10 réponses à ce sujet

[frost.mage.mari]

Hello, everyone.

I've been having a bit of trouble in my latest playthrough of DA2.  I'm trying to make a proper go of it, keep myself in the story.. but i'm having a hard time getting down one point in hawke's personality.. basically the pro-mage or anti-mage things that come up.

It seems that every time the issue is brought up by any character, i either have to condemn mages and demand they all be thrown in the gallows, or i have to be anti-circle and anti-chantry and demand freedom for all mages.

What i'm looking for is something along the "Circles might not be the best option, but i know why we need them".  Is getting those kind of lines out of hawke doable, or do i always have to pick a side?

I know this is a vague question.. but i thought this was the only place to ask this.  Thanks for any answers.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

There are several points in the game where Hawke is force to choose between two kind of extreme viewpoints on mages or templars. It is kind of ridiculous because the issue at hand is specifically designed to me a multifaceted issue so those choices are insufficient. My advice would be if you can't condemn a specific problem brought up by either side, the pick the one who feel slightly lesser of two evils. In my case for example, I told Fenris that the The Gallows was better than the alternative but also agreed Anders that the Circles practices were unfair.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 19 octobre 2011 - 08:00 .

[frost.mage.mari]

*smile* Thanks! I'll have to try that this go around.

It's a shame though..that we have to choose the extremes of an issue like this.

[TheCreeper]

Really? most of the time I saw a third option like "The Circle doesn't work but mages need something guiding them option"

[Jedi Master of Orion]

It doesn't happen every time the conversation comes up so you don't need to spend the entire game doing it, but there are a couple times I distinctly remember there being no middle ground. Most notable that one time in Act 3 when Samon promts you for your opinion. And I think if you take Aveline with you, she (rightfully) criticizes either choice you select for your dialouge.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 19 octobre 2011 - 07:59 .

[Gervaise]

Unfortunately, whilst you can do your best to take a balanced approach and at one point are allowed to opt for the middle ground, eventually you are forced to take one "side" or the other. It's annoying if that's not the way you've wanted to play it and your Hawke can see both sides of the argument. Even when you do seem to get prompts that suggest a middle ground approach, inevitably other people seem to misunderstand you.
I have played Hawkes who started off very pro-mage but gradually revised their opinion in favour of the Templars and vice versa. In fact to stick to just one view is very narrow minded because each situation involving Templars/Mages involves a different set of circumstances - even my pro-mage Hawke would not condone kidnapping Templars and torturing them into being possesed.

So the best I can offer is take the dialogue that is nearest to how you feel at that particular stage of the game and in that situation and shrug your shoulders when the response of other characters doesn't really match your intent. As in real life, sometimes people only seem to hear what they want to hear.

[Kenshen]

Emile de Launcet comes to mind when you can make a choice reguarding a mage that turns out to be the best for both sides, if you let him get what he wants. However most quests do force you down one path or another. The middle option on the dialog wheel seems to be the most neutral and usually funny least to your Hawke.

[Wulfram]

There are usually some sort of vaguely neutral or moderate choice. For example with Fenris you can say that they don't work, which indicates that you understand that there's a reason for them. In the first conversation with Anders you can note that his viewpoint is controversial rather than expressing a firm opinion - and after that you can usually make a joke.

The discussion with Gamlen after Leandra's death I found a bit problematic though - there wasn't a neutral option, and really in the circumstances I couldn't see my character being in the mood to argue mage freedom.

[maxernst]

One problem I found with trying to take the middle ground is that the friendship/rivalry system punishes you for it.

[Jalek]

The plotline's just bad. Moral points in stories is old-school, and it explains the obvious racism theme with the Qunari. The grey area decisions are what provide some depth to these games, but this one just doesn't work for me.

In the end, the dialogue among companions and NPCs tries to steer you to the group claiming to be oppressed with a "think of the innocents" plea, then gives the twist so you're a fool for ignoring all that you saw before. The moral lesson here seems to be, ignore pleas from people claiming to be an underclass if some of them are monsters, crush them utterly before they turn on you in spite of "collateral damage".

I'm thinking that wasn't what they were going for, so it's not a moral story. It makes which side you choose less important but you end up gimped in class abilities when siding against Anders in any way, so there's really only one clear game path, siding with blood mages and abominations among your companions. Maybe DLC lessens that absolute.

[AlexXIV]

Not sure if you get to say the exact line in the game, but you can of course roleplay a Hawke with exactly this point of view.