274 réponses à ce sujet

[the_one_54321]

Conway044 wrote...
The Seekers report directly to the Divine, they seem to serve a role like the secret police of the Chantry.  I would find it odd for them to allow herectics and non-belivers to become members.

  <- this is a link

Modifié par the_one_54321, 09 avril 2012 - 04:29 .

[Odd Bet]

Personally, I have no problem having my character forced to work with the Chantry via the Seekers. I do not, however, want to start the game as a Seeker, implying that my character joined them. Basically, I would see it playing out like ME2, where the player is forced to work for an organization, but how they handle the relationship is up to them. I don't want to play a character who has a crisis of faith, though I can understand that some may find that story appealing.

I also think the people so dead set on the player being a Seeker are neglecting the situation of mages at the end of Asunder. I do not see a reasonable way for the Divine to recruit/conscript a mage, even if she wanted to, as it is implied that all Circle mages are either in rebellion or under Templar control. Would it be possible? I suppose, but the plot wrangling it would take would be a little on the ridiculous side.

[Cultist]

Maria Caliban wrote...
Mr. Thorton enlists of his own will. If the protagonist of DA 3 enlisted
in the Seekers of his or her own free will and could kill everyone in
the end, would that be satisfactory for you?

No. Restrictions are still to serious. We can talk for hours how Seekers that answer directly to the Divine may not believe in Maker or support Chantry. That'll only make supposed Seeker protagonist storyline more ridiculous.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Point being, the idea of playing as a Seeker doesn't automatically negate player agency.

No. I does negate player agency. Seeker order. Answering to the Divine. Andrastean. That stands true until proven wrong by any official source.

But it seems like you're hellbent on believing that playing as a Seeker
will render your player agency null and void by dint of playing as a
Seeker.

I am. i can stand being forced to work for Seekers, of course, if i can betray and slaughter them later. But starting as one? No. Too many plot-holes, too many ridiculous explanations, like atheist Seekers and such.
Fanbase accepted Wardens because they were neutral and cared only about one goal, disregarding religion, politics and everything else.

So, as you people are stating how the idea could work, I state how this idea could not work.

[Maria Caliban]

Cultist wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
Mr. Thorton enlists of his own will. If the protagonist of DA 3 enlisted
in the Seekers of his or her own free will and could kill everyone in
the end, would that be satisfactory for you?

No. Restrictions are still to serious. We can talk for hours how Seekers that answer directly to the Divine may not believe in Maker or support Chantry. That'll only make supposed Seeker protagonist storyline more ridiculous.

To be sure, I'd want the Seeker PC to default to a believer.

I have no problems with restrictions in a game. I had to be human in DA II. I had to be a Grey Warden in DA:O. I had to be a Jedi in KotOR and a Spirit Monk, orphaned child raised by elderly martial arts mentor in Jade Empire.

I consider restrictions a good thing.

Series like the Elder Scrolls or Divine Divinity where you can imagine yourself to be anything are nice, but that's not all I'd want to play.

[klebaart]

The main problem IMO is that if you make the protagonist a Seeker AND allow the player to have ''change of heart'', you would have already assumed that the character willingly joined them in the first place and thus agreed with the Seekers once -> you make choice for the player, he does not feel free and does not like it.
I think it's exactly like having the protagonist be a templar. It implies that the character sided with them before, and it makes the player feel like it is not is character.

If I understood well, the Seekers are nothing like the Wardens. They are presented like half-legends (I'm thinking about the codex in the hanged-man), some sort of elite whereas the Warden, as they have to fight something way bigger in term of scale, have to privilege quantity above beliefs etc. The Seekers are fewer.
I didn't understood that the Seekers exist to keep order in Thedas but rather to serve the Chantry: they take their orders from the Divine after all.
Thus, as an elite serving the Chantry leader directly, the Seekers would be stupid to hire someone against the Chantry or even just not Andrastian. I don't know if the comparisons are relevant but I think it would be like the MI6 recruiting Captain America or the Council (or whatever the 3 aliens ruling the citadel in ME1 are called) asking Wrex to become a specter: their personal interests could go against the institutions they are working for, which cannot be allowed when you are this important.

I hope I have been clear enough in my explainations, please excuse me if I have not.

Edit: I have never read Asunder nor played the Sebastian DLC, so maybe the way I picture the Seeker is mistaken but my point is that forcing the player into being a Seeker or joining them (like with the Wardens) would make the character be (or have been) Andrastian and lawful to the Chantry, making assumption about my character that are not coherent with the way Dragon Age games are done.

Modifié par klebaart, 09 avril 2012 - 05:22 .

[the_one_54321]

klebaart wrote...
you would have already assumed that the character willingly joined them in the first place and thus agreed with the Seekers once

When was the last time you had a wide range of freedom in determining backstory?

[The Elder King]

I'd rather not. Being restricted as a Grey Warden in DAO or a human in DA2 it's not the same as to play as a Seeker. A Grey Warden have (especially during the Blight) the freedom to whatever he wants to stop the Blight/darkspawn. You could very well be a follower of the Chantry, a pro-mage, a templar, a dwarf, a dalish. A Seeker firmly believes in Andraste. They could give the possibility of losing your faith in the Chantry (though I don't see why, considering both DA2 and Asunder), but I'd prefer to start in a blank state about that matter.
And I still don't think that there are mages Seekers. I admit that we don't know enough to be certain on the point, so Bioware could very well make some Seeker mages, but I don't think that's the case.

[nightcobra]

 
edit:posted this in another thread but i think it's relevant to this topic.

some people won't like this idea but how about this?



a reversed funnel type of class choice for the player character (has magic potential but can choose to train as a warrior or rogue while supressing the innate magic talent or using it to improve the other 2 classes or maybe just concentrating on the mage aspect. the party members would be one of the 3 classes like in previous DA games.

imagine kingdom's of amalur leveling system and you get pretty much the gist of what i'm talking about.
you could pick abilities from the 3 trees (warrior/rogue/mage) and depending on how much points you put into the trees you could then select a specialization tree:

true warrior 
true mage
true rogue
warrior/rogue hybrid
warrior/mage hybrid
mage/rogue hybrid
jack of all trades


this could be explained as an integral part of your character.
let's see if i can explain myself clearly...remember fenris? his lyrium marks were basically what enabled magic use in him. now consider this...it could be possible for something similar to happen to your character.
in DA1 you went through the joining to become a grey warden, what if at the end of DA3's prologue you undergo a experiment/ritual or something that makes you a mana battery much like how gems could make shale one.
this is just an idea however so i don't expect bioware to actually go through with something like this. 

also, we know that the chantry uses lyrium to make templars, templars use a kind of magic to combat mages that much we already know.
how about if the chantry is trying to come up with the next iteration of templar due to the now total war between mages/templars and you're kidnapped and used as a lab rat.
would you still forgive the ones who did this to you (if the ones responsible only did this to protect the people from what they think is the menace of mages) or would you rebel agaisnt them and join the mages cause, or do you use these new found powers for your personal gain, or even yet do you refuse to use them if you find the notion of magic abhorrent?

just a few things out the top of my head.  

like i said some people won't like due to this making the PC a "special snowflake" but i kinda like these kind of characters like i like the grey wardens, spirit monks, etc.
also in my theory it's possible you wouldn't be the only one, just one of the first:wizard: 

[LobselVith8]

the_one_54321 wrote...

klebaart wrote...
you would have already assumed that the character willingly joined them in the first place and thus agreed with the Seekers once

When was the last time you had a wide range of freedom in determining backstory?

The Courier in New Vegas and the Dragonborn in Skyrim are protagonists in stories that allow the player to chose specific elements for his (or her) backstory throughout the narrative.

[the_one_54321]

LobselVith8 wrote...
The Courier in New Vegas and the Dragonborn in Skyrim are protagonists in stories that allow the player to chose specific elements for his (or her) backstory throughout the narrative.

I know folks that have been playing Skyrim since it released and still haven't take a huge interest in the main story.

[klebaart]

the_one_54321 wrote...

klebaart wrote...
you would have already assumed that the character willingly joined them in the first place and thus agreed with the Seekers once

When was the last time you had a wide range of freedom in determining backstory?

I'm fine with a set origin like in DA II, but there's a huge difference between this and a pre-set personality  (in this case that my character is or has been lawful to the Chantry). This is IMO way more binding. I have a bigger sense of freedom if no choices were made by a character who is supposed to be mine before I controled him, even if I am not actually more ''free'' it matters to me. Origins are no choices.

[GavrielKay]

I'm supposed to be working, so I haven't read every post, but I'll offer a few opinions anyway:

The Seekers are presented as the most trusted of the Divine's forces. Trusted the way you're supposed to be able to trust the watchers of the watchers. They are presented as the people who make sure the Divine's will is carried out and that the Divine knows what she needs to know. I don't see any room here for forced service. Maybe you could try to rationalize your anti-Chantry PC as incredibly gifted at deceit, such that everyone was absolutely convinced of his/her loyalty to the Chantry as (s)he was promoted up the ranks. But I really don't see forced servitude of an openly anti-Chantry person.

There are a number of players who are anti-Chantry as presented in the games thus far. I'm not sure the percentage, but I'd guess it's not an insignificant number. So, BioWare would not be making a very smart choice to force all players to have a Seeker as their PC. This would leave them stuck with a character they don't like or have to invent crazy stories to rationalize.

Now, if they go back to Origin stories, and one of the available choices is Seeker, I think that'd be awesome. Certainly it would be an interesting viewpoint. And both pro and anti-Chantry folks might enjoy working from the inside.

But, to make the only available back story so closely associated with the Chantry and having a character history that had to have at least on the surface been extremely pro-Chantry and trusted by the Divine would not suit a lot of folks. Why alienate a bunch of people if you don't have to? They're out to make money, and the broader the audience the better for that.

[GavrielKay]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Given the scale of the potentially global conflict presented to us, I doubt the Seekers could be so picky as to only recruit people that believe in the Maker.

I don't buy this.  For one, belief in the Maker is extremely widespread.  Finding zealots has never been a problem for the Templars, and promoting particularly bright - and in whatever fashion counts as "worthy" by the current Divine - folks shouldn't be difficult. 

It appears to be a very trusted position.  The Divine's personal guard, spies and enforcers.  These are not folks you would recruit out of nowhere with no feeling for their true loyalties.  Templars and hired mercenaries might relax their standards during war time, but the inner circle would not.

You would be forcing the player to either actually play a character loyal to the Divine and the Chantry, or to make up a backstory explaining how everyone else was fooled into thinking that's what you were.

[klebaart]

GavrielKay wrote...

Now, if they go back to Origin stories, and one of the available choices is Seeker, I think that'd be awesome. Certainly it would be an interesting viewpoint. And both pro and anti-Chantry folks might enjoy working from the inside.

As I said before, I think that the Seekers are some sort of elite, so it would not be really consistent to have your lvl 1 PC become one during the origin story.

[esper]

GavrielKay wrote...

I'm supposed to be working, so I haven't read every post, but I'll offer a few opinions anyway:

The Seekers are presented as the most trusted of the Divine's forces. Trusted the way you're supposed to be able to trust the watchers of the watchers. They are presented as the people who make sure the Divine's will is carried out and that the Divine knows what she needs to know. I don't see any room here for forced service. Maybe you could try to rationalize your anti-Chantry PC as incredibly gifted at deceit, such that everyone was absolutely convinced of his/her loyalty to the Chantry as (s)he was promoted up the ranks. But I really don't see forced servitude of an openly anti-Chantry person.

There are a number of players who are anti-Chantry as presented in the games thus far. I'm not sure the percentage, but I'd guess it's not an insignificant number. So, BioWare would not be making a very smart choice to force all players to have a Seeker as their PC. This would leave them stuck with a character they don't like or have to invent crazy stories to rationalize.

Now, if they go back to Origin stories, and one of the available choices is Seeker, I think that'd be awesome. Certainly it would be an interesting viewpoint. And both pro and anti-Chantry folks might enjoy working from the inside.

But, to make the only available back story so closely associated with the Chantry and having a character history that had to have at least on the surface been extremely pro-Chantry and trusted by the Divine would not suit a lot of folks. Why alienate a bunch of people if you don't have to? They're out to make money, and the broader the audience the better for that.

Exactly. I am simply not going to enjoy the story of playing a Seeker. It might have worked if this was the first game and I came in unbiased, but as it is now bioware has to realize that they have build a world that people is very opiniated of and force people into organization that are not neutral is simply a no go.

It would be as if someone forced me to play a Tevinter magister - you don't get to that place in Tevinter without have done some nasty things, you don't get to play an elite religious warrior without being pro-the group that tracked you down. The seekers who are not pro-chantry stopped follow the chantry because they agreed with the templars. They are not neutral in the conflict.   

[Huntress]

What ever, just remember many didn't want to be a warden, forcing people to be something that they don't like is fail. Remmeber hawke, never mind it was said: Human story so has to have Humans only main character.. the whines never ended.. even today they still don't get the message.

Another thing, I won't buy a game if my character is a seeker or mage helping a seekers/chantry or what ever the hell someone comes up with, My character do not have any affiliation to any organization what so ever, now make a mage fleeing the crcle of magi, thats ok, making a rogue helping a town and killing blood mages who are from Kirkwall and totally nuts, thats ok, forced to be a seeker is NOT ok, forced to work for the chantry for some" duty" IS NOT OK..

What about people who wants to be dalish? Are you going to tell me that a dalish elf is going to agree and work for the chantry and on top of that be a seeker?... OR better yet, is da3 only Humans Character again?

[GavrielKay]

klebaart wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

Now, if they go back to Origin stories, and one of the available choices is Seeker, I think that'd be awesome. Certainly it would be an interesting viewpoint. And both pro and anti-Chantry folks might enjoy working from the inside.

As I said before, I think that the Seekers are some sort of elite, so it would not be really consistent to have your lvl 1 PC become one during the origin story.

That's an interesting point too.  I suppose if you wanted to account for that, you'd have to be someone like Alistair...  a trained but uninitiated Templar who had just been cherry picked for service?  Even level 1 is supposed to be more skills than your general person off the street.

Anyway, as one of those players who really thinks the Chantry is a lousy organization that needs to be put in its place, I would not buy DA3 if the main character were a Seeker.  Gaming is supposed to be fun, not annoying.  I could roleplay it, I could invent backstories to shoehorn the character I want to play into the one I'm given, but it's not worth the bother.

I have no problem if BioWare decides they prefer to get someone else's $60 rather than mine.  I'm sure I can find plenty of things to do with the money.

[esper]

GavrielKay wrote...

klebaart wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

Now, if they go back to Origin stories, and one of the available choices is Seeker, I think that'd be awesome. Certainly it would be an interesting viewpoint. And both pro and anti-Chantry folks might enjoy working from the inside.

As I said before, I think that the Seekers are some sort of elite, so it would not be really consistent to have your lvl 1 PC become one during the origin story.

That's an interesting point too.  I suppose if you wanted to account for that, you'd have to be someone like Alistair...  a trained but uninitiated Templar who had just been cherry picked for service?  Even level 1 is supposed to be more skills than your general person off the street.

Anyway, as one of those players who really thinks the Chantry is a lousy organization that needs to be put in its place, I would not buy DA3 if the main character were a Seeker.  Gaming is supposed to be fun, not annoying.  I could roleplay it, I could invent backstories to shoehorn the character I want to play into the one I'm given, but it's not worth the bother.

I have no problem if BioWare decides they prefer to get someone else's $60 rather than mine.  I'm sure I can find plenty of things to do with the money.

To be fair levels doesn't really exist on the story plane so if you characther was talented it is proberly explainable.
 
I would buy it to give it a chance, but unless some sort of miracle happens pretty quick in the story, I am not going to get any of the dlc or dragon age 4. Simply put, I would be quitting the franchnise, because it would no longer be fun for me to play.

[Deviija]

If Seekers were more like Spectres, in that they had full sanction and authority to hunt the truth of whatever they are seeking, and root out lawful and civil problems wherever they felt the need, and worked beyond country law and Chantry obligation, then I wouldn't mind it.

But at that point it is sounding more like the Warden organization. 

Modifié par Deviija, 09 avril 2012 - 07:31 .

[esper]

Deviija wrote...


If Seekers were more like Spectres, in that they had full sanction and authority to hunt the truth of whatever they are seeking, and root out lawful and civil problems wherever they felt the need, and worked beyond country law and Chantry obligation, then I wouldn't mind it.

But at that point it is sounding more like the Warden organization. 

But they are not. They are the chantrys clean up, meaning they are pro-chantry. Those that abandoded the chantry left to join the templars. Meaning they are pro-chantry/pro-templar.

Besides law doesn't exist effictively in dragon age, so be technically speaking every protogonist is beyond the law, since eveyr protagonist proberly have the means to bully/bribe/sweet talk the law. (Not that it is a good thing, mind you).

Modifié par esper, 09 avril 2012 - 07:34 .

[Sylvianus]

Yeah, no. I don't buy the = ooooh I am a seeker but I don't believe in the maker, I never was an andrastian.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 09 avril 2012 - 07:46 .

[CENIC]

"The Seekers of Truth and the Templar Order were once known as the
Inquisition, a group of people who were fighting against dark magic
after the First Blight. When the Chantry arose, the Andrastian organization convinced the Inquisition to unite under the banner of their common faith.
In the twentieth year of the Divine Age, the Seekers of Truth and the Chantry came to an agreement known as the Nevarran Accord: the Seekers acknowledge the Chantry's authority and agree to serve as their agents. The two organizations created the Circle of Magi."

The Seekers were non-religious before they allied with the Chantry. And the alliance doesn't mean they all had to become Andrastians. Considering Lambert antagonized the Divine in Asunder and had no compunctions about splitting off from the Chantry, I think it's more than possible for Seekers to be non-religiously motivated.

Because so much about Seekers is still unknown, that means there is a lot of wiggle room in situations like this.

[esper]

CENIC wrote...

"The Seekers of Truth and the Templar Order were once known as the
Inquisition, a group of people who were fighting against dark magic
after the First Blight. When the Chantry arose, the Andrastian organization convinced the Inquisition to unite under the banner of their common faith.
In the twentieth year of the Divine Age, the Seekers of Truth and the Chantry came to an agreement known as the Nevarran Accord: the Seekers acknowledge the Chantry's authority and agree to serve as their agents. The two organizations created the Circle of Magi."

The Seekers were non-religious before they allied with the Chantry. And the alliance doesn't mean they all had to become Andrastians. Considering Lambert antagonized the Divine in Asunder and had no compunctions about splitting off from the Chantry, I think it's more than possible for Seekers to be non-religiously motivated.

Because so much about Seekers is still unknown, that means there is a lot of wiggle room in situations like this.

They are not the wardens.They are not neutral. Up in till Asunder they were pro-chantry. Every member of the Seekers is hired by the chantry, and the seekers who left, left because they chose the rebelling templars route. Meaning that today the Seekers are pro-chantry or pro-templars.

I would also be against being an warden in Andersfeld where they are getting involved in behind the scene polical. 

[berelinde]

CENIC said...

"The Seekers of Truth and the Templar Order were once known as the 
Inquisition, a group of people who were fighting against dark magic 
after the First Blight. When the Chantry arose, the Andrastian organization convinced the Inquisition to unite under the banner of their common faith.
In the twentieth year of the Divine Age, the Seekers of Truth and the Chantry came to an agreement known as the Nevarran Accord: the Seekers acknowledge the Chantry's authority and agree to serve as their agents. The two organizations created the Circle of Magi."

The Seekers were non-religious before they allied with the Chantry. And the alliance doesn't mean they all had to become Andrastians. Considering Lambert antagonized the Divine in Asunder and had no compunctions about splitting off from the Chantry, I think it's more than possible for Seekers to be non-religiously motivated.

Because so much about Seekers is still unknown, that means there is a lot of wiggle room in situations like this.

Did you read the text you quoted? "When the Chantry arose, the Andrastian organization convinced the Inquisition (Seekers) to unite under the banner of their common faith."

It's really hard to find wiggle room in a statement that clear and concise.

The Seekers are Andrastian. Regardless of how things fell out in Orlais in a book that has is not officially canon, the Seekers have strong ties to the Chantry.

I hope BioWare does not impose that rigid and unappealing a protagonist on their DA3 audience because it will cost them a lot of sales at a time when they cannot afford it.

Modifié par berelinde, 09 avril 2012 - 08:11 .

[JimmyTheProthean]

The seeker will actually be the maker.