791 réponses à ce sujet

[Monica21]

Zanallen wrote...

You can argue that Loghain didn't betray his king? How? He quite clearly disobeyed a direct order and abandoned Cailan to die on the field. Granted, you could argue that he did it for the good of Ferelden, but he still betrayed Cailan to do so.

Loghain Thread
Battle of Ostagar

[Zanallen]

Monica21 wrote...

Loghain Thread
Battle of Ostagar

Theeeeeenks.

Edit: So, after reading...It makes him a deserter. He deserted the field, justified or not. And, knowing the sheer number of darkspawn that he faces, it makes his other actions even more questionable.

Modifié par Zanallen, 09 septembre 2011 - 04:08 .

[ipgd]

Monica21 wrote...

*sigh* Yes, I can argue that Loghain did not betray his king, rather easily in fact. But I'm not going to do it because I'm tired and frustrated because the only thing I seem to be doing on the internet lately is fighting with people (and people I like at that, not even people I don't even know, like you, although I'm sure you're perfectly nice even though we have different opinions) and I don't want to do it anymore. 

Have a nice evening.

Loghain completely betrayed his king. Cailan trusted him with a command, and he disobeyed it. By your logic, "all you can debate is whether he was justified". Funny how that works.

Monica21 wrote...

Again, just started playing last month. The Anders thread doesn't interest me.

Then why are you saying you've seen these discussions and participated in them if you... haven't?

The consequences are not the character. Is Anders messed up? Yep. And....?

And [over 2000 pages of substantive discussion about his character and his role in the story]? If you looked at any of these massive discussions you'd see people certainly found plenty of things to discuss in just as much depth and at just as much length as Loghain's threads.

Modifié par ipgd, 09 septembre 2011 - 04:06 .

[Monica21]

Zanallen wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

Loghain Thread
Battle of Ostagar

Theeeeeenks.

Edit: So, after reading...It makes him a deserter. He deserted the field, justified or not. And, knowing the sheer number of darkspawn that he faces, it makes his other actions even more questionable.

So, any military commander anywhere that's ever retreated is a deserter?

[Monica21]

ipgd wrote...
... some stuff ...

You win.

[ipgd]

Monica21 wrote...

So, any military commander anywhere that's ever retreated is a deserter?

Whether or not it was the smart move doesn't really have much to do with whether or not he was disobeying a direct order from the king. Which he was.

This obviously does not prevent people from having plenty to discuss about Loghain. That he betrayed Cailan doesn't make him any less of a nuanced figure than Anders being a terrorist does.

Modifié par ipgd, 09 septembre 2011 - 04:19 .

[Monica21]

ipgd wrote...
Whether or not it was the smart move doesn't really have much to do with whether or not he was disobeying a direct order from the king. Which he was.

Loghain never got a direct order. There was an agreement on a battle plan, that is all. Cailan never said, "You must charge and you must save me." The king of Ferelden is not a divine right ruler. He's elected by nobles at the Landsmeet. Loghain's loyalty is therefore to Ferelden and not to its head of state. Maric also made Loghain promise that he would never make one man more important than Ferelden. (This, after Loghain made a rather daring rescue at West Hill.) I would argue that Loghain saved Ferelden's forces by retreating rather than making an ill-advised attempt to defeat the darkspawn or rush into enemy ground and try to save Cailan, without even knowing where Cailan is.

This obviously does not prevent people from having plenty to discuss about Loghain. That he betrayed Cailan doesn't make him any less of a nuanced figure than Anders being a terrorist does.

When did I say Anders was a terrorist?

[Sabariel]

Oh fudge, "The Loghain Discussion" has entered the thread. Now it shall never be free again :3

[Monica21]

Sabariel wrote...

Oh fudge, "The Loghain Discussion" has entered the thread. Now it shall never be free again :3

In my defense, three other people started it. 

[ipgd]

Monica21 wrote...

Loghain never got a direct order. There was an agreement on a battle plan, that is all.

Generally, when your direct military superior instructs you in a military conflict, it is an order. I really doubt an actual general or king would take an "agreement on a battle plan" so lightly. Granted, an actual king could have had Loghain's head for nailing his betrothed like he did in The Stolen Throne.

I would argue that Loghain saved Ferelden's forces by retreating rather than making an ill-advised attempt to defeat the darkspawn or rush into enemy ground and try to save Cailan, without even knowing where Cailan is.

That's arguing about whether or not he was justified in what he did.

(I agree that Loghain had good reason to abandon Ostagar. I am trying to point out how dumb of a reason this is to say there's nothing to discuss about a character. Of course there's plenty to discuss, even if you do accept that Loghain was definitively going against Cailan's orders.)

When did I say Anders was a terrorist?

When did I say you said Anders was a terrorist? I said he was a terrorist.


WOOP WOOP BED TIME GOYZ

Modifié par ipgd, 09 septembre 2011 - 04:35 .

[Zanallen]

Monica21 wrote...

Loghain never got a direct order. There was an agreement on a battle plan, that is all. Cailan never said, "You must charge and you must save me." The king of Ferelden is not a divine right ruler. He's elected by nobles at the Landsmeet. Loghain's loyalty is therefore to Ferelden and not to its head of state. Maric also made Loghain promise that he would never make one man more important than Ferelden. (This, after Loghain made a rather daring rescue at West Hill.) I would argue that Loghain saved Ferelden's forces by retreating rather than making an ill-advised attempt to defeat the darkspawn or rush into enemy ground and try to save Cailan, without even knowing where Cailan is.

Really? You know that Loghain never received a direct order to strike when the signal fire was lit? You call it an agreement, but it was an order from his king, no matter how that king obtains his throne. When a soldier disobeys an order and leaves the field, that is desertion. It was then and it is now. If Cailan had already been killed at the time, it would be a different story. Command would have probably gone to Loghain and he could have done what he wanted. Abandoning the field despite his orders is desertion.

You can argue over whether or not it was justified, but you can't argue what it was.

And Loghain didn't really save the forces of Ferelden. He abandoned most of them to die and then further splintered Ferelden's forces by having Eamon poisoned.

[FieryDove]

Zanallen wrote...

 I want a <snip> constantly complaining mage.

You didn't get enough of that already?

ipgd wrote...

Anders's one act had more effect on the Dragon Age world state than the sum of all of Hawke's actions throughout the entirety of the game.

^^^^^This

Finally the truth is revealed.

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Anyway, the whole argument about armour and how it makes no sense for iconic NPCs wearing very little to not get hurt in a computer game will get people nowhere.

Maybe not for you. But walking around with characters in high heels and exposed in hostile vaccum frozen planets/combats tends to pull some (many?) out of the experience of being immersed in a game world to just playing a game.

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

 You could strip your characters naked in DA:O and fight darkspawn without suffering injuries if you wanted to, yet I see no one arguing that PC-empowered customisation is stupid because of this.

At least you had the choice. If people want to fight with naked Oghrens more power to them...just as long as I don't have to watch.

[Monica21]

 Really you guys? In the DA2 forum? In a thread about companion armor?

Go read the Loghain thread, and good night.

[TEWR]

I think the Battle of Ostagar could've been won with a different strategy. The one that was used more than likely wouldn't have worked

[Zanallen]

FieryDove wrote...

You didn't get enough of that already?

Anders wasn't complaining about the things I want this mage to complain about and Morrigan was generally just disagreeable. I want a mage who complains about traveling or about constantly getting into fights. I want him to be exasperated and annoyed with things in general. And above all overweight and greedy.

[Zanallen]

Filament wrote...

Sounds like you want more Finn.

Finn was awesome.

[Zanallen]

Monica21 wrote...

 Really you guys? In the DA2 forum? In a thread about companion armor?

Go read the Loghain thread, and good night.

True. This is off-topic. Plus, I don't even play Origins anymore so i don't actually care about Loghain or his motivations. So, back to the topic at hand....Unique bodies and outfits for companions are awesome, yo.

[Monica21]

Zanallen wrote...
Plus, I don't even play Origins anymore so i don't actually care about Loghain or his motivations.

Me either! Well, the Origins part at least. Except I'll probably go back to it at some point.

So, back to the topic at hand....Unique bodies and outfits for companions are awesome, yo.

Something we can agree on. :happy:

[AtreiyaN7]

Monica21 wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...
Question: did Loghain betray his king? That's a pretty black & white question, isn't it? It's also an example of how easy it is to reduce a character's actions to simple yes/no questions that have no level of complexity whatsoever. You can't deny Loghain't actions, can you? Or maybe you can spin it for me so that bailing on the Battle of Ostagar somehow becomes more complex than, well, bailing on the Battle of Ostagar? Oh right - whatever complexity there is related to what Loghain did solely relates his motivation behind the actions that he took and who he was as a person.

*sigh* Yes, I can argue that Loghain did not betray his king, rather easily in fact. But I'm not going to do it because I'm tired and frustrated because the only thing I seem to be doing on the internet lately is fighting with people (and people I like at that, not even people I don't even know, like you, although I'm sure you're perfectly nice even though we have different opinions) and I don't want to do it anymore. 

Have a nice evening. 

You're the one who was trying to paint all the DA2 characters as shallow. My interest in discussing Loghain is exactly nil at this point having done it to death on the DA:O forums in the past. My point was that you can't claim characters are shallow when it suits you because what complexity we all find in characters revolves around our views on things the motivations behind a given character's actions and the repercussions of his/her actions. A person can't arbitrarily go "I can claim <x> is strictly yes/no and is therefore shallow according to me." Also, I don't actually recall you participating in the Anders thread, but hey, maybe I missed your participation somewhere in the 2000 or so pages.

In any case, I'm sure that this thread should get back on track with people endlessly wanking about how BW is lazy/RPGs are ruined because the devs want companions to have unique appearances (horrors!) - even though they're considering a hybrid system which would allow people to equip whatever armor pieces they like while keeping the "iconic" appearances.

[Monica21]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...
You're the one who was trying to paint all the DA2 characters as shallow.

I wasn't trying to paint anything as anything. I said I found them shallow. I didn't have time to express my thoughts more clearly, but I don't dislike the companions, I just think there could be more to them and I think the Origins companions are more interesting. It's a different opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.

My interest in discussing Loghain is exactly nil at this point having done it to death on the DA:O forums in the past. My point was that you can't claim characters are shallow when it suits you because what complexity we all find in characters revolves around our views on things the motivations behind a given character's actions and the repercussions of his/her actions. A person can't arbitrarily go "I can claim <x> is strictly yes/no and is therefore shallow according to me." Also, I don't actually recall you participating in the Anders thread, but hey, maybe I missed your participation somewhere in the 2000 or so pages.

I don't care to discuss Loghain either, and I can have an opinion about the characters. So yes, I can say that x is shallow according to me, because that's my opinion. Nevertheless, more was made of what I considered an off-hand and purely subjective comment than I intended. It was a response to a dev who said that they make continue to make good stories and polarizing characters and I disagreed. I don't find the story or the characters to be particularly compelling or interesting. I find DA2 Anders to be downright boring compared to Awakening Anders. I never said it was anything other than my opinion. Perhaps I should have said "IMHO" before my statement but I assumed it would be recognized as opinion and not as a statement of fact. Serves me right, I guess.

*still confused on why my participation in the Anders thread would be so important*

In any case, I'm sure that this thread should get back on track with people endlessly wanking about how BW is lazy/RPGs are ruined because the devs want companions to have unique appearances (horrors!) - even though they're considering a hybrid system which would allow people to equip whatever armor pieces they like while keeping the "iconic" appearances.

For what it's worth, I don't think Bioware is lazy or that RPGs are ruined because Isabela wears a scarf and no pants. I like that about my favorite pirate queen. In fact, I Iike DA2. I'm playing it now. It's minimized. It's a good game that I think has flaws and could be much better.

[Boiny Bunny]

David Gaider wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...
Is it possible to give an unique look to each armor class for each character?

That is indeed on the table as a possibility, among other things. There are numerous permutations to a system that still gives us the look we're going for but offers more flexibility-- without simply going back to generic armor across the board.

On this point - perhaps a system somewhat similar to Diablo 2 could be implemented - where every character has a different take on every piece of armour in the game.  This is the ultimate compromise, and would probably make both parties very happy - though would obviously require significantly more work from the design/graphics teams.

Even if there were only 3 different companion appearances ('light', 'medium' and 'heavy' armour), but they were still capable of equipping any type of armour (provided they had the strength/other stats), it would be a vast improvement on only 1 constant appearance.

Modifié par Boiny Bunny, 09 septembre 2011 - 06:16 .

[AtreiyaN7]

@monica - The only reason I mentioned the Anders thread thing is because you said you participated in the Anders debates while apparently trying to support your opinion of Anders, etc. - just don't remember you from there or the other threads. Either way, yes, let's get back on topic (such as it is).

[Morroian]

Zanallen wrote...

Filament wrote...

Sounds like you want more Finn.

Finn was awesome.

And Ariane, I want to see more of both.