46 réponses à ce sujet

[Cromalic]

No matter how many nobles vote for or against you, it still ends up with the whole ordeal being settled with a duel.

What's the point of all this then? Why are we supposed to gather evidence to use in the landsmeet, why are we supposed to speak several lines supporting our cause, why why why, when EVERYTHING is going to be decided by a stupid duel?

I guess it would've made sense if the vote was a tie, but it still happened when I had everyone vote for me except one. Was anyone else a bit bummed out by this?

[Taerda]

I was disappointed I could not kill Anora then and there.

[FalloutBoy]

Game designers think that you can't resolve anything without a battle. Same thing happened with the dwarves pretty much. The elf area is the only place I can think of where it is possible to finish the major quest line without a big final battle.

[MadCat221]

It's not the destination but the journey itself.

Also... maybe getting a prevailing opinion in the Landsmeet affects the endgame more favorably if you want Allistair to take the throne in some manner? I wouldn't know, maybe someone else would.

As for the Dwarves...  are you considering the Anvil of The Void battle as the finale, or the coronation as the finale?  Choosing Bhelen results in Harrowmont simply being condemned, no big battle.

Modifié par MadCat221, 28 novembre 2009 - 07:24 .

[Original182]

From what I remember, I think the duel isn't compulsory.

If you get the majority of the votes, your party is the winner and decides who should rule.

In the perfect world, the duel isn't necessary. But it is because Loghain did not wish to step down gracefully, and would ask his men to attack, that your main character recommended a duel to settle things once and for all, preventing unnecessary bloodshed.



If Loghain gets the majority of the votes, or even a tie, he remains regent. But you cannot have that, so that's why there's a huge fight later on.



So the duel is more to settle things once and for all, to spare the lives of the soldiers.

[FalloutBoy]

MadCat221 wrote...

As for the Dwarves...  are you considering the Anvil of The Void battle as the finale, or the coronation as the finale?  Choosing Bhelen results in Harrowmont simply being condemned, no big battle.

Hmm. I guess that's another exception. If you pick Harrowmont, Bhelen attacks you.

[Cromalic]

The duel is compulsory, you still have to do it whether you get all the votes possible or not.
If you try to attack Loghain because he won't back down, it will still lead to a duel once he's on low health as the nobles stop the battle saying there will be no more bloodshed in those halls.
So they're willing to let the whole political function of the landsmeet, the whole fate of the matter, be decided by a random duel, even though the nobles and their mothers support your cause?
It makes no sense to me at this point, but if someone is able to explain and have it make more sense, it would be great.

Modifié par Cromalic, 28 novembre 2009 - 07:45 .

[Lianaar]

For me the Landsmeet was the eclipse of the game. The very thing I was fighting for. From there on I knew things will be all right. As we united Ferelden and all my struggles led me that way. With that army at hand and that knowledge at hand I was confident the Blight will be stopped. And even if not, the Orlesian Grey Wardens now could come in and help. Which is also important.



The Landsmeet also decides the future of Ferelden. You might not play it out (unless they make a sequel about it) but it is still a massive effect you have on Ferelden through the landsmeet.



Both parties are determined. Neither party accepts losing because both parties believe they are essential for the victory over the Blight. What's the difference between Arl Eamon attacking Loghain and Loghain attacking you? It is the same, just different standpoints. But one way your choice will be the legal king/queen, the other way you are doing a coup.



But then, I am not able to take away the RP part from the game, and see it just as mechanism and puzzle.

[Lianaar]

DA takes a lot from historical feudalism. Duels aren't just duels accordingly. In the duels the will of the Maker shows. It is the Maker that guides the hand of the duelers. They don't allow the skill to win, they allow the will of the Maker to win. At least that is what historical justice duels were about. They were judgements of the god. I believe it fits perfectly, as it was the ultima ratio people (nobles) were able to call for.

[Original182]

Lianaar wrote...

DA takes a lot from historical feudalism. Duels aren't just duels accordingly. In the duels the will of the Maker shows. It is the Maker that guides the hand of the duelers. They don't allow the skill to win, they allow the will of the Maker to win. At least that is what historical justice duels were about. They were judgements of the god. I believe it fits perfectly, as it was the ultima ratio people (nobles) were able to call for.

You again, demon sympathizer.
As for duels being the will of the Maker, that is the case for the Proving in Orzammar. Whoever wins must be due to the will of the Ancestors. It's clearly stated by the Proving Master.

But the duel with Loghain is merely tradition that has no bearing with the Chantry or the Maker. So far I've not read anything that indicates Landsmeet duels are to determine what the Maker wills. Maybe it is so for real life feudalism, and Orzammar, but not so for the Landsmeet.

[Original182]

Cromalic wrote...

The duel is compulsory, you still have to do it whether you get all the votes possible or not.
If you try to attack Loghain because he won't back down, it will still lead to a duel once he's on low health as the nobles stop the battle saying there will be no more bloodshed in those halls.
So they're willing to let the whole political function of the landsmeet, the whole fate of the matter, be decided by a random duel, even though the nobles and their mothers support your cause?
It makes no sense to me at this point, but if someone is able to explain and have it make more sense, it would be great.

From a lore standpoint, it still makes sense somewhat. The duel was never meant to be compulsory, the outcome of the Landsmeet really is supposed to decide who gets to rule, once and for all.
The duel didn't determine the outcome. It was just to prevent additional bloodshed. Loghain is adamant about not backing down, still commands a powerful force, and the only way out of the situation short of fighting till the bitter end, is a duel.

From a game design point of view, as in why not just let us win without any additional things like duels, well we cannot argue why the devs made it this way. It'll be almost like arguing why not let us swim through watery areas.

[Brimleydower]

Defeating Loghain in the duel earns you his support and blessing to lead the nation against the Blight, when he gives the whole "there's a strength in you I've not seen since Maric..." speech. So, essentially, winning the duel forces him to withdraw his claim to the throne and resign himself to whatever your character wills. Did the Landsmeet affect anything for us as people playing the game in the real world? Nope. In-game, however, the politics do add up. Let's be honest here, we knew that wasn't going to end without a fight. Even if you don't have the assembly's majority vote, whipping him in a duel indicates to Loghain that maybe he was wrong after all.

[Niten Ryu]

Game designers think that you can't resolve anything without a battle.

It's odd how developers from different teams always repeat this error. Obsidian did the same with NWN2 - You just had to duel after your trial. Same here in Dragon Age. You get majority of the votes and you still have to dual. Sure you skip one fight that way but not to fight ain't at ain't option.

It's not only peaceful solution that'll suffer from this. What about evil or amoral characters. Why would you choose to duel if you have good group backing you. To fight fair? that don't mean anything to you. Lords rebeling against you if you choose not to duel? There's elder Gray Warden at the Landsmeet who do know why Gray Wardens are really needed against archdemon. Player character has all the cards but for some odd reason you have to risk it all and choose to duel. During my last run I was about to shut down my computer before the duel. Not because of this issue but because rest of the game is stupid grind against waves of trash mobs. Maybe I should have end game right there. Enemy would have won the duel and Blight would have destroyed Ferelden

[Lianaar]

Original182 wrote...
You again, demon sympathizer.

Tsk tsk, you mean someone who makes thoughts on the nature of evil and the source of information

As for the rest, I admit that the Landsmeet as a whole reminded me too much on medieval Germany, or more so the 2nd German-Roman empire on its early days. So I automatically pulled the laws of the era on it. My bad. It was a presumption.

But my point is irrelevant as others were correct, the duel is not there to determine the future of the kingdom. I remembered that part wrong.

[Cromalic]

As far as I understood the duel would determine the entire outcome of the landsmeet.If the votes are against you, you can still turn the whole thing around with the duel, right? So it does determine the outcome?

Don't get me wrong, I loved the landsmeet. Which is exactly why I didn't like that everything would be decided by a duel. Might as well had that duel to begin with and skip all the votes and speeches.

I did enjoy the duel and I don't mind that it's mandatory from a designer point of view, I just didn't like or understand the reasoning behind it and the consequences storywise.

[Axterix]

Cromalic wrote...

As far as I understood the duel would determine the entire outcome of the landsmeet.If the votes are against you, you can still turn the whole thing around with the duel, right? So it does determine the outcome?

Well, when I lost the landsmeet, there wasn't a duel.  My side flat out attacked, much like Bhelen attacks you if you pick Harrowmount.

When I reloaded and picked some different conversation options, resulting in a win, then Loghain challenged me to a duel.

I view the duel as an appeal.  Judgement was rendered.  Loghain appealed.  I beat him, so he lost his appeal.  Case completely closed, never to be opened again. 

Essentially, by accepting the duel, I agreed to risk my victory in the vote in exchange for a X-0 vote in my favor if I won.  A finality the voting process did not have.

[ReubenLiew]

Fereldan are barbarians, they tell you it's to prevent bloodshed but we all know deep down they just like a good bashing to settle matters.

[Theratis111]

Landsmeet was weird for me. I "won". 6 nobles voted for me, 2 against. Then Arl Eamon goes "this is not good, we will not lose in this manner" and attacks, even though we won.

[Herr Uhl]

Trial by battle was commonplace in the days of yore.



See nothing weird about it.

[Taerda]

The landsmeet should be your opportunity to behead Anora.



/nod

[The Angry One]

FalloutBoy wrote...

Game designers think that you can't resolve anything without a battle.

Except Peter Molyneux.

[ReubenLiew]

No, Peter Molyneux will hype up the upcoming battle and then later to reveal there never was any real battle

[Duck and Cover]

yeah I think it's annoying too (I love the game still). But it's not what a rpg is truelly about. rp stands for role playing. People want to roleplay different characters. Some people actually like to be peaceful and use diplomacy over swords. This game does not offer that.



I think I once saw a guide for fallout2 to go thru the game without killing things. I never tried it, but I do think you can go thru the entire game without violence, or nearly all of it. Which is what makes fallout 2 one of the, if not the best crpg of all time.

[Original182]

I've also heard good things about Fallout, though I've only played part 3. The novelty of finishing a game without violence is very interesting.

[Cromalic]

The duel always happens. Attacking and battling first is optional if you have enough votes, but when Loghain reaches 0 HP he doesn't die and the fight is over. Then the nobles say something about not wanting anymore bloodshed in these halls, and that the matter should be settled by a duel and that's what happens.