63 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

It's expectedthat DA3 will feature more mages and templars.

For the love of all that is good and holy, please do a better job of writing mages and templars. The situation changed from gray and morally complex to downright hillarious/insane.

In DA2 it was raining mages, and they turned into abominations at the drop of the that. And those same abominations were pitifull to boot, easily dispatched.

What DA2 failed to do:

- properly present the danger of mages
- properly present the danger of abominations. Seriously, the players don't fear or dread aboninations at all - they wipe the floor with them. How you can you then expect the player to belive abominatiosn are dangerous, when they are so easily dfeated?
- properly present the templars and the Circle (seriously, would it have killed you to show at least one templar getting disciplined?)
- faield to show the danger and power of mind control (this is THE most corrupting power a magecan have, and it's totalyl glossed over. Only one incident, which Hawke cna brush off with HEROIC WILLPOWER! What wasted potential)


As it is, mages ar presented ar madmen foaming at the mouth, and templars as natzi's that do torture for s*** and giggles.

Bring back the greyness and moral ambiguity. Right now most people just want to carpet bomb both.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 20 juillet 2012 - 08:55 .

[caradoc2000]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Only one incident, which Hawke cna brush off with HEROIC WILLPOWER!

Two incidents.

[Augustei]

One thing that they need to address in all things dragon age whether it be the novel or the movie or the games is the Templars ability to silence a mage from being able to use their magic.. Its like they forget they can do it. In DA2 and the movie especially the Templars get beat pretty bad by the mages magic and I keep thinking "Why the hell don't they silence their abilities?!"

And yeah both sides need to be presented alot better as you say. Also there is to many mage supporters amongst the fans in comparison to Templar supporters. Theres probably like 90% mage supporters and 10% Templar supporters. Bioware should attempt to get it closer to 50/50 somehow maybe demonize mages a bit =P but not get to carried away they seem to have attempted to do so in DA2 a bit but it didn't really seem to work out well.

[Face of Evil]

What is said here that couldn't have been said in this other thread here?

Here's my issue with your complaint and complaints in general about how mages and templars were "too crazy" in DA2:

I know that because Dragon Age dabbles in morally complex issues that have no easy answers, a lot of people fall into the trap that these issues should be dealt with in a thoughtful, even-handed way.

Except, at the same time, the Dragon Age games are adventure RPGs. You aren't playing the moderator in a political debate; you're playing an adventurer who battles monsters in dank ruins. You fight to save yourself, the lives of innocents, or the entire world.

If the NPCs you dealt with were all level-headed and reasonable people, you wouldn't be called in to deal with them. A sane person wouldn't have commited the same crimes as Tarohne, Quentin or Ser Alrik.

Imagine how an Act of Mercy would have gone if everyone involved was amenable to reason:

Decimus: The templars have come!
Grace: Decimus, no! Whoever these strangers are, they are no templars.
Decimus: Oh, really? My mistake, then. Good thing you pointed that out or I may have over-reacted.
Hawke: Do you lead these mages? I have come to tell you that the templars are nearing your location. One of their number stands outside this cave and others will soon be on the way.
Decimus: I feared that might happen. If we have no options, then we must surrender, as there is no way we could stand up to such overwhelming odds.
(outside the cave)
Ser Kerras: I will take these apostates into custody. It is a relief that we were able to locate these mages before they became susceptible to demonic corruption. You have done a service for the templar order. (marches away)
Hawke: (after everyone leaves) Wow, that was easy.

That might have been more realistic, but certainly not as fun. Me? I enjoyed killing Decimus and his undead lackeys. I enjoyed killing Ser Kerras as well, and I enjoyed looting all their bodies afterwards and gaining some rather nice gear. Which, incidentally, I used later to kill even more people.

Ultimately, I quite liked DA2 for providing me an opportunity to kill lots of enemies and perform some suitably heroic acts, as well as providing a more personal story than the first game. The actual failures of DA2 as I saw them were the lack of variety in environments and monsters.

Abominations could stand to be stronger — it'd be nice to see more of them actually casting spells instead of just clawing you to death all the time. Though they were still stronger than the abominations of DAO, which were total weaksauce.

Modifié par Face of Evil, 20 juillet 2012 - 09:35 .

[mp911]

they were both too extreme in da2, templars were fanatics and mages couldn't be trusted,
due to the danger of magic templar are needed but mage have the right to rebel so they should be more subtle when talking with mage/templar characters, going toward 50/50 supporters for each side would be good

[Lotion Soronarr]

XxDeonxX wrote...

One thing that they need to address in all things dragon age whether it be the novel or the movie or the games is the Templars ability to silence a mage from being able to use their magic.. Its like they forget they can do it. In DA2 and the movie especially the Templars get beat pretty bad by the mages magic and I keep thinking "Why the hell don't they silence their abilities?!"

And yeah both sides need to be presented alot better as you say. Also there is to many mage supporters amongst the fans in comparison to Templar supporters. Theres probably like 90% mage supporters and 10% Templar supporters. Bioware should attempt to get it closer to 50/50 somehow maybe demonize mages a bit =P but not get to carried away they seem to have attempted to do so in DA2 a bit but it didn't really seem to work out well.

That's because thy didn't demonize them - they went over the top to the point it lost credibility.

Seriouly, all abominations should be hanldleded like Connor, Uldred or the Baroness.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Completely agree. Mustache twirling Mages and sadistic Templars are all i saw in DA2. It was so ridiculous. Instead of showing me both the good and the bad of both sides, i was shown the insanity of both sides, CONSTANTLY.

But out of the Templars and the mages, the mages were by far the worst written. The amount of insane blood mages in comparison to sadistic Templars was a ratio of about 3:1. Ironically, DAO portrayed the Mage and Templar debacle far better than DA2.

[Arthur Cousland]

In DA3, there need to be less mages who turn into abominations just by sneezing, and more that use mind control (Idunna) or that seek power, not just independence (Tarohne).

In addition to all of the crazy blood mages in DA2, there were also plenty of templars who seemed to enjoy killing mages for sport.

I just don't agree with the templar idea that it's their "divine right" to do what they please with mages, which leads to many of them turning to blood magic in the first place.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Arthur Cousland wrote...

In DA3, there need to be less mages who turn into abominations just by sneezing, and more that use mind control (Idunna) or that seek power, not just independence (Tarohne)..

Disagree with the force of Thor's hammer. We need more believable motivations, and less "MMWAUAHAHAHA POWAAAAAAA!!!".

What i'd like to see is mages that are more like the companions. NPC's turning to blood magic for other reasons than to stick it to the Templars or to gain awesum powerz. Like Merill for example. People becoming abominations for causes they believe in, and not just wanting to see the world burn because they got a few spanks in the Circle. Like Anders (A fine line, but his original intent was to help mages without raging at every Templar in sight. It eventually got away from him).

We need more believable mages. Power hungry mages just make me sigh (Morrigan being the exception, because there is far more depth to her).

[Dave of Canada]

 I want to see among the mages...

• Mages which behave like ordinary people, more characters like Bethany and Jowan which just seem to be victims of circumstance and their powers are just "tacked" on. The most "civilian" mage.
• Mages which see freedom as something they want to achieve, though they do mind the costs to achieve it. The idealists which work toward freedom but will oppose the blood mages and those who turn to more extreme measures.
• Mages which see freedom as the only thing, they strive toward getting it at any cost and wouldn't mind killing an entire village of commoners to use their corpses and make deals with demons all the time, though some are reasonable and others are fanatical. Abuse of mind control can come into play.
• The Chantry loyalists which want to see things return back to the way things were, some more fanatical than others.

I want to see among the Templar...

• Templar which joined because they genuinly believe in defending the commoners, they see themselves as the protectors of the weak and strive to continue their duties to them despite their seperation from the Chantry.
• Templar which see mages as super dangerous, similar to Meredith pre-insanity. They don't care about what they do provided the mages are contained, they abuse mages and perhaps will kill commoners out of paranoia thinking they're hiding mages.
• Templar which their addictions are showing to their fullest, delerium and attacks on caravans showing them to be a public threat.
• Templar which care more about the mages, similar to Thrask and his daughter and would likely betray the Templar to the mages assuming something crosses their line.

Abominations should be treated similar to ogres in terms of frequency, you don't see them often but they're far more dangerous--similar to the chantry / meredith's story.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 20 juillet 2012 - 11:40 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Completely agree. Mustache twirling Mages and sadistic Templars are all i saw in DA2. It was so ridiculous. Instead of showing me both the good and the bad of both sides, i was shown the insanity of both sides, CONSTANTLY.

But out of the Templars and the mages, the mages were by far the worst written. The amount of insane blood mages in comparison to sadistic Templars was a ratio of about 3:1. Ironically, DAO portrayed the Mage and Templar debacle far better than DA2.

At least Orsino seemed like a likeable and rational fellow...right up untill the very end.
Ther's 2-3 templars that were OK.
The entire Circle in Kirkwall as an organization was as done badly as mages were individually. They made it look like bloomin' Auschwitz.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Arthur Cousland wrote...

In DA3, there need to be less mages who turn into abominations just by sneezing, and more that use mind control (Idunna) or that seek power, not just independence (Tarohne).

The severity of blood magic and abominations has to be properly shown. Everywhere.
Off the top of my head:
- a dalish clan wiped out by a Keeper tuned abomination
- stories of abominations in Rivian and Tevinter
- a blood mage controling half hte village

I just don't agree with the templar idea that it's their "divine right" to do what they please with mages, which leads to many of them turning to blood magic in the first place.

You refeering to Cullen? That's not what he said.
IIRC, he said that they are charged with the task (wardens of mages) by divine right. That doesn't transalte as "do what we please".

[Lotion Soronarr]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Arthur Cousland wrote...

In DA3, there need to be less mages who turn into abominations just by sneezing, and more that use mind control (Idunna) or that seek power, not just independence (Tarohne)..

Disagree with the force of Thor's hammer. We need more believable motivations, and less "MMWAUAHAHAHA POWAAAAAAA!!!".

Power is a believable motive for a mage. After all, they can't get power the normal way (politics, law) and blood magic (mind control) is the best superpower ever.
Just as long as 99% of mages aren't like that, it's OK.

What i'd like to see is mages that are more like the companions. NPC's turning to blood magic for other reasons than to stick it to the Templars or to gain awesum powerz. Like Merill for example. People becoming abominations for causes they believe in, and not just wanting to see the world burn because they got a few spanks in the Circle. Like Anders (A fine line, but his original intent was to help mages without raging at every Templar in sight. It eventually got away from him).

A whole slew of motivations, yes. But ultimatively there won't be time to dwell deep into the motivations for every mage you encounter.  For the most part you'd be meeting them when they already are itn the "Anders blowing up people" stage.
And some just might be loony.

[Fallstar]

The contents of this thread:

Mages and Templars being written as insane and stupid caricatures.

It was a bit too long for me to copy and paste every post.

Modifié par DuskWarden, 20 juillet 2012 - 01:52 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

Well that isn't what i want. I don't want to meet them in their "latter stages", as on the surface they'd all be exactly the same. I don't want Uldred's running everywhere, twirling their mustaches with pedo grins. It's acceptable for little side missions, but not for major plot missions.

I want to delve into their motivations, as that will ultimately be something many could relate to, and would help in garnering sympathy from the player. The blood mage hunted relentlessly by the Templars because he wanted to cure his mother of a terminal illness. Showing us that blood magic isn't inherently evil, and is not used solely to kill people with demons.

Stuff along those lines. Crazy mages are good and fun in moderation, but if DA3 really wants me to see the plight of both sides, it's going to have to get serious with it's writing.

[Xilizhra]

Ahahahaha. Glorious; you frame everything in terms of wanting the templars to be completely right? Well, I'm afraid that's not going to happen; in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the Order went the way of Cerberus and became straight-up villains, maybe even the main foe of DA3. Their leader in Asunder would definitely fit that. Mages will be balanced better, I think, as they admitted to screwing up their presentation in DA2, while templars will likely be as they always have: a hideous moral blemish on Thedas' face, but now more obvious about it.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote...

Ahahahaha. Glorious; you frame everything in terms of wanting the templars to be completely right? Well, I'm afraid that's not going to happen; in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the Order went the way of Cerberus and became straight-up villains, maybe even the main foe of DA3. Their leader in Asunder would definitely fit that. Mages will be balanced better, I think, as they admitted to screwing up their presentation in DA2, while templars will likely be as they always have: a hideous moral blemish on Thedas' face, but now more obvious about it.

Actually no. According to you the mages are provably and factualy compeltely right aready.

And if you are right, then where is the greyness? Where is the moral ambiguity if one side is a moustache-twirling, puppy-kicking villain?
Of course, you don't like moral ambiguity. Probably stains your brain too much.

I want and expect for DA3 to be closer to Origins. You just want for templars to pull a Cerberus to justfy your one-sided obsession.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Well that isn't what i want. I don't want to meet them in their "latter stages", as on the surface they'd all be exactly the same. I don't want Uldred's running everywhere, twirling their mustaches with pedo grins. It's acceptable for little side missions, but not for major plot missions.

I didn't say for everyone, but for most NPC. And that holds true for templars and mages alike.
how do you propose to develop htem and hteir change in a short time-span?

For Anders it worked because Anders traveled with us.
But you can't honestly expect that every mage the player encounter is someone he knew for years and he keeps bumping  into them.

If you ask me, there should be LESS mage characters. Mages are supposed to be rare and so are abomination; so they shoundn't be propping up behinf every rock and bush.  Fewer characters, but better developed.

Showing us that blood magic isn't inherently evil, and is not used solely to kill people with demons.

That one would be debatable.

[Xilizhra]

Actually no. According to you the mages are provably and factualy compeltely right aready.

Slightly true, but I refer only to a statement of Gaider's.

And if you are right, then where is the greyness? Where is the moral ambiguity if one side is a moustache-twirling, puppy-kicking villain?

The templars have never been anything but, they were just sufficiently deceptive in Origins. Like, say, Cerberus. And the moral ambiguity can come with internal conflicts in the mage issue, such as the use of blood magic, as well as issues with the civilian Chantry.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Bollocks.

You have only one agenda on your mind, you coudn't care less about "good writing".
Templars coud be written like drooling monsters and you wouldn't bat an eye, nor would oyu call it bad writing. But if someone writes mages like that? BIOWARE, HOW COLD YOU?? WAAAAAAAAH!!!!
So hypocritical.

[Xilizhra]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Bollocks.

You have only one agenda on your mind, you coudn't care less about "good writing".
Templars coud be written like drooling monsters and you wouldn't bat an eye, nor would oyu call it bad writing. But if someone writes mages like that? BIOWARE, HOW COLD YOU?? WAAAAAAAAH!!!!
So hypocritical.

How would I bat an eye when "drooling monsters" is how they already are? All they need to do is maintain consistency across games.

[Ophir147]

Xilizhra wrote...


How would I bat an eye when "drooling monsters" is how they already are? All they need to do is maintain consistency across games.

The consistency you're asking for seems a lot like asking Bioware to strip the individuality from Templars and asking us to believe that they are all the same

[Xilizhra]

Ophir147 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...


How would I bat an eye when "drooling monsters" is how they already are? All they need to do is maintain consistency across games.

The consistency you're asking for seems a lot like asking Bioware to strip the individuality from Templars and asking us to believe that they are all the same

Hardly. It's clear that many templars have different takes on their lives of abusive internment and periodic genocide. However, the ones who break out of that to become genuinely decent people... well, judging from DA2's Thrask and Keran, they don't stay templars for long. Not loyal ones, at any rate.

[Maclimes]

Xilizhra wrote...

Hardly. It's clear that many templars have different takes on their lives of abusive internment and periodic genocide. However, the ones who break out of that to become genuinely decent people... well, judging from DA2's Thrask and Keran, they don't stay templars for long. Not loyal ones, at any rate.

There's your problem, right there.

Instead, look at Gregoir in DA:O. He and Irving had a competitive, intense relationship, but at the end of the day, they respected each other (and may even have been friends). When he called for the Right of Annulment, it was with regret at the necessity, and he very quickly jumped at the opportunity for the Warden to prove it unnecessary. 

[Xilizhra]

Maclimes wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Hardly. It's clear that many templars have different takes on their lives of abusive internment and periodic genocide. However, the ones who break out of that to become genuinely decent people... well, judging from DA2's Thrask and Keran, they don't stay templars for long. Not loyal ones, at any rate.

There's your problem, right there.

Instead, look at Gregoir in DA:O. He and Irving had a competitive, intense relationship, but at the end of the day, they respected each other (and may even have been friends). When he called for the Right of Annulment, it was with regret at the necessity, and he very quickly jumped at the opportunity for the Warden to prove it unnecessary. 

Greagoir is barely better than Meredith, and he wasn't driven partially insane by childhood trauma before going all the way from a magic sword. He declared Tranquility on someone innocent of harming anyone, then summary execution (in addition to maintaining "traditions" like the Harrowing). And Irving is a collaborator luring curious apprentices to their doom by planting books on blood magic in the library there. I find them both disgusting and see few redeeming qualities in Ferelden's Circle aside from being less outright hellish than Kirkwall's.