Hawke didn't keep Meredith in check at all though from what I saw

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 21 août 2011 - 04:38 .

[LobselVith8]

Xilizhra wrote...

Actually, it's not true that Hawke must do nothing about Petrice's religious warfare thing; she can inform the Arishok. She can't inform the viscount because she can't get an audience, she can't inform Elthina because Elthina is flipping useless, and I think there's a reason given why she can't just kill her.

In other words, Hawke does nothing about Petrice but informs the Arishok about how dangerous Petrice is? Wouldn't it have been better to deal with Petrice and then inform the Arishok about what transpired?

Xilizhra wrote...

Bethany tells Hawke not to interfere with Cullen taking her; I doubt that it was really only two templars who came there, and if they didn't return in sufficient time, there'd probably be a lot of reinforcements coming to probably do bad things to the entire Hawke family. The only way out is to flee to a ship leaving right at that instant, and there may well be none at all.

All we see is Cullen and one other templar; Hawke abandoned his sister to the templars, where she could have been tortured (like the mage who fled to her cousin, who the templars were going to kill), raped (like Alain), or made tranquil (like Karl). Since Hawke knows what happened to Karl, I can't condone him doing nothing to protect his baby sister.

Xilizhra wrote...

Meredith as dictator is explained in my timeskip thread. Though she could be still doing something, enough so that Meredith doesn't have total power. It's just not directly shown.

And I explained that it wouldn't stop Hawke from making a clandestine effort against Meredith if he didn't want to publicly oppose her.

Xilizhra wrote...

Grace is I think just an artifact of how fast the event moves in reality vs. how we see it. Gameplay/story segregation.

It has nothing to do with seperating story and game mechanics and everything to do with Hawke, once again, doing nothing at all. Hawke is supposed to be able to defend himself against enemies, and be quick enough to counter their attacks. If your theory is correct, how can Hawke deal with Grace's speed? How is he still able to defeat her after she kills Thrask? How is anyone among Hawke's group capable of dealing with her if she's that fast?

[Neminea]

Edit: I should read before I post

Modifié par Neminea, 21 août 2011 - 04:51 .

[Xilizhra]

In other words, Hawke does nothing about Petrice but informs the Arishok about how dangerous Petrice is? Wouldn't it have been better to deal with Petrice and then inform the Arishok about what transpired?

When I reach this point in the game again, I'll select the "I should kill you" option to see what Petrice says.

All we see is Cullen and one other templar; Hawke abandoned his sister to the templars, where she could have been tortured (like the mage who fled to her cousin, who the templars were going to kill), raped (like Alain), or made tranquil (like Karl). Since Hawke knows what happened to Karl, I can't condone him doing nothing to protect his baby sister.

Well, it's that or have her, him/herself, and quite possibly his mother and uncle all just get killed by templar retaliation. Hell, if Hawke attacked, one of the templars might just kill Bethany instantly.

And I explained that it wouldn't stop Hawke from making a clandestine effort against Meredith if he didn't want to publicly oppose her.

How do we know that Hawke didn't? Meredith's grip on the city clearly isn't complete.

It has nothing to do with seperating story and game mechanics and everything to do with Hawke, once again, doing nothing at all. Hawke is supposed to be able to defend himself against enemies, and be quick enough to counter their attacks. If your theory is correct, how can Hawke deal with Grace's speed? How is he still able to defeat her after she kills Thrask? How is anyone among Hawke's group capable of dealing with her if she's that fast?

My best theory is that in the actual scenario, the enemy attack and Grace killing Thrask happen at the same time, so that Hawke can't reach them in time.

[LobselVith8]

Xilizhra wrote...

When I reach this point in the game again, I'll select the "I should kill you" option to see what Petrice says.

I selected that dialogue option, and Hawke does nothing.

Xilizhra wrote...


Well, it's that or have her, him/herself, and quite possibly his mother and uncle all just get killed by templar retaliation. Hell, if Hawke attacked, one of the templars might just kill Bethany instantly.

If a templar is being attacked, wouldn't he try to save his own life? Hawke could have killed the two templars and saved his sister from suffering the same fate as Alain, Karl, or the other mages who suffered, but instead Hawke did nothing. I guess personal gain was more important than Bethany's life.

Xilizhra wrote...

How do we know that Hawke didn't? Meredith's grip on the city clearly isn't complete.

Play Act III. Hawke doesn't do anything unless someone asks him to do something, and my imagination isn't a substitute for Hawke's inaction in the storyline.

Xilizhra wrote...

My best theory is that in the actual scenario, the enemy attack and Grace killing Thrask happen at the same time, so that Hawke can't reach them in time.

Doesn't that contradict what we see happening? My imagination shouldn't have to override the actual scenes that are depicted.

[Xilizhra]

I selected that dialogue option, and Hawke does nothing.

What does Petrice say?

If a templar is being attacked, wouldn't he try to save his own life? Hawke could have killed the two templars and saved his sister from suffering the same fate as Alain, Karl, or the other mages who suffered, but instead Hawke did nothing. I guess personal gain was more important than Bethany's life.

I really don't see how Hawke could have done anything. Bethany might not even fight, and then it'd be one-on-two unless she changed her mind. And Leandra could get killed at any time.

Play Act III. Hawke doesn't do anything unless someone asks him to do something, and my imagination isn't a substitute for Hawke's inaction in the storyline.

That's just how questing works. The timeskips are annoying, but there's no reason to assume the worst about Hawke.
'

Doesn't that contradict what we see happening? My imagination shouldn't have to override the actual scenes that are depicted.

Probably not, but it's the best explanation I could come up with.

[Arthur Cousland]

A rogue duelist Hawke should have been able to Vendetta over to Grace to save Thrask.

Hawke also just stood there as Grace was insisting that they kill the hostage.

This whole scenario made no sense.

[LobselVith8]

Xilizhra wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I selected that dialogue option, and Hawke does nothing.

What does Petrice say?

Petrice says that Hawke may be more than a match for her templar bodyguard, and she pays Hawke. It was stupid. It's one of the reasons why I made this thread - the writers seem to treat Hawke very poorly, and the ending to Legacy with Larius (which, to me, mirrors "Sheparding Wolves") makes me feel like they plan on continuing the trend.

Xilizhra wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

If a templar is being attacked, wouldn't he try to save his own life? Hawke could have killed the two templars and saved his sister from suffering the same fate as Alain, Karl, or the other mages who suffered, but instead Hawke did nothing. I guess personal gain was more important than Bethany's life.

I really don't see how Hawke could have done anything. Bethany might not even fight, and then it'd be one-on-two unless she changed her mind. And Leandra could get killed at any time.

If my sister was going to be taken to a prison where people like her have been facing abuses - including lobotomies that happen illegally - I'm going to do something. I'd rather risk my life protecting her than doing nothing when the worst can happen to her.

[whykikyouwhy]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

If a templar is being attacked, wouldn't he try to save his own life? Hawke could have killed the two templars and saved his sister from suffering the same fate as Alain, Karl, or the other mages who suffered, but instead Hawke did nothing. I guess personal gain was more important than Bethany's life.

I really don't see how Hawke could have done anything. Bethany might not even fight, and then it'd be one-on-two unless she changed her mind. And Leandra could get killed at any time.

If my sister was going to be taken to a prison where people like her have been facing abuses - including lobotomies that happen illegally - I'm going to do something. I'd rather risk my life protecting her than doing nothing when the worst can happen to her.

If you-as-Hawke had done something, it's very likely that you would have been killed. So that would have made for a very short game, wouldn't it? Which would then prompt a whole different wave of dissatisfaction.

[Wulfram]

I tend to assume that there was a regiment waiting outside Hawke's house when Bethany is taken in. And I try to treat the 3 year gaps as an invitation to use my imagination rather than an indication of inaction.

Though I agree with your broader point.

[LobselVith8]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

If you-as-Hawke had done something, it's very likely that you would have been killed. So that would have made for a very short game, wouldn't it? Which would then prompt a whole different wave of dissatisfaction.

There are two templars in the scene, it's not like the army of people at the end of Scarface. Given how many different antagonists are defeated by Hawke, I don't see the difficulty in dealing with two templars. Hawke could do the little trick he does in "Wayward Son" (right here) and then he only has to deal one-on-one with Cullen.

[whykikyouwhy]

LobselVith8 wrote...

whykikyouwhy wrote...

If you-as-Hawke had done something, it's very likely that you would have been killed. So that would have made for a very short game, wouldn't it? Which would then prompt a whole different wave of dissatisfaction.

There are two templars in the scene, it's not like the army of people at the end of Scarface. Given how many different antagonists are defeated by Hawke, I don't see the difficulty in dealing with two templars. Hawke could do the little trick he does in "Wayward Son" (right here) and then he only has to deal one-on-one with Cullen.

Two templars that you saw.

There were only a handful of Qunari at the compound every time you visited, but that didn't stop there from being a slew of them who were able to practically destroy Kirkwall at the end of Act 2.

The imagination has to fill in the gaps.

[TobiTobsen]

LobselVith8 wrote...

whykikyouwhy wrote...

If you-as-Hawke had done something, it's very likely that you would have been killed. So that would have made for a very short game, wouldn't it? Which would then prompt a whole different wave of dissatisfaction.

There are two templars in the scene, it's not like the army of people at the end of Scarface. Given how many different antagonists are defeated by Hawke, I don't see the difficulty in dealing with two templars. Hawke could do the little trick he does in "Wayward Son" (right here) and then he only has to deal one-on-one with Cullen.

Who is just a dude in plate armor against every non mage. Not really a threat like the Ancient Rock Wraith Hawke killed a week ago in the deep roads.

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Two templars that you saw.

There
were only a handful of Qunari at the compound every time you visited,
but that didn't stop there from being a slew of them who were able to
practically destroy Kirkwall at the end of Act 2.

The imagination has to fill in the gaps.

Hawke is surprised to see Templars in his house. So there don't seem to be more of them outside the door, otherwise he wouldn't stroll in and be all "what is a Templar doing in my living room/kitchen?" instead of "Where is Bethany? There are Templars in front of the house."

Modifié par TobiTobsen, 21 août 2011 - 06:41 .

[whykikyouwhy]

TobiTobsen wrote...


Hawke is surprised to see Templars in his house. So there don't seem to be more of them outside the door, otherwise he wouldn't stroll in and be all "what is a Templar doing in my living room/kitchen?" instead of "Where is Bethany? There are Templars in front of the house."

So let's stop to consider that if Hawke had killed the two templars, what then? Take Bethany and Leandra and run for the hills? Hide out in Darktown? The family was tired of running - Bethany says as much, as does Leandra. 

And if in the struggle, one of them had been killed? Then we might get to spend the next two Acts regretting that decisions - wallowing in guilt, etc and so forth.

I don't know that any aggressive stance would have been optimal, or helped in any way, no matter how instinctual it might have been. But that's doesn't equate Hawke as "doing nothing" imo - rather, Hawke stepped back because it made the most sense. It's not as though that could have been an easy decision, even if the snarky dialogue options are chosen.

[TobiTobsen]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

TobiTobsen wrote...


Hawke is surprised to see Templars in his house. So there don't seem to be more of them outside the door, otherwise he wouldn't stroll in and be all "what is a Templar doing in my living room/kitchen?" instead of "Where is Bethany? There are Templars in front of the house."

So let's stop to consider that if Hawke had killed the two templars, what then? Take Bethany and Leandra and run for the hills? Hide out in Darktown? The family was tired of running - Bethany says as much, as does Leandra. 

And if in the struggle, one of them had been killed? Then we might get to spend the next two Acts regretting that decisions - wallowing in guilt, etc and so forth.

I don't know that any aggressive stance would have been optimal, or helped in any way, no matter how instinctual it might have been. But that's doesn't equate Hawke as "doing nothing" imo - rather, Hawke stepped back because it made the most sense. It's not as though that could have been an easy decision, even if the snarky dialogue options are chosen.

So sending his sister into the baddest circle in Thedas is the better option? I really don't think so. Hawke is rich now. Just kill those damn templars, buy three places on the next ship out of Kirkwall and move back to Ferelden or somewhere else.

I think it's really, really silly to back down like Hawke is doing it, just because his sisters asks him to to do it. If my sister would ask me to don't do anything while she is running into a burning building or jumping out of a window I wouldn't comply.
Malcom put Hawke in charge of the family, according to the codex, when he died. So could he please ask Bethany to stop insisting that he stands down and tell her to just obey him in that situation?

In my opinion it's illogical for Hawke, who has done nothing but protecting Bethany from the templars all his life, just like his parents, to stand down and make all the sacrifices of the Hawke family senseless.

But maybe we have to agree to disagree

[Icy Magebane]

I think it just comes down to too many variables that would need to be programmed, and too many divergences from the story that Bioware "wished to tell." You can hardly expect them to make an entirely separate Act 2 and 3 based on Hawke killing the Templars trying to take Bethany... so while the writers may have seen this as a dramatic scene, many of us are just left scratching our heads when we come across something like this. I for one would have done something other than stand there, especially after beating the AWR...

Basically, some of the quests just missed the mark. It might be interesting if you were just watching a movie, but when you're playing a video game, you tend to want scenarios where your actions have an impact... I hope I'm explaining this well enough. The story just doesn't present believable scenarios sometimes... like really... Hawke could have killed Petrice in Act 1, and then a new character would have just stepped in and done something similar, maybe even more devious than what she had planned. This would have given us not only more replay value, but a satisfying way to carry the story forward. Like in this case, even if the next "Petrice" is even worse, at least Hawke tried... If you killed Grace at the end of the first meeting with her, or insisted she was too dangerous to live and had the Templars do it, a similar event could still have unfolded in Act 3, but with different characters. 

Or, she could have just not turned out to be crazy and hell bent on blaming Hawke for all the ills of society even if you did choose to help her... how about if that quest just doesn't even happen in that case?

Etc...

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 21 août 2011 - 07:29 .

[Vicious]

He does a hell of a lot. I don't know what game you were playing. If you are taking issue with the fat that he is generally reactionary rather than taking things into his own hand, well welcome to literally every Bioware protagonist ever, which gets events forced upon them rather than going around doing whatever the hell they want.

[Anyroad2]

Icy Magebane wrote...

I think it just comes down to too many variables that would need to be programmed, and too many divergences from the story that Bioware "wished to tell." You can hardly expect them to make an entirely separate Act 2 and 3 based on Hawke killing the Templars trying to take Bethany... so while the writers may have seen this as a dramatic scene, many of us are just left scratching our heads when we come across something like this. I for one would have done something other than stand there, especially after beating the AWR...

Basically, some of the quests just missed the mark. It might be interesting if you were just watching a movie, but when you're playing a video game, you tend to want scenarios where your actions have an impact... I hope I'm explaining this well enough. The story just doesn't present believable scenarios sometimes... like really... Hawke could have killed Petrice in Act 1, and then a new character would have just stepped in and done something similar, maybe even more devious than what she had planned. This would have given us not only more replay value, but a satisfying way to carry the story forward. Like in this case, even if the next "Petrice" is even worse, at least Hawke tried... If you killed Grace at the end of the first meeting with her, or insisted she was too dangerous to live and had the Templars do it, a similar event could still have unfolded in Act 3, but with different characters. 

Or, she could have just not turned out to be crazy and hell bent on blaming Hawke for all the ills of society even if you did choose to help her... how about if that quest just doesn't even happen in that case?

Etc...

How would killing Petrice in Act 1 just to have her replaced by someone who does something similar change anything? How is that replay value? How is that more satisfying? Sure, you killed her, but the same thing is going to happen no matter what because its a part of the story that Bioware wanted players to experience. People would complain about that just as much if not more.


People really need to understand that there cant be a whole ton of diffrent stories, huge impacting decissions, and many diverging paths in video games right now. The medium simply isnt advanced enough to do that yet.

[Icy Magebane]

Just trying for some middle ground... it's true that there are a lot of limitations involved in creating branching storylines, but I was just thinking that it would be better to replace certain NPCs than just have Hawke stand there when he knows letting them walk away is going to lead to trouble. That way, you'd keep the core story intact, but Hawke would be free to act, even if some (not all) events will still play out in a similar way...

Personally, I'd feel better if I could kill certain NPCs even if somebody else decided to follow in their footsteps. At the very least, the PC is trying to maintain order and influence the world, even if it doesn't always work. I think it's better than just watching events unfold...

Vicious wrote...

He does a hell of a lot. I don't know what game you were playing. If you are taking issue with the fat that he
is generally reactionary rather than taking things into his own hand, well welcome to literally every Bioware protagonist ever, which gets events forced upon them rather than going around doing whatever the hell
they want.

Never played as a Renegade Shepard, I take it?  Actually, this also relates to DA:O, Jade Empire, and KotoR... the PC had lots of control over events in those games, and actually did do whatever the hell they wanted more often than not...

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 21 août 2011 - 10:03 .

[Vicious]

Personally, I'd feel better if I could kill certain NPCs even if somebody else decided to follow in their footsteps.

You say that, but I bet you'd be on the boards fuming instead about the 'cop out' and your actions having 'no effect on the plot' anyway.

Just saying. Because I sure as hell would be.

[Icy Magebane]

Vicious wrote...

Personally, I'd feel better if I could kill certain NPCs even if somebody else decided to follow in their footsteps.

You say that, but I bet you'd be on the boards fuming instead about the 'cop out' and your actions having 'no effect on the plot' anyway.

Just saying. Because I sure as hell would be.

The current system is not ideal.  We have the exact same outcome for Grace's storyline regardless of what you do when you meet her.  So whatever fuming I might hypothetically do if we had a different system, there is still an actual problem within the current one.

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 21 août 2011 - 10:04 .