294 réponses à ce sujet

[Morty Smith]

Speaking of vocal minorities, the irony.

[TEWR]

Ah, while we're discussing DAII's characters, I'd like to make a request to Bioware.

Could we see more philosphical and astute Merrill alongside cute Merrill? I love cute Merrill, but I do think you guys are pushing the boundary into excessive territory. Give us some more philosophical Merrill. More astute Merrill.

And not just on matters of the arcane, but on life itself.

This should also apply to some of the rest of the companions. I feel that Fenris and Anders talk too much about mages and Templars. Certainly that's an aspect of their characters that should remain, but give them more than just those things. I understand they've both had traumatic experiences in the past, but this shouldn't be all they talk about. An important part of who they are and what they talk about definitely, but give them other things to talk about.

As it stands Isabela, Varric, Aveline, and the siblings have depth to them. Merrill is teetering on the edge for me, and Fenris and Anders -- while enjoyable -- seem to merely be poster boys in the attempt to get the player to feel that the endgame decision is morally grey when it isn't.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 12 janvier 2012 - 03:43 .

[LinksOcarina]

Merrill is a naive mage who makes a literal deal with the devil to try and restore her peoples history. Her own hubris is the fact that the thought she could control it to get what she wanted, and it cost her big time. What is more philosophical or poetic then causing heartbreak that is your own doing?

I think I gave this example before...but I have a friend of mine who was...well..had a traumatic experience when he was younger. To this day he talks about it still, and goes to therapy to get over it. Sometimes the trauma is all that they have, it consumes them to the point of self-damaging, in the case of Anders and Fenris by many degrees. So they become more tragic figures due to that.

[TEWR]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Merrill is a naive mage who makes a literal deal with the devil to try and restore her peoples history. Her own hubris is the fact that the thought she could control it to get what she wanted, and it cost her big time. What is more philosophical or poetic then causing heartbreak that is your own doing?

Marethari was ultimately responsible for all the suffering Merrill endured. It was her decision to stay on the mountain to keep an eye on Merrill, it was her decision to free a demon that was trapped in a statue and would continue to be trapped and was sundered from the Fade, and she's the one that turned the entire clan against Merrill by Act II.

Had Marethari not even been there, Merrill would've been safe, as she had no intention of freeing Audacity and the Eluvians link beyond Thedas and beyond the Fade. She had only met and conversed with Audacity 3 times. The first with Marethari in the short story, the second to learn blood magic, and the third when Marethari freed the demon as DG made it clear she had been using whatever scraps of lore and research she could find to build her Eluvian.

The act of cleansing the Eluvian was just her using blood magic to amplify the healing spell Marethari had taught her. The same one that manage to combat Mahariel's taint in the Dalish Elf Origin. So anyone that thinks that Audacity tricked her into doing anything to the Eluvian happens to be wrong.

We know that blood magic is linked to the taint. Avernus was able to prolong his life by manipulating his tainted blood -- though since he's a living person and no one knows how Fiona was cured (yet) he can't be cured -- and Merrill's amplified healing spell is proof that blood magic can combat the taint (and the Joining just also happens to be blood magic).

And while you may see her story arc as poetic and philosphical, that was not what I was getting at. I want Merrill to make more philosophical comments.

And now I want her to make some poetic comments as well.

I think I gave this example before...but I have a friend of mine who was...well..had a traumatic experience when he was younger. To this day he talks about it still, and goes to therapy to get over it. Sometimes the trauma is all that they have, it consumes them to the point of self-damaging, in the case of Anders and Fenris by many degrees. So they become more tragic figures due to that.

Okay, I can see that.

Still, I would like them to talk about other stuff. Does your friend always talk about the trauma? I mean, is that all he ever talks about or can he still make jokes and discuss other topics without bringing it back towards his personal trauma?

If you want to answer my queston that is. You don't have to if you don't want to.

Because I have a friend that has also suffered a traumatic experience, but she doesn't bring it up. She makes jokes, talks about serious discussions, and all kinds of other things without bringing up her personal trauma. Not that I'm saying everyone should be like this. Certainly not. Some people just aren't strong enough to handle such a trauma, and that's not their fault.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 12 janvier 2012 - 04:21 .

[LobselVith8]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Merrill is a naive mage who makes a literal deal with the devil to try and restore her peoples history.

Merrill, unlike the overly passive and ineffectual Hawke, actually tries to help the People, instead of doing absolutely nothing for years at a time. I notice plenty of people condemn Merrill for having the audacity to not be as lazy as Hawke is. Instead of watching people get killed right in front of her and do nothing like Hawke, or find evidence of a murder accomplice and doing nothing like Hawke, or coming into a position of fame with the title of Champion and doing nothing like Hawke, Merrill actually tries to do something to help elves across Thedas. 

Why should Merrill should be condemned for being proactive? I found her to be more competent, intelligent, and capable than Hawke, who bothered me to no end.

LinksOcarina wrote...

Her own hubris is the fact that the thought she could control it to get what she wanted, and it cost her big time. What is more philosophical or poetic then causing heartbreak that is your own doing?

Wait a second... it's all Merrill's fault that people try to commit cold-blooded murder, or that Marethari caused her own undoing? Are you telling me that grown adults aren't responsible for their own actions...that Merrill is responsible for their actions instead?

LinksOcarina wrote...

I think I gave this example before...but I have a friend of mine who was...well..had a traumatic experience when he was younger. To this day he talks about it still, and goes to therapy to get over it. Sometimes the trauma is all that they have, it consumes them to the point of self-damaging, in the case of Anders and Fenris by many degrees. So they become more tragic figures due to that.

Merrill having the backbone to actually do something about the plight of her people, instead of taking a cue from Hawke and not doing a damn thing, makes me applaud her.

[Plaintiff]

I guess I'm the only one who saw Anders and Fenris scolding Merril for delving in blood magic, or badgering Isabela about the missing relic, or cracking jokes with Varric.

[LinksOcarina]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Merrill is a naive mage who makes a literal deal with the devil to try and restore her peoples history. Her own hubris is the fact that the thought she could control it to get what she wanted, and it cost her big time. What is more philosophical or poetic then causing heartbreak that is your own doing?

Marethari was ultimately responsible for all the suffering Merrill endured. It was her decision to stay on the mountain to keep an eye on Merrill, it was her decision to free a demon that was trapped in a statue and would continue to be trapped and was sundered from the Fade, and she's the one that turned the entire clan against Merrill by Act II.

Had Marethari not even been there, Merrill would've been safe, as she had no intention of freeing Audacity and the Eluvians link beyond Thedas and beyond the Fade. She had only met and conversed with Audacity 3 times. The first with Marethari in the short story, the second to learn blood magic, and the third when Marethari freed the demon as DG made it clear she had been using whatever scraps of lore and research she could find to build her Eluvian.

The act of cleansing the Eluvian was just her using blood magic to amplify the healing spell Marethari had taught her. The same one that manage to combat Mahariel's taint in the Dalish Elf Origin. So anyone that thinks that Audacity tricked her into doing anything to the Eluvian happens to be wrong.

We know that blood magic is linked to the taint. Avernus was able to prolong his life by manipulating his tainted blood -- though since he's a living person and no one knows how Fiona was cured (yet) he can't be cured -- and Merrill's amplified healing spell is proof that blood magic can combat the taint (and the Joining just also happens to be blood magic).

And while you may see her story arc as poetic and philosphical, that was not what I was getting at. I want Merrill to make more philosophical comments.

And now I want her to make some poetic comments as well.

I think I gave this example before...but I have a friend of mine who was...well..had a traumatic experience when he was younger. To this day he talks about it still, and goes to therapy to get over it. Sometimes the trauma is all that they have, it consumes them to the point of self-damaging, in the case of Anders and Fenris by many degrees. So they become more tragic figures due to that.

Okay, I can see that.

Still, I would like them to talk about other stuff. Does your friend always talk about the trauma? I mean, is that all he ever talks about or can he still make jokes and discuss other topics without bringing it back towards his personal trauma?

If you want to answer my queston that is. You don't have to if you don't want to.

Because I have a friend that has also suffered a traumatic experience, but she doesn't bring it up. She makes jokes, talks about serious discussions, and all kinds of other things without bringing up her personal trauma. Not that I'm saying everyone should be like this. Certainly not. Some people just aren't strong enough to handle such a trauma, and that's not their fault.

I don't know how much I want to say, but for the most part he does bring it up a lot. Casual conversations sometmes gravitate towards it, when he sees something in the news or he makes comments about the experience. He is also affected in other ways, for example he doesn't like crowded places which is a problem because we live in New York and all that, it was a phobia that he talked about which he told me he developed from the trauma. 

And keep in mind he is in therapy for over ten years now...

I think your right where we can see more of the characters doing stuff outside of their obsessions. I mean party banter showcases deeper bits of Fenris and Anders, but it is not enough to go on sometimes. I think the point for them is that they fall under the same category as my friend. They are too weak to deal with it. Fenris, for all his bluster and the facade of being strong, I think fully admits he is weak by the time we get to Act III. Anders never admits it, and that is just as sinister.

LobselVith8 wrote...

Merrill, unlike the overly passive and ineffectual Hawke, actually tries to help the People, instead of doing absolutely nothing for years at a time. I notice plenty of people condemn Merrill for having the audacity to not be as lazy as Hawke is. Instead of watching people get killed right in front of her and do nothing like Hawke, or find evidence of a murder accomplice and doing nothing like Hawke, or coming into a position of fame with the title of Champion and doing nothing like Hawke, Merrill actually tries to do something to help elves across Thedas. 

Why should Merrill should be condemned for being proactive? I found her to be more competent, intelligent, and capable than Hawke, who bothered me to no end.

Wait a second... it's all Merrill's fault that people try to commit cold-blooded murder, or that Marethari caused her own undoing? Are you telling me that grown adults aren't responsible for their own actions...that Merrill is responsible for their actions instead?

Merrill having the backbone to actually do something about the plight of her people, instead of taking a cue from Hawke and not doing a damn thing, makes me applaud her.

1. I never condemned her, I just pointed out the arc she took. 

2. something that ties in with EWR,  I always got the impression that Marethari stayed at sundermount because of Merrill, because she wanted to save her. Every time she went back she always asked her to return and forget what she was doing, and then she finally released the demon and took it so she would forcibly save her.

Maybe I read too much into that. Yes it was Maretharis choice, but it was Merrills doing, if that makes sense. Her actions caused Marethari to act, almost a ripple effect.

3. The bottom part has nothing to do with Merrill. Read next time. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 12 janvier 2012 - 04:34 .

[LobselVith8]

Plaintiff wrote...

I guess I'm the only one who saw Anders and Fenris scolding Merril for delving in blood magic, or badgering Isabela about the missing relic, or cracking jokes with Varric.

I saw Anders pushing his Andrastian views on Merrill because spirits are "the Maker's First Children" and being irate with her Dalish views, while Fenris distrusted all mages and magic in general. Neither one is an open and shut case against Merrill, or her actions to help the People. Anders and Fenris don't really make much of a case against Merrill - it's simply two people had an opinion about her.

[TEWR]

Plaintiff wrote...

As for combat animation, I doubt very much that anyone on this forum is qualified to dictate what "real combat" actually looks like. Tell me, do you have any first-hand experience with swordfighting? Or any fighting?

For magic, certainly no one can claim what's realistic. Well, within reason. Hemorrhage is obviously unrealistic and it's not just something that is seen only in Blood Mage Hawke's gameplay. Grace uses it too in the BSC cutscene and that needs to change.

Stabbing yourself in the stomach with a staff -- one that also magically enters a portal and disappears without coming out of your backside -- is just bad.

A hemorrhage is simply defined as profuse bleeding. While the ability certainly conveys that, it also leaves one wondering how a person that just stabbed themselves in the stomach can still stand and fight. Cutting a vein would be better served at conveying profuse bleeding and retaining the ability to fight.

This is something that suspension of disbelief will not work for.

But for conventional weapons and armor, there was an article made by a blacksmith some time ago. I forget where.

However, I can certainly help attest to what is realistic with one-handed weapons in terms of speed and weight as I own a Civil War Sabre. Granted, they were used more by cavalry, but it's a one-handed weapon all the same.

However, I have never been in a fight with a sword -- whether to the death or simply to outmaneuver an opponent in a controlled fight. Not that I'd want the former to happen mind you. The latter I'd probably be a part of -- but I fervently believe that in war you must strike quickly and powerfully in order to defeat your opponent. I've often called the wearing of armor and use of weapons akin to weight lifting, in that eventually the weight of the weapons/armor will seem like nothing after extensive use.

Rawgrim wrote...

You don`t need combat experience to realize a person can`t "skateboard" across the ground just like that. And poking someone with a dagger doesn`t make them explode.

For the first point, indeed that's one of my problems with the S&S warrior animations.

For the second, I've landed plenty of critical hits now with a dagger and they don't explode. And even if they do, it can now be chalked up to Varric embellishing.

When I can be certain it does happen is when an enemy is made brittle by a freezing spell and a critical hit lands, which makes it realistic.

If you've ever experimented with liquid nitrogen, it's the same thing basically.

Plaintiff wrote...

I guess I'm the only one who saw Anders and Fenris scolding Merril for delving in blood magic

For the both of them this is just another facet of their Mage/Templar personality. Fenris abhors blood magic because of what Danarius and the other Magisters did/do. He sees anyone that uses it as weak simply because of his past experience -- an understandable notion, if flawed -- and sees anyone that uses blood magic as someone that will sacrifice innocents to fuel their power or work with demons.

Merrill is neither of those things. She is a blood mage that responsibly uses her powers. She finds it ghastly that anyone would raise the dead or sacrifice innocents, and she's all about playing the demon before it can play you.

Anders hates it because he believes it leads to possession -- though it's my belief that this is simply due to sheer arrogance on the part of the mage because of the power they think they wield, which causes them to let their guard down and that's when the demons subsequently strike -- and because he sees it as the reason why mages will never earn their freedom. That anyone who practices blood magic is automatically a bad mage to the whole mage community.

Merrill happens to show that even blood mages can live normally in the community without damaging the Mages' reputation -- Chantry likes to do that on its own -- or becoming an Abomination.

, or badgering Isabela about the missing relic, or cracking jokes with Varric.

I never said that they don't do anything outside of the Mage Templar persona, but that they don't do enough of those other things.

LinksOcarina wrote...


I think your right where we can see more of the characters doing stuff outside of their obsessions. I mean party banter showcases deeper bits of Fenris and Anders, but it is not enough to go on sometimes. I think the point for them is that they fall under the same category as my friend. They are too weak to deal with it. Fenris, for all his bluster and the facade of being strong, I think fully admits he is weak by the time we get to Act III. Anders never admits it, and that is just as sinister.

Okay, I can certainly understand where you're coming from better now and Anders and Fenris definitely do fit the bill of the same line as your friend.

Though if you think about it, Anders does admit it. His personal trauma was his merging with Justice and the subsequent corruption of Justice, because he does admit he was wrong in doing such a thing. But he realizes that he can't change it.

In my mind, Justice is himself and Vengeance sort of tied together as one new entity inside Anders. I don't think Justice is completely gone. Vengeance and Justice are after all two sides of the same coin, with one being a slightly darker shade than the other.


EDIT: I wanted to add my post on the previous page into this, since it may have gotten lost in the shuffle.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 12 janvier 2012 - 05:34 .

[whykikyouwhy]

As interesting as this discussion is, there are quite a lot of spoilers being bandied about (for a non-spoiler forum). Perhaps we can tone the specifics down?

[TEWR]

2. something that ties in with EWR,  I always got the impression that Marethari stayed at sundermount because of Merrill, because she wanted to save her. Every time she went back she always asked her to return and forget what she was doing, and then she finally released the demon and took it so she would forcibly save her.

Maybe I read too much into that. Yes it was Maretharis choice, but it was Merrills doing, if that makes sense. Her actions caused Marethari to act, almost a ripple effect

The blame can hardly be laid at Merrill's feet though. Marethari was the one that said Audacity wouldn't be a danger and Merrill has tried talking with the Keeper time and time again about how she cleansed the shard and is working to restore their past.

Marethari was never forced to act. It was her own doing that led to such a thing. It's my belief -- and the game hints at me being right, though obviously it's never explicity stated my theory is correct -- that Audacity's real target was Marethari and he was using Merrill to manipulate Marethari's motherly pride into becoming stronger so he could subtly control her actions, just like Allure did to Lady Harimann with her desire.

Marethari subscribes too much to this notion of "Mother knows best", and I believe that she thought that since she was the Keeper she was automatically right.

She's got too much pride in that she is both a mother-figure to Merrill and is the Keeper of the clan.

I've made this point before, but I'm having a tough time today saying what I want to say. I hope you understand what I'm saying though.

[TEWR]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

As interesting as this discussion is, there are quite a lot of spoilers being bandied about (for a non-spoiler forum). Perhaps we can tone the specifics down?

Yea sorry about that. When Merrill comes up I can't help but post about her story arc in my defense of her.

[LobselVith8]

LinksOcarina wrote...

1. I never condemned her, I just pointed out the arc she took. 

An arc where Merrill did what she thought was right, with the goal of helping elves across the entire continent. Whether she was correct about the Eluvian's potential or not, we'll never know. Even Merrill admits she could be wrong, even Merrill acknowledges this could kill her, but she's willing to try because the possible outcome can be beneficial for countless people.

LinksOcarina wrote...

2. something that ties in with EWR,  I always got the impression that Marethari stayed at sundermount because of Merrill, because she wanted to save her. Every time she went back she always asked her to return and forget what she was doing, and then she finally released the demon and took it so she would forcibly save her.

Where Marethari acted based on her opinion of what she thought might happen, nothing more. The Keeper wasn't forced or coerced to do anything, she made a decision of her own free will with no evidence to back up her claims.

LinksOcarina wrote...

Maybe I read too much into that. Yes it was Maretharis choice, but it was Merrills doing, if that makes sense. Her actions caused Marethari to act, almost a ripple effect.

Marethari is an adult. She is responsible for her own actions. Merrill isn't to blame for what Marethari does.

LinksOcarina wrote...

3. The bottom part has nothing to do with Merrill. Read next time. 

Your small post was framed from Merrill and going on into the "tragic figure," citing Anders and Fenris as two examples. Maybe you should have been more clear about what you were addressing, instead of attacking me for thinking that a small post that began with Merrill and segued into the "tragic figure" didn't actually have to do with the topic you started with.

[LinksOcarina]

LobselVith8 wrote...

An arc where Merrill did what she thought was right, with the goal of helping elves across the entire continent. Whether she was correct about the Eluvian's potential or not, we'll never know. Even Merrill admits she could be wrong, even Merrill acknowledges this could kill her, but she's willing to try because the possible outcome can be beneficial for countless people.

Where Marethari acted based on her opinion of what she thought might happen, nothing more. The Keeper wasn't forced or coerced to do anything, she made a decision of her own free will with no evidence to back up her claims.

Marethari is an adult. She is responsible for her own actions. Merrill isn't to blame for what Marethari does.

Your small post was framed from Merrill and going on into the "tragic figure," citing Anders and Fenris as two examples. Maybe you should have been more clear about what you were addressing, instead of attacking me for thinking that a small post that began with Merrill and segued into the "tragic figure" didn't actually have to do with the topic you started with.

I was clear in what I was adressing, you are just too ignorant to realize it considering the fact I was referring to EWR's entire post. So read next time and don't jump to a conclusion. End of story. 

Speaking of which,  once again, you fail to realize the point on what I said about Merrill. Simply stated again, I pointed out aspects of the arc she took that made her, in my mind, a more philosophical character beyond the "girl next door" facade, which was something I was attempting to address. 

[TEWR]

I think LinksOcarina was simply addressing both parts of my post without the need for quoting me.

[John Epler]

Let's try and be civil, folks. Calling people ignorant is not being civil.

One and only warning.

[LobselVith8]

LinksOcarina wrote...

I was clear in what I was adressing, you are just too ignorant to realize it considering the fact I was referring to EWR's entire post. So read next time and don't jump to a conclusion. End of story. 

You weren't clear; otherwise, we wouldn't be having this conversation. You wrote a short post that began with Merrill, and made no indication that the "tragic figure" you continued on with wasn't addressing her as well. Being belligerent about it doesn't change the fact that you weren't clear. I "read" what you wrote, and responded to what I "read."

LinksOcarina wrote...

Speaking of which,  once again, you fail to realize the point on what I said about Merrill. Simply stated again, I pointed out aspects of the arc she took that made her, in my mind, a more philosophical character beyond the "girl next door" facade, which was something I was attempting to address. 

No, I read what you wrote, which is the problem. You seem to think that Merrill is responsible for the actions that another grown adult decides to make, and I respectfully disagree.

[Cloaking_Thane]

I like it. I've read and understood many dissenting opinons of it, even agreed with some things they don't like.

I think it could have been everything most people wanted with a longer dev time frame.

Regardless I think the roughly 8.5/10 aggregate metacritic accurately reflects my opinion of it, overall very good, but needed clear polish to certain areas.

[LinksOcarina]

LobselVith8 wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

I was clear in what I was adressing, you are just too ignorant to realize it considering the fact I was referring to EWR's entire post. So read next time and don't jump to a conclusion. End of story. 

You weren't clear; otherwise, we wouldn't be having this conversation. You wrote a short post that began with Merrill, and made no indication that the "tragic figure" you continued on with wasn't addressing her as well. Being belligerent about it doesn't change the fact that you weren't clear. I "read" what you wrote, and responded to what I "read."

LinksOcarina wrote...

Speaking of which,  once again, you fail to realize the point on what I said about Merrill. Simply stated again, I pointed out aspects of the arc she took that made her, in my mind, a more philosophical character beyond the "girl next door" facade, which was something I was attempting to address. 

No, I read what you wrote, which is the problem. You seem to think that Merrill is responsible for the actions that another grown adult decides to make, and I respectfully disagree.

*sigh* this will get us nowhere...

And yes, I am belligerent about it. Mostly because you were wrong and won't admit it. 

You need to really be careful how you respond to posts, simple as that.  If it will make you feel better next time, i'll just put in big bold letters a transition saying "IN REGARDS TO" or something to make it more clear for you. But honestly, since you seem to be the only one who didn't get it the first time around, then I don't think the fault is with what I wrote, rather how you read it.  

But this is honestly a waste of time...in fact its not even pertaining to the topic at hand. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 12 janvier 2012 - 07:22 .

[LobselVith8]

LinksOcarina wrote...

*sigh* this will get us nowhere...

Apparently so. It doesn't really change that people had different feelings toward Dragon Age II - I thought the companions were good, while I took issue with the passive protagonist, the depiction of the mages and templars as caricatures, and the weak storyline. It's how I felt about Dragon Age II.

LinksOcarina wrote...

And yes, I am belligerent about it. Mostly because you were wrong and won't admit it. 

You need to really be careful how you respond to posts, simple as that.  If it will make you feel better next time, i'll just put in big bold letters a transition saying "IN REGARDS TO" or something to make it more clear for you. But honestly, since you seem to be the only one who didn't get it the first time around, then I don't think the fault is with what I wrote, rather how you read it.

You can cut out the conscending attitude while you're at it. This back and forth isn't really getting us anywhere, and I'm not looking to spend pages debating the clarity of your short post. I disagreed with you about Merrill, and I suppose we can agree to disagree.

LinksOcarina wrote... 

But this is honestly a waste of time...in fact its not even pertaining to the topic at hand. 

Agreed.

[Marionetten]

Not everyone hates Big Rigs either.

[Am1vf]

Marionetten wrote...
Not everyone hates Big Rigs either.

Hey, I don't hate Big Rigs, I don't even know what it is .

[Sylvianus]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Merrill is a naive mage who makes a literal deal with the devil to try and restore her peoples history. Her own hubris is the fact that the thought she could control it to get what she wanted, and it cost her big time. What is more philosophical or poetic then causing heartbreak that is your own doing?

I think I gave this example before...but I have a friend of mine who was...well..had a traumatic experience when he was younger. To this day he talks about it still, and goes to therapy to get over it. Sometimes the trauma is all that they have, it consumes them to the point of self-damaging, in the case of Anders and Fenris by many degrees. So they become more tragic figures due to that.

I stopped taking Merril seriously when she said that  '" demons can be as good as the spirits of joy or of justice, etc.. "

Really ? T___T

That's not what said the lore as well. There is difference between demons / abominations, etc and Spirits.

I do not know if it is a mistake of the writers or if she is that naive and stupid.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 12 janvier 2012 - 08:17 .

[LobselVith8]

Sylvianus wrote...

I stopped taking Merril seriously when she said that  '" demons can be as good as the spirits of joy or of justice, etc.. "

T___T

That's not what said the lore as well. There is difference between demons / abominations, etc and Spirits.

I do not know if it is a mistake of the writers or if she is that naive and stupid.

Anders and Merrill disagree because of Anders' religious views:

Anders: Maybe you don't really understand the difference between spirits and demons.
Merrill: Did I ask you?
Anders: Spirits were the first children of the Maker, but He turned his back on them to dote on His mortal creations. The ones who resented this became demons, driven to take everything mortals had and gain back the Maker's favor.
Merrill: Your "Maker" is a story you humans use to explain the world. We have our own stories. I don't need to borrow yours.

Also, Merrill addresses that the denizens of the Fade are dangerous:

Merrill: Are you all right?
Anders: I nearly killed an innocent girl. How could I be all right?
Merrill: I'm sorry.
Anders: You're sorry? For me? This could be you! You could be the next monster threatening helpless girls!
Merrill: Anders... There's no such thing as a good spirit. There never was. All spirits are dangerous. I understood that. I'm sorry that you didn't.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 12 janvier 2012 - 08:17 .

[Am1vf]

Sylvianus wrote...
I stopped taking Merril seriously when she said that  ' demons can be as good as the spirit of joy or of justice, etc..

T___T

That's not what said the lore as well. There is difference between demons / abominations, etc and Spirits.

I do not know if it is a mistake of the writers or if she completely stupid.

I agree with her there. The way I see it the spirits (and demons) are just very primal beings, all their traits are based on one concept and they don't understand morality. The lore you have read is the version from the chantry and therefore the human morality is projected into the names we use to discern them.

But of course that doesn't mean it is safe to trust them or anything.

edit: I've been kind of nija'd, I think:?

Modifié par Am1_vf, 12 janvier 2012 - 08:20 .