274 réponses à ce sujet

[whykikyouwhy]

LobselVith8 wrote...

CENIC wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You seeemed to have missed the part of my statement where I addressed that Hawke says someone is "with the Maker," as it's part of my argument. Clearly, the writers didn't allow us to depict Hawke as an atheist, which is compounded by the issue of his religious-leaning battle dialogue.

I guess a statement like that is much more loaded for you than it is for me. Fair enough!

It's pretty cut and dry that Hawke says [someone] is with the Maker. There's not much room for interpretation there. In addition to the Andrastian battle cries, it's pretty self-evident. I don't see why you dismiss it so easily. It's not as though Hawke has the dialogue to say that he's atheist like The Warden did, or even Aveline.

I would say that the line is actually open to interpretation. The statement could be a nod to the person-in-question - something said out of respect for that person's beliefs, and not necessarily Hawke's own personal line of faith. It could also be said as a sort of wistful musing - as in "this is what the chantry says in such a time, I wonder if that is indeed true." And no, Hawke doesn't outright frame it the way I have here, but that could certainly be interepreted by tone.

Personally, I never took Hawke to be follow the Andrastian faith one way or the other - nothing said in game gave me a concrete direction in that regard, thus, I felt that I could role-play her however I wanted to.

[TEWR]

berelinde wrote...

I am reading your posts. Every word. It's just that your arguments are not convincing. They are based on assumptions that are contrary to published canon (atheist Seekers).

Edit: And I'm not sure you're reading my posts. I'm saying that it would be okay as one possible background choice. Just not as the only one. I have also said that it would be okay to be forced into working - as a mercenary or slave - for the Seekers. Just not as a sworn and card-carrying member at the outset, without having the opportunity to say "I would sooner see you all dead."

So, to recap, your problem with playing as a Seeker is that you believe that you'd be shoehorned into believing in the Maker.

Even if you could profess a different viewpoint on the Maker's existence and that affected who recruited you. And if you're an atheist and want the Chantry to burn, ex-Seekers -- or at least people who have assistance from ex-Seekers -- come to recruit you for your skill. And maybe that doesn't necessarily mean you are an official Seeker, but just that you're working with ex-Seekers. Maybe you're a different kind of Seeker: one belonging to a group of atheists and believers that despise the Chantry.

But you'd still have a problem with it, despite the fact that you could have different viewpoints?

I'm sorry, but that makes no sense to me. Your issue is that you can't profess a different viewpoint. But if the game would allow for that, you'd still have a problem with it. So what, if a group of ex-Seekers wanted the Chantry to burn, recruited you because you share that viewpoint, and wanted to further that goal -- which would more then likely not succeed due to story reasons -- you would still have a problem with it? You would have a problem with choosing your character to be an atheist intent on destroying the Chantry and being recruited by like-minded people?

There are a few things you need to consider:

1) That codex that is being cited as the hallowed truth of the matter was written 50-60 years prior to the events of the two games we have. Their recruitment methods may have changed in that timeframe, perhaps after what happened in Dawn of the Seeker.

2) It was penned by an in-game author, and David Gaider has said that not all in-game authors have the facts of the situation and thus they're not always correct in what they believe.

3) The information he gathered was hard to come by and no one else knows much about them. It's possible that the Seekers deliberately let that information about them being solely an Andrastian-believing group -- though I still disagree with that extrapolation made by you and others -- be found so as to conceal that they recruit atheists and other people. I doubt that many people in Thedas would appreciate knowing that the Seekers have atheists in their ranks, so it could be a way to ensure that the populus believes something that isn't true.

4) Kossith Seeker:

Cultist wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux, to summarize some objections. Imagine that you are forced to start as a Tevinter Blood Mage that, at the beginning of the game, sacrifices some children in his\\her ritual and then mutilated their corpses and sends them to commit a genocide of soem remaining elves...and then goes to Orlais under cover. You propose the very same thing.

Yeah... no. That's not even remotely what I'm proposing.

[Always Alice]

Having the protaginist be a former Seeker who quit (for reasons decided by the PC) and is approached again by the order is another possibility, instead of simply starting out as a member.

[Maria Caliban]

Cultist wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux, to summarize some objections. Imagine that you are forced to start as a Tevinter Blood Mage that, at the beginning of the game, sacrifices some children in hisher ritual and then mutilated their corpses and sends them to commit a genocide of soem remaining elves...and then goes to Orlais under cover. You propose the very same thing.

I'd have no problem with this.

To be honest, I find this conversation bizarre. You're not the character. You get to control and define the character in some ways but not others.

I don't get how people can demand so much of the game but can't handle it if the game demands something in return.

[Cultist]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Yeah... no. That's not even remotely what I'm proposing.

But it is. You can travel where you can as you are undercover. Tevinter cares not about Mages and Templars' war. Orlesian and Chantry politics - tevinter interested in them more than others.
You are forced to sacrifice children and kill innocents? So what, as a Seeker you are forced to believe in sme woman that claimed to be Bride of some Maker.

Maria Caliban wrote
I'd have no problem with this.

To be honest, I find this
conversation bizarre. You're not the character. You get to control and
define the character in some ways but not others.

I don't get how people can demand so much of the game but can't handle it if the game demands something in return.

Neither do I, but a lot of people will be disgusted by the idea of sacrificing children and playing as a Tevnter Blood Mage.
Majority of BioWare fandom ar etoo used to freedom of choice in terms of protagonists.

[LobselVith8]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's pretty cut and dry that Hawke says [someone] is with the Maker. There's not much room for interpretation there. In addition to the Andrastian battle cries, it's pretty self-evident. I don't see why you dismiss it so easily. It's not as though Hawke has the dialogue to say that he's atheist like The Warden did, or even Aveline.

I would say that the line is actually open to interpretation.

Hawke saying that someone who has died is with the Maker is open to interpretation? I honestly don't understand that. It's like when I addressed my concern about Hawke appearing white in Varric's opening story, and there were people who had claimed that the developers were making a commentary on race - despite the fact that absolutely no evidence supported such a claim.

If there was meant to be some ambiguity about Hawke's beliefs, then the writers should have had him say something else. It simply doesn't ring true to me that there's any ambiguity about a person saying that someone who has died is with the Maker. The fact remains that we don't have as much control over Hawke as we did over The Warden, who could actually voice that he (or she) did not believe in the Maker.

whykikyouwhy wrote...

The statement could be a nod to the person-in-question - something said out of respect for that person's beliefs, and not necessarily Hawke's own personal line of faith. It could also be said as a sort of wistful musing - as in "this is what the chantry says in such a time, I wonder if that is indeed true." And no, Hawke doesn't outright frame it the way I have here, but that could certainly be interepreted by tone.

That is a lot of hoops to jump through in order to explain that Hawke saying that [someone] is "with the Maker" doesn't mean what he explicitly said, and argue that it doesn't mean Hawke is a firm believer. I'd rather have the option to actually have a character who didn't believe in the Maker (like The Warden) instead of having to fan fic alternative explanations to comments that are explicitly voiced by the protagonist.

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Personally, I never took Hawke to be follow the Andrastian faith one way or the other - nothing said in game gave me a concrete direction in that regard, thus, I felt that I could role-play her however I wanted to.

I always took his Andrastian lines to mean that Hawke was Andrastian, but that's how I see it. Then again, it's difficult for me to roleplay a character when I never know what he's going to actually say. It looks like that same issue is going to happen for people in Dragon Age III.

[Anvos]

Yes it does limit out atheism, but saying somebody is with the maker doesn't mean they are andrastian, it mearly means they believe in a god. So far for me my main warden and hawke have all been believers in the maker, but believe andraste was actually an apostate abomination bent on taking over the world, taking advantage of Tevinatar being weakened by the blight. Sure you haven't been able to directly express something like that but if you play it right there isn't much saying you must be andrastian.

As for the seeker subject, I would say no to being seeker at start. However I would say have origins and after your origin your character ends up in a situation that makes you declare a side in the war between seekers, templars, and mages.

[GavrielKay]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Even if you could profess a different viewpoint on the Maker's existence and that affected who recruited you. And if you're an atheist and want the Chantry to burn, ex-Seekers -- or at least people who have assistance from ex-Seekers -- come to recruit you for your skill. And maybe that doesn't necessarily mean you are an official Seeker, but just that you're working with ex-Seekers. Maybe you're a different kind of Seeker: one belonging to a group of atheists and believers that despise the Chantry.

So you want to rewrite the definition of Seeker in order to be able to stretch it to include whatever the player might want to play?  I don't buy it.  There was enough in DA2 that broke me out of character, I'd rather not start DA3 having to retcon who my character is.

[Huntress]

You can't get the title of templar/seeker without sharing their view is like saying:
1)you can suck and blow at the same time.

^ If anyone say they can suck and blow at the same time, you must show me in a video or shut up and stop lying..

Would any of us fight for a cause that we don't believe in? I don't and I won't.

Modifié par Huntress, 14 avril 2012 - 06:30 .

[Uccio]

No seekers. I don´t want to be forced to play religious character.

[Rawgrim]

I want to decide what my character should be. Being forced to play a seeker, is a no-go. Might just as well play assassin`s creed or something then.

[Mevlut Cousland]

Mage Seeker? Ewwwww please no
i'm gonna kill every mage in da3 and side only with templars
THE MAKER HATES MAGES

[Huntress]

Mevlut Cousland wrote...

Mage Seeker? Ewwwww please no
i'm gonna kill every mage in da3 and side only with templars
THE MAKER HATES MAGES

rofl thats why He made them so powerful right?

[drake heath]

You don't necessarily have to be religious to be a Seeker, there's plenty of people who would join for power, or some other reason.

Although with the character being religious, it could open some interesting forks in character development based on ideology, like instead of good vs bad, you could have puritan vs radical.

[whykikyouwhy]

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's pretty cut and dry that Hawke says [someone] is with the Maker. There's not much room for interpretation there. In addition to the Andrastian battle cries, it's pretty self-evident. I don't see why you dismiss it so easily. It's not as though Hawke has the dialogue to say that he's atheist like The Warden did, or even Aveline.

Hawke saying that someone who has died is with the Maker is open to interpretation? I honestly don't understand that. It's like when I addressed my concern about Hawke appearing white in Varric's opening story, and there were people who had claimed that the developers were making a commentary on race - despite the fact that absolutely no evidence supported such a claim.

 
Are there known Andrastian battlecries? Is there a handbook somewhere in-game that I neglected to find? <_<

If a person is raised in or around a certain faith, aspects of that religion could easily become part of that person's lexicon. There is enough evidence to warrant that the Amell-Hawke family was raised under a faith - dialogue from Leandra and Bethany point to this. I would say that their lines speak more to an actual and current belief in the Maker than Hawke's. Hawke yelling out in the heat of battle that someone will meet the Maker (which could be akin to "go to hell"), or muttering "Oh, Maker" when exasperated (something that Aveline does as well), doesn't necessarily mean that Hawke is a practicing Andrastian. It denotes familiarity with a religion that was prevalent in his/her upbringing.
 

  
If there was meant to be some ambiguity about Hawke's beliefs, then the writers should have had him say something else. It simply doesn't ring true to me that there's any ambiguity about a person saying that someone who has died is with the Maker. The fact remains that we don't have as much control over Hawke as we did over The Warden, who could actually voice that he (or she) did not believe in the Maker. 

That is a lot of hoops to jump through in order to explain that Hawke saying that [someone] is "with the Maker" doesn't mean what he explicitly said, and argue that it doesn't mean Hawke is a firm believer. I'd rather have the option to actually have a character who didn't believe in the Maker (like The Warden) instead of having to fan fic alternative explanations to comments that are explicitly voiced by the protagonist.
  

   
Why can't someone say "X is with the Maker" and it have to mean that the person uttering that is a believer? I'm not saying that your perspective is wrong, but I am trying to say that there is another way to look at the line, and at all Maker-references made by Hawke. It's not a matter of hoops. I didn't do any jumping or tumbling to arrive at the conclusion I presented. I merely heard the line, and felt that it was ambiguous.

And why should the game be so explicit in every single line of dialogue? People are going to read whatever they wish into anything said or written, in-game or otherwise. People will add their own head canon, people will inject motivation behind their character's actions no matter if it's Dragon Age or any other RPG. Isn't that part of role-playing?

If you want the ability for your character to declare that (s)he does not believe, that's one thing. But in the realm of role-playing and interpretation of what currently exists in the game, being a non-believer is indeed possible depending on your perspective.

 
I always took his Andrastian lines to mean that Hawke was Andrastian, but that's how I see it. Then again, it's difficult for me to roleplay a character when I never know what he's going to actually say. It looks like that same issue is going to happen for people in Dragon Age III.

I don't know how you have arrived at the conclusion that the "same issue" is going to appear in DA3. It's pretty early to make any assessment of what will or won't be in DA3. 

[The Elder King]

drake heath wrote...

You don't necessarily have to be religious to be a Seeker, there's plenty of people who would join for power, or some other reason.

The fact is that you don't have the freedom to join the Seekers. The Seekers (or maybe even the Chantry, before DA2) choose who will enter in their ranks. Considering that the Seekers, as an organization, are fervent Andrastian (the fact that they weren't born as an Andrastian organization doesn't matter. They are now Andraste's followers), they'll probably not let in their ranks someone who doesn't firmly believe in the Maker.
That doesn't mean that they are all fanatics. But I think they that one of the requirements for becoming a Seekers is a firm belief in the Maker.

[drake heath]

There's plenty of religious officials who don't believe in said faith. You can easily say you were faking it and became a Seeker, or they recruited you because of your skill and not your faith.

But, regardless, I don't have a problem playing a religious character, KotOR made me play a religious character, and I enjoyed that game.

Modifié par drake heath, 15 avril 2012 - 04:29 .

[jlb524]

Being forced to play a character associated with a religious group (Seekers) feels no different from being forced to play a character that cares about saving Ferelden from the Blight (Grey Warden).

I wouldn't mind and I'm one of those 'pro-mage' crazies.

It could open up some interesting RP possibilities.

Modifié par jlb524, 15 avril 2012 - 04:39 .

[The Elder King]

drake heath wrote...

There's plenty of religious officials who don't believe in said faith. You can easily say they were faking it.

What you said it's true. Though you should consider that the Seekers are a secretive organization, who would probably choose their memeber with a strict control. It's possible that there might be some of them who don't believe in the Maker, but I think it's unlikely.
It's almost the same with the Templars. There's really a low chance that you might find a Templar who doesn't believe in the Maker. The same for the Seekers.
Bioware could work from that point of view in the case they decide to make the PC a Seeker, but I still find it'd be better if they'll make the PC a person outside of the organization.

[Heather Cline]

The problem with playing a Seeker is they believe in the religious rhetoric that the Chantry spouts. With the Warden and with Hawke they skirted that issue by being a outside observer to the building mage/chantry conflict. By being forced into being a Seeker you are essentially being forced to play a religious person. It's already been proven in the game that the Seekers are apart of the Chantry, just overseers of the Templars and Knight Commanders. Therefore it wouldn't be smart to force players into a religious role what so ever.

[TheChris92]

The Wardens are a neutral body and what really unifies them all is their common goal in killing Darkspawn. They do not interfere with their members beliefs. The Grey Warden recruits, you assemble, in Awakening will sometimes discuss their beliefs/customs and question them. Like Anders does with Sigrun, or Velanna does with Oghren. I prefer having a protagonist, who has no allegiance to any organization, but then again. All I really care about is that the protagonist is likeable. And I really did like Hawke, but it would be interesting to see a different protagonist.

Modifié par TheChris92, 15 avril 2012 - 05:24 .

[jlb524]

TheChris92 wrote...
The Wardens are a neutral body and what really unifies them all is their common goal in killing Darkspawn. They do not interfere with their members beliefs.

I don't think we know enough about them to claim either way.

I thought Duncan running Jory through with his blade for 'disagreeing' was pretty intense, though.

Regardless, your PC in DA:O has to care enough about Ferelden to want to stay there and fight Darkspawn with the Grey Wardens.  I find that especially odd for a Dalish Elf, who could get the 'cure' from the GW and then sneak off in the middle of the Ostagar battle to rejoin her clan that is leaving Ferelden.

[Huntress]

jlb524 wrote...

Being forced to play a character associated with a religious group (Seekers) feels no different from being forced to play a character that cares about saving Ferelden from the Blight (Grey Warden).

I wouldn't mind and I'm one of those 'pro-mage' crazies.

It could open up some interesting RP possibilities.

Really? you didn't join the warden because you believe in it, IT was THE ONLY WAY TO GET OUT ALIVE, yes there weren't any other choice, join them or DEATH right in the intro. If Noble didn't join, he would have perish in the castle, if the Noble dwarf didn't join, he would have finished eating dead darkspawns in the deeproad, if the dalish didn't join it would ended up as a darkspawn or die in the camp, if mage didn't join, the templars would have killed him for helping a blood-mage. DID YOU GET the message now?<_<

Modifié par Huntress, 15 avril 2012 - 05:28 .

[Dakota Strider]

I was willing to listen to the OP's argument, but I am still not convinced. The Seeker makes a great antagonist, or possibly, an unknown entity, that may or may not give aid to the protagonist, depending upon role play choices in the game. I think it is very possible that there will be a choice between a couple Seeker NPC's that can join your party. They will either try to persuade you to their cause, or you may be able to persuade them to your point of view. And I would not be surprised if one of these were a potential romantic interest, as this type of tension would make great roleplay in that regard, as well.

But making a the player character a Seeker, immediately puts restrictions on the player. He/she can no longer have a chance to pursue his/her own agenda or motives, but must follow the dictates of a higher authority. If the PC rebels against the Seeker heirarchy, than DA3 becomes an entire game of struggles within the Seekers, and the chance of finding closure on other loose ends from DAO and DA2 become more remote.

I think the Seeker makes a great NPC, just like the Arch Demon, or jumping genres, the Reapers. And while I know some people would always want to play the arch villion in a game, if DA3 becomes that sort of game, it would not resemble any of the rpg's that Bioware built its reputation on.

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 15 avril 2012 - 05:35 .

[TheChris92]

jlb524 wrote...

TheChris92 wrote...
The Wardens are a neutral body and what really unifies them all is their common goal in killing Darkspawn. They do not interfere with their members beliefs.

I don't think we know enough about them to claim either way.

I thought Duncan running Jory through with his blade for 'disagreeing' was pretty intense, though.

Regardless, your PC in DA:O has to care enough about Ferelden to want to stay there and fight Darkspawn with the Grey Wardens. I find that especially odd for a Dalish Elf, who could get the 'cure' from the GW and then sneak off in the middle of the Ostagar battle to rejoin her clan that is leaving Ferelden.

I think the reason why the Dalish Warden didn't rejoin her clan is because they were already well out of her reach at the time. She would have no way of knowing where they are. You can choose to tell Alistair in Lothering that they are long gone now and it's not possible to track them down