[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
Morrigan made it clear that Flemeth would likely return - there was never any doubt about that. Morrigan simply wanted enough time with Flemeth gone to be safe, and she makes it clear she'll kill Flemeth again and again if necessary. It's never in question that Flemeth would return, because Morrigan makes it clear that she believes this is the case.
[/quote]
Morrigan makes it clear after the Warden kills her. The player has no knowledge that Flemeth may return when he goes in to fight her, and because of that believes she will stay dead. Even when Morrigan says Flemeth may return, that's only a may. It's not definite, but it's enough to make the player doubt their actions.
[quote]Leliana needed to stay dead if she was killed. I doubt that the people who killed Anders would be happy to see him return if their respective Hawke decided to kill him, and Leliana is no different for people who killed her.[/quote]
Why should Leliana stay dead when somewhere in the games it was stated that the soul doesn't immediately leave the body upon death?
I know that was said somewhere, but for the life of me I can't recall where. Might've actually been a dev post on the forums.
The extent of choosing to fight her is that she died, which she has still done. She did die in Origins. That death however isn't permanent. What was lacking was something in that specific quest to imply that the very magical nature of the area may cause someone to not actually die permanently.
Wynne died, but she's still alive. She tells the Warden that her life left her body because she used up all of her strength and willpower fighting a demon, and it was only through the Spirit of Faith's intervention that she came back to life.
In Thedas, depending on the nature of the area, death may not be a permanent death, but it will indeed be a death.
[quote]If The Warden killed her, then The Warden killed her. This isn't a soap opera we're talking about here where everyone should come back from the dead simply because they are popular enough with some fans. There needs to be continuity; otherwise, choice doesn't matter if it's discarded.[/quote]
The thing I'm saying is that had it been established in Origins that killing Leliana doesn't kill her permanently because of the nature of the area she was killed in and the lore that says a person's spirit doesn't leave the body upon death, this wouldn't be an issue.
Had this stuff been mentioned in Origins after killing Leliana, it wouldn't be a matter of "bringing back a popular character". It would be a matter of "bringing back a character they wanted to use for the continuity and had a vague idea of possibly using her."
[quote]If death becomes meaningless and decisions are rectonned, then what's the point? What's the point in a game that's supposed to carry over personal choices if those particular choices are overwritten with Bioware's canon decisions?[/quote]
Leliana appearing doesn't mean death is meaningless. The devs have stated that she did die, but something brought her back. Death isn't meaningless. Perhaps her death will affect her persona in some way.
Again, the nature of the area could've brought her back. Had she died in say a castle and was brought back to life, then her death would be abnormal. Because there isn't sufficient anything to explain how she has returned. She just did.
[quote]Leliana should have stayed dead. Simply because she's popular with some fans isn't a sufficient reason for bringing a character back from the dead and ignoring the decision some fans made. I don't understand why Bioware keeps doing this in Dragon Age - overwritting personal choices with their own "canon outcome." Maybe you want to see Leliana come back in the future, but I don't. I had enough of Leliana's incompetence and idiocy in "Faith."[/quote]
That's not what I'm saying. You're acting like I'm saying them bringing her back was okay. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying Bioware should've given the player information in Origins to doubt whether her death was permanent or temporary given the fact that
a person's soul doesn't leave the body immediately upon death.It's the lack of information to establish doubt in Origins that I'm saying is the problem.
Had Bioware said she may come back in Origins, this wouldn't be because she was popular. It would be because they had a vague plan and carried forward with it. It would be that they wanted her to die, but they wanted her to live as well.
[quote]Fenris has no basis for his accusations - that's the problem. Anders is actually from a Chantry controlled Circle, and knows what Circle mages face. Fenris was a slave who did horrible things because he was controlled by a monstrous person.
[/quote]
And Fenris is from Tevinter and has dealt with the Magisters. He served two Magisters as a bodyguard slave and regularly was a servant to others, along with being Danarius' personal sex toy.
He has lived in Tevinter and thus has knowledge of the mindsets of the Magisters of the Imperium. That the Magisters covered their tracks and no proof of their involvement has been revealed doesn't mean it isn't true. Frequently there isn't in proof in cases, but that doesn't mean a certain party wasn't involved in that crime.
[quote]YES. Leliana has no basis for her claims. Simply because a particular group of mages attacked her doesn't mean anything. If the narrative is telling me that unrest is being caused by the Knight-Commander turned dictator - from the templars and mages who are working together to oust Meredith, to the commoners and nobles who fully support the Champion when he speaks out against her dictatorship - then having Leliana tell me something entirely different and making no mention of the dictatorship that is actually responsible for the unrest is clearly inaccurate.[/quote]
She acknowledges that there isn't any proof of the claims to Tevinter's involvement. But again, lack of proof does not mean lack of involvement. It just means lack of proof to say a party was definitely involved.
If someone killed a friend of yours and you knew who it was but had no evidence to back it up, does that mean the person didn't kill your friend? No. It just means you don't have any evidence to say they did kill your friend.
[quote]Having nothing but mostly insane mage antagonists made the entire mage and templar dichtotomy pointless. Tarohne was simply one of many insane antagonists who served no real purpose. I would have preferred to have Hawke have the option to become part of the mage underground than deal with a plethora of over-the-top imbeciles who didn't make any sense.
[/quote]
Indeed. Somewhere on some other thread I posted a way Hawke could undermine the Templars' authority on both sides of the spectrum. Pro-mage people show the people of Kirkwall that the Templars can't do their job and capture the Mage Underground, while pro-Templar people would show the people of Kirkwall that an outsider did more work that the Templars are supposed to do than the Templars themselves.
Either way, the Templars' authority and power is severely undermined.
[quote]"All That Remains" was ridiculous. Hawke's moment of "shock" was completely absurd.[/quote]
Eh I wouldn't have minded had Quentin been given sufficient character development to show how unhinged he was prior to his wife's death, his downward spiral into being insane because he became even more unhinged, and if Leandra wasn't flopping throughout the battle.
Quentin's necromancy served to show the darker side of magic, and specifically how far blood mages can go to be evil. It doesn't make magic, mages, or blood magic inherently evil. But it does show how dark they can all be.
Also, I think both siblings should've lived. That would've allowed me to feel more emotionally attached. 3-way dialogue between the siblings would've allowed me to feel connected to both (especially if one or both die in the Deep Roads). Hell 4-way dialogue between the siblings and Leandra would've been great.
[quote]They should have given us the option to side with different factions throughout the narrative, i.e. mages or templars (in the same way New Vegas and Morrowind provide the option for the protagonist to side with different factions throughout the storyline), instead of forcing us to deal with a linear narrative where choices didn't feel like they mattered. [/quote]
I agree. Here's what I wrote on another thread for how I would've handled Grace and Decimus for pro-mage people:
[quote] The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
I'd much rather prefer not to be railroaded into the same ending for a choice, though I do like your idea for Grace killing Thrask. Here's what I propose:
This really stems back to Act 1 and what I perceived as horrible storytelling for Decimus. I go in with a group of Mage Hawke, Anders, Merrill, and Carver. When I find Decimus, he immediately attacks three mages when Grace herself was smart enough to realize they weren't Templars. Decimus doesn't even bother to find out what Hawke's intentions were.
I would've had Decimus stand down at first and ask what side Hawke is with.
A) Hawke is assisting the Templars
Hawke is going to assist Decimus and company.
Option A would lead to Decimus beginning his assault again because he and his friends will not be taken back to the Circle. Some people stand with him, and Hawke and company kill them. Grace is saddened, but she tells everyone that didn't stand with Decimus to stand down. Grace and her friends are then handed over to the Templars.
6 years later, she's mad about what happened and does your scenario (the stabbing herself with a staff was one of the biggest
moments for me)
But Option B leads to Hawke being able to assist Decimus and company by helping them out. You are then able to either: bluff your way out of it with Witty Hawke or Varric or kill Kerras right there. Thrask assists you if you decide to kill him, and Decimus and company escape.
3 years later, Decimus and company are captured. Hawke can then talk to Decimus, and he says that two of his "friends" turned out to be Loyalists and betrayed them to the Templars. He then says that he holds no grudge or malice towards Hawke, because he has shown that he is on the side of the mages.
3 years later, if Hawke is pro-mage, he heads down to the Wounded Coast to meet with them (none of that "We know you're spying for Orsino!" crap happens). Hawke then agrees with their cause, but tells them to hurry and get out of there before Cullen arrives. They agree, but before doing so Hawke tells them to use their magic to fling him and his friends into the cliff. That way, they make it look convincing that the Champion was unable to stop them.
By the endgame, you explore much of the Gallows and find out that they are helping the mages escape.
This is a very simplistic idea that's only exploring whether Hawke is consistently pro-mage. [/quote]
For the life of me I can't remember what thread I posted my ideas about crushing or leading the Mage Underground in.
Retour en haut
