930 réponses à ce sujet

[wsandista]

Ryzaki wrote...



As long as he doesn't fall into being a villian because he's gay and that being one of his "evil" traits I wouldn't mind. And no depraved bisexuals please. I've seen enough of those to last a lifetime.

Of course not, he would just be evil(or at least opposed to the PC) and gay. Only a dumb@ss thinks that the two are not mutually exclusive.

As far as the depraved bisexual, Dethmold in TW2 was bad enough.

[Ryzaki]

wsandista wrote...
Of course not, he would just be evil(or at least opposed to the PC) and gay. Only a dumb@ss thinks that the two are not mutually exclusive.

As far as the depraved bisexual, Dethmold in TW2 was bad enough.

Sadly Some Anvils Need To Be Dropped with some people. They would need for someone to flat out say the two are unrelated to realize that. Not talking about anyone in this thread but some people are that damn dumb.

And yeah I...I had enough of them in the manga and VNs I read. No more. Please no more.

[syllogi]

wsandista wrote...
Good. Even though I think your concern homogenizes LIs.

BTW, what does everyone think about a homosexual villain?

Will never understand how Merrill, Isabela, Fenris, and Anders all standing together could ever be seen as "homogenous".  If all you see is sexual preference when looking at those characters, you're missing out.

Why do villains need to express a sexual preference?  Jon Irenicus had a lost love, Flemeth seduced men...it's nice to get this backstory, but that's just a part of their history, not a definitive declaration of their sexual orientation.  For all we know, Irenicus had plenty of boyfriends before settling down with a woman, and Flemeth has a "one that got away" story that involves a woman.  We don't know anything but what we're told, and that's okay.  

Would Meredith have been a better character if we got some sad backstory about a past female lover?  Or what if we had known that Orsino and Quentin had a relationship?  I think the impact of either revelation would depend completely on the writing, just as any heterosexual relationship a villain could have.

How exactly do you imagine a homosexual villain would behave differently from a heterosexual villain?

[LolaLei]

Ryzaki wrote...

LolaLei wrote...
He has a theme tune that plays whenever you talk to him as well LOL. To be honest I've never been able to romance or rivalmance Fenris (not for want of trying) for some reason I can never get him to stay with Hawke when he visits her estate, I think maybe it's glitched for me.

Fenris is *very* picky. 

1. Make sure you don't romance ANYONE. I managed to sleep with Izzy once before him but I tried a second time and it didn't work. So to err on the side of caution keep your Hawke from knocking boots with anyone. You can flirt freely though. Just don't sleep with anyone. Flirt with him enough that he suggests sleeping together. I believe that's what triggers his romance. I'm not 100% sure though.

2. Try to get his questioning beliefs BEFORE you do a bitter pill (yes it sounds off but yes you can do this), it's best if you keep him in your party for all of act 1 or 2 and be CONSISTENT in dealings with mages/slavers (If you want to rival him be very pro mage and set every mage you can free, if you want to friend him do the reverse. Be pro slavery for rivalry and anti slavery for friendship (though this honestly isn't needed he has enough rivalry points to make up for the friendship points you get for being anti-slavery). Try to be very diplomatic in dealings with slavers (even if you're not going to let them go simply not attacking them instantly gets you rival points), do the reverse for friendship points. If you take him around in act 1 you should be able to trigger his QB very early on in Act 2. Even before you do a bitter pill.

3. If you can't trigger his QB before a bitter pill get enough friendship/rivalry points to trigger it. Encouraging his anger gives friendship, discouraging it gives rivalry, if he leaves your house after you pick the heart go back to his home and see if the QB triggers. If your F/R is high enough it should and go back to Hawke's house and the romance scene should trigger then.

Tried all of that but he's having none of it LOL!

[wsandista]

syllogi wrote...

Will never understand how Merrill, Isabela, Fenris, and Anders all standing together could ever be seen as "homogenous".  If all you see is sexual preference when looking at those characters, you're missing out.

All of them are intrested in Hawke with no restrictions. I would like to see extremly defined NPCs, and sexuality is a large part of what defines who characters are. With all-bi, I see a continuing trend to make LIs be more accepting of the PC, which would end up where LIs are nothing but virtual playmates who are completely subject to the layers will.

Why do villains need to express a sexual preference?  Jon Irenicus had a lost love, Flemeth seduced men...it's nice to get this backstory, but that's just a part of their history, not a definitive declaration of their sexual orientation.  For all we know, Irenicus had plenty of boyfriends before settling down with a woman, and Flemeth has a "one that got away" story that involves a woman.  We don't know anything but what we're told, and that's okay.  

Would Meredith have been a better character if we got some sad backstory about a past female lover?  Or what if we had known that Orsino and Quentin had a relationship?  I think the impact of either revelation would depend completely on the writing, just as any heterosexual relationship a villain could have.

How exactly do you imagine a homosexual villain would behave differently from a heterosexual villain?

I would like to see a homosexual villian who isn't horribly campy or depraved.

[LolaLei]

wsandista wrote...

I would like to see a homosexual villian who isn't horribly campy or depraved.

LOL well, it might be set in Orlais so hell knows what we could end up with if the villian is an Orlesian homosexual... I'd like to think they'd avoid stereotypes!

[TJX2045]

LolaLei wrote...

wsandista wrote...

LI's should be hard to romance, and if the PC does something they don't like, they should react accordingly.

Now THAT I agree with!

I definitely felt that the love interests in DA2 were too easy to woo/seduce, to the extent that they felt more like an excuse for Hawke to get laid, rather than a nice little optional addition to the story to enhance our game play experience, I feel like perhaps the friendship/rivalmance thing was partly to blame for that because some of the companion rivalmances seem really out of character. For example, I can understand someone like Isabela rivalmancing Hawke because she enjoys a little conflict in her relationships to keep things interesting, BUT for someone like Merrill who is known to be sensitive to even consider dating a Hawke who has opposed and insulted her during the course of 10 years seems odd to me, especially considering how rude Hawke can be when you pick his/her more aggressive dialogue options. Another example is Anders dating a pro-Templar Hawke, if he's as dedicated to his cause as he evidentally is, I expected him to be completely disgusted at the thought of dating anyone that agrees with the captivity of Mages.

... It almost seemed a waste to give the romanceable companions such strong beliefs if they weren't going to come into play during potential romance persuits. I had hoped that it would give us pause for thought in the way we played our game beyond just getting a telling off from your love interest for not agreeing with them lol.

I agree here.  Some of the Rivalmances MIGHT get away with it if the character was the type to let people walk all over them.  However, I am sure Fenris and Anders would've killed someone like Hawke before even letting them get that close.  I doubt Anders would even be in love like he waswith a rivalmance Hawke.  I'm pretty sure he would've probably...oh, can't say anything withouot spoiling the end of DA2.  But I'm sure THAT would've happened with Hawke there with them. 

What I found the strangest is Anders at the end and his response to the climax to a friendship Hawke vs rival Hawke...it seemed reversed...I didn't like it AT ALL now that I think about it.  I really wish this was in a spoiler forum so I could go really in depth about how it seems so far from his character on the friendship path when he accepts what happened as opposed to his rival path where he is in denial.  

With that said, I do not mind if a romance gets LOCKED OUT because you REALLY REALLY pissed off a character.  Maybe some characters you can work on rebuilding the broken pieces but there's some uncertainty still and if you screw up again you're done (second chance type thing), it's done for good.

Though I'm sure that if you said something that pissed off a character a whole bunch you were probably pissed by something they said and chose the option to smack them with a dose of harsh reality.  LOL

Modifié par TJX2045, 10 juin 2012 - 02:29 .

[Iakus]

wsandista wrote...

BTW, what does everyone think about a homosexual villain?

Irrelevant to being a villain.

As a character who is a villain, could be a valid aspect to a backstory.

[wsandista]

iakus wrote...

wsandista wrote...

BTW, what does everyone think about a homosexual villain?

Irrelevant to being a villain.

As a character who is a villain, could be a valid aspect to a backstory.

Already addressed that.

[Ryzaki]

LolaLei wrote...
Tried all of that but he's having none of it LOL!

Really? Youch. I find it easy to romance Fen according to that guide. D: I'm not sure how to help I'm afraid.

[LolaLei]

TJX2045 wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

wsandista wrote...

LI's should be hard to romance, and if the PC does something they don't like, they should react accordingly.

Now THAT I agree with!

I definitely felt that the love interests in DA2 were too easy to woo/seduce, to the extent that they felt more like an excuse for Hawke to get laid, rather than a nice little optional addition to the story to enhance our game play experience, I feel like perhaps the friendship/rivalmance thing was partly to blame for that because some of the companion rivalmances seem really out of character. For example, I can understand someone like Isabela rivalmancing Hawke because she enjoys a little conflict in her relationships to keep things interesting, BUT for someone like Merrill who is known to be sensitive to even consider dating a Hawke who has opposed and insulted her during the course of 10 years seems odd to me, especially considering how rude Hawke can be when you pick his/her more aggressive dialogue options. Another example is Anders dating a pro-Templar Hawke, if he's as dedicated to his cause as he evidentally is, I expected him to be completely disgusted at the thought of dating anyone that agrees with the captivity of Mages.

... It almost seemed a waste to give the romanceable companions such strong beliefs if they weren't going to come into play during potential romance persuits. I had hoped that it would give us pause for thought in the way we played our game beyond just getting a telling off from your love interest for not agreeing with them lol.

I agree here.  Some of the Rivalmances MIGHT get away with it if the character was the type to let people walk all over them.  However, I am sure Fenris and Anders would've killed someone like Hawke before even letting them get that close.  I doubt Anders would even be in love like he waswith a rivalmance Hawke.  I'm pretty sure he would've probably...oh, can't say anything withouot spoiling the end of DA2.  But I'm sure THAT would've happened with Hawke there with them. 

What I found the strangest is Anders at the end and his response to the climax to a friendship Hawke vs rival Hawke...it seemed reversed...I didn't like it AT ALL now that I think about it.  I really wish this was in a spoiler forum so I could go really in depth about how it seems so far from his character on the friendship path when he accepts what happened as opposed to his rival path where he is in denial.  

With that said, I do not mind if a romance gets LOCKED OUT because you REALLY REALLY pissed off a character.  Maybe some characters you can work on rebuilding the broken pieces but there's some uncertainty still and if you screw up again you're done (second chance type thing), it's done for good.

Though I'm sure that if you said something that pissed off a character a whole bunch you were probably pissed by something they said and chose the option to smack them with a dose of harsh reality.  LOL

They done something similar with Kaidan in ME1, if you were too ruthless he'd lose interest in you and the romance would be locked out. Then in ME3 if you "cheated" on him with someone else and you aren't honest about it he'll tell you to leave and he'll refuse to rejoin the Normandy crew even though he's still in love with you lol.

[Ihatebadgames]

wsandista wrote...

syllogi wrote...

Will never understand how Merrill, Isabela, Fenris, and Anders all standing together could ever be seen as "homogenous".  If all you see is sexual preference when looking at those characters, you're missing out.

All of them are intrested in Hawke with no restrictions. I would like to see extremly defined NPCs, and sexuality is a large part of what defines who characters are. With all-bi, I see a continuing trend to make LIs be more accepting of the PC, which would end up where LIs are nothing but virtual playmates who are completely subject to the layers will.

Why do villains need to express a sexual preference?  Jon Irenicus had a lost love, Flemeth seduced men...it's nice to get this backstory, but that's just a part of their history, not a definitive declaration of their sexual orientation.  For all we know, Irenicus had plenty of boyfriends before settling down with a woman, and Flemeth has a "one that got away" story that involves a woman.  We don't know anything but what we're told, and that's okay.  

Would Meredith have been a better character if we got some sad backstory about a past female lover?  Or what if we had known that Orsino and Quentin had a relationship?  I think the impact of either revelation would depend completely on the writing, just as any heterosexual relationship a villain could have.

How exactly do you imagine a homosexual villain would behave differently from a heterosexual villain?

I would like to see a homosexual villian who isn't horribly campy or depraved.

I'd like to see any villian in a BW game not be campy,depraved or silly looking.I want evil to be evil.Desire demon that change looks(female to male and vice versa)They(the villian)should be able to scare the crap out of you.

[wsandista]

Ihatebadgames wrote...

wsandista wrote...

syllogi wrote...

Will never understand how Merrill, Isabela, Fenris, and Anders all standing together could ever be seen as "homogenous".  If all you see is sexual preference when looking at those characters, you're missing out.

All of them are intrested in Hawke with no restrictions. I would like to see extremly defined NPCs, and sexuality is a large part of what defines who characters are. With all-bi, I see a continuing trend to make LIs be more accepting of the PC, which would end up where LIs are nothing but virtual playmates who are completely subject to the layers will.

Why do villains need to express a sexual preference?  Jon Irenicus had a lost love, Flemeth seduced men...it's nice to get this backstory, but that's just a part of their history, not a definitive declaration of their sexual orientation.  For all we know, Irenicus had plenty of boyfriends before settling down with a woman, and Flemeth has a "one that got away" story that involves a woman.  We don't know anything but what we're told, and that's okay.  

Would Meredith have been a better character if we got some sad backstory about a past female lover?  Or what if we had known that Orsino and Quentin had a relationship?  I think the impact of either revelation would depend completely on the writing, just as any heterosexual relationship a villain could have.

How exactly do you imagine a homosexual villain would behave differently from a heterosexual villain?

I would like to see a homosexual villian who isn't horribly campy or depraved.

I'd like to see any villian in a BW game not be campy,depraved or silly looking.I want evil to be evil.Desire demon that change looks(female to male and vice versa)They(the villian)should be able to scare the crap out of you.

I agree, but I would also like to see a villain that you can sympathize with as well. DA3 doesn't have to have only 1 villain.

[jlb524]

wsandista wrote...

All of them are intrested in Hawke with no restrictions.

Which makes Leliana and Morrigan homogenous in comparison considering they are interested in a male Warden with no restrictions beyond that.

[TJX2045]

Nyoka, I couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you for that.

[wsandista]

jlb524 wrote...

wsandista wrote...

All of them are intrested in Hawke with no restrictions.

Which makes Leliana and Morrigan homogenous in comparison considering they are interested in a male Warden with no restrictions beyond that.

Maybe youu should look at some previous posts where I said that was a problem.

[mesmerizedish]

wsandista wrote...

...sexuality is a large part of what defines who characters are...

Bullshit.

It can be, as with Isabela or Morrigan (whose romance is uncomfortably couched in gender roles). Or it can not be, as with Merrill or Fenris.

If you want more characters to be sexually defined, then fine! But I have yet to read any argument that doesn't ultimately boil down to "I'm just more comfortable with straight people."

I'd like companions who are defined by things OTHER than sexuality. It's fine to have companions whose sexual preferences are at the forefront, but I don't think someone for whom, if asked to define them in five words or less, you would answer with "straight" is a very interesting character at all, let alone an interesting romance.

[upsettingshorts]

In this thread: A crowd of flimsy strawmen - against efficient inclusiveness - that rivals the Terracotta Army.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 juin 2012 - 04:18 .

[wsandista]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

wsandista wrote...

...sexuality is a large part of what defines who characters are...

Bullshit.

It can be, as with Isabela or Morrigan (whose romance is uncomfortably couched in gender roles). Or it can not be, as with Merrill or Fenris.

If you want more characters to be sexually defined, then fine! But I have yet to read any argument that doesn't ultimately boil down to "I'm just more comfortable with straight people."

I'd like companions who are defined by things OTHER than sexuality. It's fine to have companions whose sexual preferences are at the forefront, but I don't think someone for whom, if asked to define them in five words or less, you would answer with "straight" is a very interesting character at all, let alone an interesting romance.

I actually have made that argument. SEVERAL GOD DAMN TIMES. If you think being sexuality is a choice or doesn't effect who you are that is bullsh!t. I have also gone on and on and on and on about how every NPC needs to be very defined in every way possible only to have someone jump in and tell me I just don't like gay people.

[upsettingshorts]

wsandista wrote...

 If you think being sexuality ... doesn't effect who you are that is bullsh!t. 

Prove how it does in Thedas.  Show your work, provide examples.

[wsandista]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

wsandista wrote...

 If you think being sexuality ... doesn't effect who you are that is bullsh!t. 

Prove how it does in Thedas.  Show your work, provide examples.

Does human nature somehow function differently in Thedas?

First of all let us put the whole sentence here

If you think sexuality is a choice or doesn't effect who you are that is bullsh!t

Admittedly I made a grammatical error. I think "being" is a vestigial part of a sentence I intended to write but felt it did not fit.

Anyways, your sexuality isn't some choice you make, like what to wear or something, it is part of who you are. Similarly to how you can't make yourself like something, you can not convince yourself what gender(s) you are attracted to.

Secondly, sexuality does define who you are. It doesn't determine your entire life or dominate your preferences, but it is part of who you are.

Modifié par wsandista, 10 juin 2012 - 04:35 .

[upsettingshorts]

wsandista wrote...

Does human nature somehow function differently in Thedas?

Okay, we need to go back a step then.

Define your position on what constitutes "human nature" with regards to sexuality.

Then see previous post.

[wsandista]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Does human nature somehow function differently in Thedas?

Okay, we need to go back a step then.

Define your position on what constitutes "human nature" with regards to sexuality.

Then see previous post.

I believe that sexuality is generally defined as which gender(s) you are atracted to. There is more to it than that but for the purpose of a consise reply I will assume that sexuality regards only attraction.

I define Human Nature as the general behavior of individuals. We generally respond to certain stimuli in similar ways, although our ways of handling those responses will differ. Who we are attracted to is part of our nature. A variety of factors influence that attraction and sexuality is among them. If someone prefers something for what ever reason, then that is part of their nature.

Already responded to previous post.

Modifié par wsandista, 10 juin 2012 - 04:59 .

[upsettingshorts]

You don't understand the question I'm trying to get you to answer.

I am not looking for definitions, I'm looking for practical consequences to a particular sexuality as regards to a character's perceptions and behavior in Thedas.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 juin 2012 - 05:07 .