274 réponses à ce sujet

[The Elder King]

The fact is that if we're going to play as a Seeker, we'll play as either (spoiler for Asunder):






a Seeker who joined the Templars (so an anti-mage Seeker, who is most likely a follower of Andraste, but indipendant to the Chantry) or a Seeker loyal to the Chantry, so a follower of both Andraste and the Chantry. As I said before, they could make in the game a path that allow us to become indipendant, fight alongside the mages or losing the faith on the Chantry/Andraste, but I think it's better to start in a (nearly) blank state about that, and give the player the freedom to choose what he/she wants.

[klebaart]

esper wrote...

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.

Moreover the fact that Seekers 900 years ago were not the Divine agents does not matter in the Dragon Age: only their current relation is relevant.

[GavrielKay]

CENIC wrote...
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.

As someone else already pointed out, it does say they united for their common faith, making it clear they were all Andrastian.

Also, a key point in Asunder is that for many years the Divine was old, weak and oblivious.  That means for a long time, there was little guidance from above and the Seekers (and Templars etc) had to make do.  They got used to setting their own priorities and acting on them.  Had a strong Divine been present all along, the Lord Seeker would almost certainly have been more loyal...  either from the force of the personality he was serving, or because he'd have been replaced by someone who was loyal

As presented in the games and books, there is no room to consider a Seeker as meant to be anything other than loyal to the Divine and the Chantry.  An openly anti-Chantry stance would not be tolerated. 

It is also completely possible that leaving the order isn't easy either.  After all, the Seekers must have all kinds of potentially damaging information about the Chantry.  I would guess that someone who tried to leave an organization like that on bad terms would have a very short retirement.

[g99]

I'm in opposition to this idea.
Seekers are very much restricted to Chantry, so we loose a sense of freedom I believe. There is no point in playing a character with so much restricted background or view of the world. Not too mention the chain of command, there is the Divine etc.
I think a very much better concept it to make seeker a companion - Casandra for example. She is a nice person, devoted, strict, there is character in her, there is motivation and since she interrogated Verrick she is a good connector to past Dragon Age games.

[TheComfyCat]

It seems pretty ridiculous to argue that Seekers can be atheists/ heretics when they're agents of the Chantry. Even if they're not running around proselytizing, they're still effectively representatives of the Chantry and the Divine.

Forcing players to be members of a religious organization is a terrible idea. I have no interest in playing a game where I'm forced to play a Seeker, especially since I'd have to answer to people like Leliana. Set the game in Kirkwall and use more recycled maps, and it would officially be my worst nightmare of what DA3 could be.

[Maria Caliban]

GavrielKay wrote...

You would be forcing the player to either actually play a character loyal to the Divine and the Chantry...

I have no particular problem with this.

[GavrielKay]

Maria Caliban wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

You would be forcing the player to either actually play a character loyal to the Divine and the Chantry...

I have no particular problem with this.

I have no problem with people who think it would be fun to play a Seeker.

I do think it would be an odd decision for a company to make regarding a popular role playing game though.  Why alienate any portion of your potential customers?

[Maria Caliban]

They potentially alienate part of their player base with every decision they make.

Are people who refuse to play a character with fantasy religious faith a significant minority or a majority in your mind? Because we already know that BioWare's fans are fine with being part of an organization.

[GavrielKay]

Maria Caliban wrote...

They potentially alienate part of their player base with every decision they make.

Are people who refuse to play a character with fantasy religious faith a significant minority or a majority in your mind? Because we already know that BioWare's fans are fine with being part of an organization.

Everyone knows that religion and politics are extremely divisive.  Sure, there are decisions they could make that would make certain folks unhappy, even if 99% were ecstatic.  However, religion is just one of those things that people are more likely to have strong feelings about. 

I don't think it would be a good business decision to set the PC as a devoted follower of the game's dominant religion.  It invites strong feelings.  Many people won't care, but those who do care will tend to care a lot.

Personally, I didn't need a fully voiced protagonist.  I think it ended up limiting a lot of things that I would have enjoyed more.  But I wouldn't refuse to buy DA3 just because the PC remained fully voiced.  I would refuse to buy DA3 if I was going to play a Seeker.  It just isn't worth it to me to have that much of my character's background set before I take over.

Others feel differently, but there are options here that would annoy fewer people and I think BioWare would be smarter to take one of those.

Modifié par GavrielKay, 09 avril 2012 - 09:20 .

[Maria Caliban]

GavrielKay wrote...

Everyone knows that religion and politics are extremely divisive.

Sure, there are decisions they could make that would make certain folks unhappy, even if 99% were ecstatic.  However, religion is just one of those things that people are more likely to have strong feelings about. 

I played DnD for years and hardly anyone had a problem with Clerics and Paladins. Likewise, no one seems to care about playing a Space Marine who constantly shouts FOR THE EMPEROR and DEATH TO XENOS.

It's fantasy religion. We're not saying that the PC has to be a Catholic priest during the Inquisition.

I don't think it would be a good business decision to set PC as devoted follower of the game's dominant religion.  It invites strong feelings.  Many people won't care, but those who do care will tend to care a lot.

The same could be said for same-sex romances. Yes, some people may be deeply offended by what you put into a game. There are people who *hate* the voice protagonist. Not dislike, but hate.

BioWare has a passionate fanbase. I don't think being a Seeker is any more upsetting than paraphrases or Hawke only being human.

Personally, I didn't need a fully voiced protagonist.  I think it ended up limiting a lot of things that I would hae enjoyed more.  But I wouldn't refuse to buy DA3 just because the PC remained fully voiced.  I would refuse to buy DA3 if I was going to play a Seeker.  It just isn't worth it to me to have that much of my character's background set before I take over.

Other's feel differently, but there are options here that would annoy fewer people and I think BioWare would be smarter to take one of those.

I admit that I don't understand your objection, it doesn't seem rational or reasonable to me, but I do respect you feel that way. We all have our limits.

[berelinde]

Maria Caliban wrote...

They potentially alienate part of their player base with every decision they make.

Are people who refuse to play a character with fantasy religious faith a significant minority or a majority in your mind? Because we already know that BioWare's fans are fine with being part of an organization.

Are people who refuse to play a character with an alternative sexual orientation a significant minority or majority in your mind? 

Would it be acceptable to force those who prefer to romance one gender to romance the opposite gender with unavoidable, unskippable romance content? Would you support that decision? After all, it's just fantasy. It doesn't matter if it's a RPG character. Not.

Faith and religion are that important to a lot of people, as is the freedom from either.

At the end of the day, people want the freedom to choose the values their characters possess. They want to be the one to determine their character's beliefs on a wide spectrum off issues from religion to sexual orientation to overall personality. They do not want those decisions made for them.

[Lindum]

While playing as a, Seeker would be very interesting and fun. It could limit player choice.

Thus, a idea could be to offer players a choice of picking a faction during, character creation. For example, one could choice to be a Templar, a Seeker or part of the Mages' Collective and even a Grey Warden.

[Maria Caliban]

berelinde wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

They potentially alienate part of their player base with every decision they make.

Are people who refuse to play a character with fantasy religious faith a significant minority or a majority in your mind? Because we already know that BioWare's fans are fine with being part of an organization.

Are people who refuse to play a character with an alternative sexual orientation a significant minority or majority in your mind?
Would it be acceptable to force those who prefer to romance one gender to romance the opposite gender with unavoidable, unskippable romance content? Would you support that decision? After all, it's just fantasy. It doesn't matter if it's a RPG character. Not.

I find the idea of not buying a game because your sexual orientation isn't the same as the PC's laughable. It's a position I expect to hear from homophobes. Really, that's not the association you want in my mind if you're trying to make a compelling argument.

Faith and religion are that important to a lot of people, as is the freedom from either.

Please stop conflating forcing someone to adopt a religion with making someone play a religious character in a fantasy game.

[Always Alice]

Maria Caliban wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

You would be forcing the player to either actually play a character loyal to the Divine and the Chantry...

I have no particular problem with this.

I don't either.

Bioware should do what's best for the story. I'd rather have a character that starts with certain views  and is better integrated in the story than one who's a blank slate and gets to where he is by circumstance. Besides, if we are a Seeker we'd be working under Justinia, so changing the system is more than likely not out of the realm of possibility. And since she has no problem working with mages I think Bioware could definitely come up with reasons why there could be a mage Seeker.

[GavrielKay]

Maria Caliban wrote...
I played DnD for years and hardly anyone had a problem with Clerics and Paladins. Likewise, no one seems to care about playing a Space Marine who constantly shouts FOR THE EMPEROR and DEATH TO XENOS.

I played D&D too (blush) but I don't remember being locked in to either of those classes.  And the class never told you what religion you had to be either.  So, it really isn't very similar.

The same could be said for same-sex romances. Yes, some people may be deeply offended by what you put into a game. There are people who *hate* the voice protagonist. Not dislike, but hate.

And if someone hates either of those things enough, I suppose they won't bother to buy the next game in the series either.  The romances are optional at least, so that's different than having every PC be a Seeker.

I admit that I don't understand your objection, it doesn't seem rational or reasonable to me, but I do respect you feel that way. We all have our limits.

Gaming is all about fun.  If it doesn't seem like it'd be fun for some reason, then there's no point.  Playing DA:O and DA2 have convinced me that Thedas would be better off if the Chantry was neutered.  If the organization was just a religion with no poliitcal or military might, then other changes in society might happen to make things better.  In my opinion of course.  I wouldn't enjoy playing a character who was supposed to have any interest in protecting the Chantry and its power in the world. 

There's just too many choices for entertainment and DA2 was just too disappointing for me to jump in to DA3 without some good reason to think it would be fun.

[berelinde]

Maria Caliban wrote...

berelinde wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

They potentially alienate part of their player base with every decision they make.

Are people who refuse to play a character with fantasy religious faith a significant minority or a majority in your mind? Because we already know that BioWare's fans are fine with being part of an organization.

Are people who refuse to play a character with an alternative sexual orientation a significant minority or majority in your mind?
Would it be acceptable to force those who prefer to romance one gender to romance the opposite gender with unavoidable, unskippable romance content? Would you support that decision? After all, it's just fantasy. It doesn't matter if it's a RPG character. Not.

I find the idea of not buying a game because your sexual orientation isn't the same as the PC's laughable. It's a position I expect to hear from homophobes. Really, that's not the association you want in my mind if you're trying to make a compelling argument.

Faith and religion are that important to a lot of people, as is the freedom from either.

Please stop conflating forcing someone to adopt a religion with making someone play a religious character in a fantasy game.

Homophobia is never excusable. That's the point. There are players who consider mandatory participation in a religion that very closely parallels a real world religion just as offensive. Telling someone else what should or should not be important to them never ends well.

[Maria Caliban]

GavrielKay wrote...


Gaming is all about fun.  If it doesn't seem like it'd be fun for some reason, then there's no point.  Playing DA:O and DA2 have convinced me that Thedas would be better off if the Chantry was neutered.  If the organization was just a religion with no poliitcal or military might, then other changes in society might happen to make things better.  In my opinion of course.  I wouldn't enjoy playing a character who was supposed to have any interest in protecting the Chantry and its power in the world. 

There's just too many choices for entertainment and DA2 was just too disappointing for me to jump in to DA3 without some good reason to think it would be fun.

I can understand that. The Chantry is a rather divisive force in the fanbase. In many ways, that's the reason I'd be interested in playing a Seeker or a Qunari.

That said, I don't think BioWare would do this, but I wish they'd do something like it.

[Who is that Masked Man]

Having the DA3 protagonist be a Seeker isn't really any more limiting than having the DAO protagonist be a Warden, I guess.

If DA3 did go that route, and currently I don't see any evidence that they will, there could still be broad leeway for your character's relationship with the Chantry depending on exactly how he/she ended up as a Seeker.

Were you a true believer who got the job because of your loyalty and piety? Are you a bitter conscript who is only here because you grew up in the Chantry, and got the job simply because the situation in Thedas has become so desperate that they'll accept anyone as a Seeker these days? Are you, in fact, a sleeper agent of the Resolutionists, cunningly deployed to destroy the Chantry from within?

It has possibilities.

[GavrielKay]

Maria Caliban wrote...
I can understand that. The Chantry is a rather divisive force in the fanbase. In many ways, that's the reason I'd be interested in playing a Seeker or a Qunari.

That said, I don't think BioWare would do this, but I wish they'd do something like it.

I think it would be fun to have the Origins model come back and allow players to choose between Seeker and whatever else.  More choices are better than fewer, assuming they can coordinate the rest of the game play.

[Maria Caliban]

berelinde wrote...

Homophobia is never excusable. That's the point. There are players who consider mandatory participation in a religion that very closely parallels a real world religion just as offensive. Telling someone else what should or should not be important to them never ends well.

I'm very comfortable telling someone that if the sexual orientation of a PC bothers them so much that they can't enjoy the game, they're being closed minded. The same with things like race and gender.

And I say this as someone for whom race, gender, and sexual orientation are important.

If playing a religious character bothers you, then I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong to feel that way, but I still think that a Seeker would make a good PC for Dragon Age III, and I would support that decision even if it turned off people who feel the same as you do.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 09 avril 2012 - 10:37 .

[CuriousArtemis]

I'm not really all that interested in seekers to be honest. I would like to continue DA:O and DA2's tradition of playing a "normal guy/girl" who just happens to be thrust into greatness.

[Maria Caliban]

I wouldn't describe the Human noble, Dwarven noble, or Mage origins as 'normal guy/girl.'

[berelinde]

I think this would be an unneccessarily stupid move for BioWare to make, especially now that they are already under a lot of scrutiny regarding player agency.

Forced religion would make the game un-fun. There are so many better ideas for a protagonist, I'm confident they'll come up with something far better. I can get my daily dose of religious intolerance a lot closer to home.