64 réponses à ce sujet

[DannyHR]

Playing through MotA reminded me of how good the Qunari were modelled in this game, aswell as how interesting their background and mindset is.

That made me think, i would simply LOVE IT if an expansion, or another game in the DA universe had a Qunari as a main character. Playing as a Qunari has so many possible storylines we could follow, it's just impossible not to like the idea.

Start from their emotional indiference, their agressive nature, their obsession with the ways of the Qun. So many possibilities...

Thoughts?

[Foolsfolly]

No.

...unless it's static as always being a Qunari.

Because in Origins with the exception of a few bits of dialogue sprinkled throughout the game your race and background were kind of grinded up into a paste which fit for most sizes. It made the things the Warden could say rather bland and characterless, mostly asking questions and allowing other characters to grand stand with monologues.

If DA3 brings in multiple playable races I think they could continue to give those characters a general tone with maybe a few dialogue options opening up for race (like DA2 has class specific options open up). But the Qunari are so different from dwarves, elves, and humans that I could not see a Human protagonist and Qunari protagonist saying the same things.

While I'd like to see the Qunari culture explored as a Qunari I just don't think they could pull it off with the other races. Unless you're next character is always Qunari like Hawke is always human. I wouldn't be against that. I just doubt many would though since there's a bit of hatred at the Qunari on these boards because they're fascists and extremists, albeit very interesting ones.

[Garden of Heaven]

I would personally love to play as a Qunari, but by that I don't mean a kossith but someone from the Qunari who lives in thier lands, the lore and history of the Qunari is by far the most interesting to me.

I would like to see are they truly better as Tallis said, or are they just zealots out to spread their philosophy.

[seraphymon]

I dont like the idea. Now that makes not liking it possible lol. Typically though i dont mind it was an origin option, but one set background the same way with DA2 and hawke im not keen on.

[Tommyspa]

I'd like a Kossith, not a Qunari. Qunari would be a little too orderly and guided for role playing games like these.

[GodWood]

The average "freedom loving", liberal, hippie, westerner wouldn't know how to (or want to) properly role-play a qunari.

[Foolsfolly]

GodWood wrote...

The average "freedom loving", liberal, hippie, westerner wouldn't know how to (or want to) properly role-play a qunari.

As a liberal western I can easily say this is incorrect. I'd love to play as a Qunari or a Tevinter Magister. I do not require my role-played characters to be paragons of my ideals.

[GodWood]

Foolsfolly wrote...

GodWood wrote...
The average "freedom loving", liberal, hippie, westerner wouldn't know how to (or want to) properly role-play a qunari.

As a liberal western I can easily say this is incorrect. I'd love to play as a Qunari or a Tevinter Magister. I do not require my role-played characters to be paragons of my ideals.

Key word: Average.

[DannyHR]

Altho the Qunari are set up to be, as someone mentioned, fascists and extremists, why not introduce a character that has decided not to be a part of that?

I mean, in DA2 you play Hawke, in a world that is torn apart between humans and mages, but Hawke can be a mage and take humans side... Why not make it something similar to that.

It has already been said DA3 will introduce a new character, i would be interested in seing a Qunari with an internal battle of his mind agains what he was "born to become".

It does not have to be a new game, but an expansion as the Darkspawn Chronicles would be most welcomed. I want some Qunari gameplay.

[Foolsfolly]

Well, I happen to believe most people could do it.

Look at video games with simple morality choices, easily discernible Good and Evil choices. People play both, even if they're not complete monsters who punch old ladies and burn orphanages.

It's a game and when given choices players will pick and choose and a great many will choose all the options over multiple playthroughs (at least of those who normally play games more than once).

I don't think it's some sign of enlightenment to play something contrary to your beliefs. It's just a game not some declaration of political allegiance.

Take the Chantry. I've done characters in Origins who hated the Chantry, were firm believers in the Maker, and then there were Dalish and dwarves which believed their own customs. It was based on what I wanted to play with at the time. More recently, I've played Pro-Mage and Pro-Templar characters neither one of them are about what I believe and more around what I wanted to play as.

Or curiosity which is a big thing in replaying a game. The whole question of "What would have happened if I supported this instead of that?" Is an alluring one.

And I think most gamers are like that. I believe on forums they allow their biases to be shown. Look at the ME2 threads about Paragons and Renegades and how both sides want to punish the other. That's got very little to do with role-playing and more to do with pleasing their sensibilities (loft ideals have no basis in fact, murdering cold-hearted bastards shouldn't win, etc. etc.)

As I previously said, I'd love to play as a Qunari. I just don't think it will happen because of how different they are from everyone else. Perhaps an option to convert to the Qun... but even then it'd be hard to justify why the Qunari would allow you to run around adventuring when they put people into their roles. (Assuming being an action game you'd get assigned as a warrior then you'd still be a part of a group of Qunari warriors following orders... which would mean converting would vastly change the course of the game's flow...which again I don't see happening). Perhaps the Qunari chain of command could issue an order similar to Sten's in Origins... hmm...

I think unless the game is designed to specifically be about playing as a Qunari... we won't ever play as a Qunari. Which is a shame, it'd be real fun.

[TheGunslinger]

Well, maybe a Qunari with a race option, since Elves can be ones too. It'd be pretty interesting actually.

[Absafraginlootly]

If the game was set in Par Vollen it could work, because then you could play different races, but they would still all follow the qun (or be enslaved by it if they refused to be converted, a sort of escaped prisoner origin). And with the existence of Tal-Vashoth your character deciding to go against the qun would not be unprecedented.

Personally the idea of playing an elf/dwarf/human who the qunari find useful/becomes usefull sounds interesting to me, espeacially as it would be an oppurtunity to experiance a culture very different from the rest of the world of Dragon Age.

[Salaya]

I think it's very difficult to play a follower of the qun. I mean..., if made it correcly, leaves poor choice to player. Unless, of course, contradictions and lore "indifferences" start to flow (like the arishok amused by mage-hawkes). I suppose it could be done, but definetely wouldn't be my first choice.

I see a Tal vasoth a much more viable

[GodWood]

Foolsfolly wrote...
Well, I happen to believe most people could do it.

But they wouldn't.

[blothulfur]

I agree that the representation of a Kossith character in the game could become a bland and characterless exercise if a lot of attention is not payed to almost every aspect of the approach, for instance Stens questioning of my dwarven characters human views was somewhat jarring and went without comment in the game.

A Kossith foundling raised ignorant of the Qun however and faced with the options of embracing his heritage or dooming himself to the way of the Tal Vashoth would be interesting and still provide many different approaches to situations due to his size, reputation among various peoples who have interacted with the Qunari and the standing with his own folk.

Do I think bioware would be interested in an accurate representation of such a character? No. His sexuality, ability to make snide one liners and overly sentimental melodrama with strangers would rank higher if DA2 is anything to go by and I honestly can't see his species affecting anything only his ability to endure staggering amounts of repetitious combat.

I may be wrong however and if Bioware decide to step away from barely interactive combat games and return to choice, consequence and depth rather than trivialities my interest in the setting might be fanned back into life.

A humble Ashkaari.

Modifié par blothulfur, 14 octobre 2011 - 12:27 .

[Wulfram]

I wouldn't have any interest in playing a Qunari. I find their ideology utterly abhorrent.

I also don't believe their culture would stand up to close scrutiny. It requires a big suspension disbelief to accept that it functions at all.

[MagmaSaiyan]

id see at as possibility to do it like Origins, we have the none named new protagonist, male or female(rogue,mage,warrior), Qunari, also male or female(classes?), and have their story branch and come together to a specific point(but have it much later in the game, not like Ostagar)

[Foolsfolly]

Wulfram wrote...

I wouldn't have any interest in playing a Qunari. I find their ideology utterly abhorrent.

I also don't believe their culture would stand up to close scrutiny. It requires a big suspension disbelief to accept that it functions at all.

Utopia at the cost of freedom? That's believable. That's totally believable in a setting chop full of autocracies and oligarchies. Where a handful of kings and hundreds of lesser nobles rule over everyone else. Where hundreds if not thousands of dwarves are considered less than people because of their birth or exposure to fresh air. Where elves are either penniless gypsies, slaves, or poor people left to fester in ghettos. Where humans are born into castes and cannot ever rise beyond those castes.

I mean, come on. It's not like there's a free country anywhere. And every country believes if you're born mage you need to be placed in a cage. And if you complain a nice lobotomy's in order.

So in that world, I can totally see a bunch of people thinking, "Hmm, job, food, security... and all it costs is my name and lack of raising children?"

Sure in our world that's terrible, horrible even. It's disgusting. But in Thedas the only people who'd do worse under Qunari rule are Human nobles and Mages. Elves would be better off, dwarves would be better off, and human peasants will be better off (they're living in the sewers in Kirkwall and begging). And while they'd lose freedoms, I'm willing to bet they'd all convert for food and security.

Do I think the Qunari will survive for hundreds of more years? No. That system will break down, it has nothing going for it. The only reason I think it's existed as long as it has is because I think kossith are more at ease with that lack of freedom. I know there are Tel'Velosh but in their own words they've given into banditry and act like animals.

There's a lot of self-loathing with being away from the Qun. It'd be interesting to meet Tel-Velshoth that were born free and never had the Qun pushed on them... see if they're different... but I imagine their children aren't well adjusted either. Qunari do not have children, they have no experience raising kids. And being raised by self-loathing bandits who act like animals...

Point is, it's very believable in Thedas (there's a reason why Hawke is born noble and reclaims their birthright instead of a peasant who rises to nobility). And that's all that matters. I mean it's not Thedas has any perfect society. The Dalish and Dwarves are pretty much on the screwed side of things too. Dwindling gene pools and beliefs that only continue to weaken them.

Modifié par Foolsfolly, 15 octobre 2011 - 02:33 .

[naledgeborn]

What Godwood said. I would, but not everyone's cup of coffee. At least not yet. Maybe further down the road.

[Huntress]

No. I do not wish to  play as one and I do not wish to play as a seeker either.
A Mage, hawke, warden, whatever.. but not qunari or seeker, I want the freedom to fight everything that represent oppresion/En'slavement and tyranny.

Modifié par Huntress, 15 octobre 2011 - 02:55 .

[Demx]

I'd rather infiltrate a Qunari town.

[naledgeborn]

Huntress wrote...

No. I do not wish to  play as one and I do not wish to play as a seeker either.
A Mage, hawke, warden, whatever.. but not qunari or seeker, I want the freedom to fight everything that represent oppresion/En'slavement and tyranny.

It's called ROLE playing. Meaning you're playing a role that is not you, your morals, and or your beliefs. Also, Kossith and Tyranny isn't mutually inclusive.

[Huntress]

naledgeborn wrote...

Huntress wrote...

No. I do not wish to  play as one and I do not wish to play as a seeker either.
A Mage, hawke, warden, whatever.. but not qunari or seeker, I want the freedom to fight everything that represent oppresion/En'slavement and tyranny.

It's called ROLE playing. Meaning you're playing a role that is not you, your morals, and or your beliefs. Also, Kossith and Tyranny isn't mutually inclusive.

Thats what am playing!! a character that do not wish to be part of the qun or chantry... Qunari or seeker.
And thats how my characters sees the qunary and the chantry/templars.
Qunari make the people who refuses to join them mindless labourer ( fenris own words), chantry is against of anything that can challange them and is opressive towards mages and templars in kirkwall are tyrannic.
Hmm did I make myself clear now? want some food with it?

Now playing as a human or elf trying to stop an invasion from the qunary, an exalted march from the chantry or simple killing templars with firebolts, am all for it.

Modifié par Huntress, 15 octobre 2011 - 04:20 .

[Laverre]

Hmm I think it would be kinda interesting, but from a designer point hard to do.
How do you get the players to accept and understand their system, believe in it and give everything up, they are used to have in a RPG without creating frustration? No freedom, no choice, no egoism, subordination etc. ?.
Sure you could always try the easy "the one and only qunari that rebelled" route, but that would make the whole "play a quinari" point senseless.

@Wulfram
Oh and for the scrutiny and suspension part, sry but caste systems were and in some places still are quite relevant part of human society. Maybe not in the same exact way the qun have it, but not really much better. Have a look at human history.. nearly everywhere you had similar ideas and concepts and they took a very long time to get rid of. The whole democracy, do and become what you want part is quite a novel concept.

[naledgeborn]

Huntress wrote...

naledgeborn wrote...

It's called ROLE playing. Meaning you're playing a role that is not you, your morals, and or your beliefs. Also, Kossith and Tyranny isn't mutually inclusive.

Thats what am playing!! a character that do not wish to be part of the qun or chantry... Qunari or seeker.
And thats how my characters sees the qunary and the chantry/templars.
Qunari make the people who refuses to join them mindless labourer ( fenris own words), chantry is against of anything that can challange them and is opressive towards mages and templars in kirkwall are tyrannic.
Hmm did I make myself clear now? want some food with it?
 
-snip-

naledgeborn wrote...
Also, Kossith and Tyranny isn't mutually inclusive. 

Peharps you should retake reading comprehension.