343 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Squiggles1334 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Actually, and it really pains me to admit this considering I think Cailin was kinda short on wits

But Maric seemed like such a pragmatic and shrewd king. Perhaps the brainy genes alternate generations? I mean, I might like Alistair as a character and such, but I would never in a hundred years ever unironically refer to him as particularly bright.

Maybe they skip a couple of generations?  Or maybe Cailin is a really good actor?

[Original182]

Squiggles1334 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Actually, and it really pains me to admit this considering I think Cailin was kinda short on wits

But Maric seemed like such a pragmatic and shrewd king. Perhaps the brainy genes alternate generations? I mean, I might like Alistair as a character and such, but I would never in a hundred years ever unironically refer to him as particularly bright.

There is a quote something to the effect of: Rulers are made, not born.

Maric had no choice but to be shrewd to survive, and even more shrewd to drive off the Orlesians. I don't think intelligence can be passed down.

So Cailan did not have to go through the brutal experience of rebelling against the Orlesians like his father did. He didn't have to think that much, hence he falls short of his father's glory.

[Sidney]

Squiggles1334 wrote..
But Maric seemed like such a pragmatic and shrewd king. Perhaps the brainy genes alternate generations? I mean, I might like Alistair as a character and such, but I would never in a hundred years ever unironically refer to him as particularly bright.

I don't think there's anything in game that says that Loghain's vision of Cailin is anything but true. Cailin is a romantic simpleton who is ill equipped to lead a 2 car funeral let alone a nation at war.

Anora, again by all accounts and not just hers, does the grunt work in the kingdom while Cailin does "photo-ops". Duncan doesn't disagree with you if you call Cailin a dope, he just says he's the King which is damnation with faint praise. Cailin doesn't develop a strategy and really barely seems to grasp what he's asked to do at the planning session for Ostagar.

Modifié par Sidney, 21 décembre 2009 - 05:14 .

[Sidney]

Sidney wrote...

Squiggles1334 wrote..
But Maric seemed like such a pragmatic and shrewd king. Perhaps the brainy genes alternate generations? I mean, I might like Alistair as a character and such, but I would never in a hundred years ever unironically refer to him as particularly bright.

I don't think there's anything in game that says that Loghain's vision of Cailin is anything but true. Cailin is a romantic simpleton who is ill equipped to lead a 2 car funeral let alone a nation at war.

Anora, again by all accounts and not just hers, does the grunt work in the kingdom while Cailin does "photo-ops". Duncan doesn't disagree with you if you call Cailin a dope, he just says he's the King which is damnation with faint praise. Cailin doesn't develop a strategy and really barely seems to grasp what he's asked to do at the planning session for Ostagar.

[Squiggles1334]

Sidney, I think you might have misread that. We all seem pretty much in agreement that Cailin probably only has a 20 watt bulb in a 100 watt lamp.

[TheMadCat]

Eh I don't know. He seemed more blinded in his quest for personal glory and to match his fathers legendary status then just simply being dumb. I wouldn't call the man smart now, but I feel he saw the paranoia eating away at Loghain and just didn't completely trust him though I highly doubt he knew what was coming. Really not all that much on Cailan aside from his obvious glory hounding and the fact he was whipped bad by his woman so perhaps I'm reading a bit to much between the lines. Maybe that new DLC will shed something new.

[Ski Mask Wei]

While the Old God Baby storyline could have the most potential I hope Bioware does something like ME2 for the sequels. My warden was way too smart to fall for Witches of the Wilds plots but unfortunately wasn't smart enough to not knock her up normally.



Y'all could've mentioned I was about to hit it raw Bioware. I damn sure would've put on the Glyph of Trojan (my character was mage) .

[kraftykid114]

Ski Mask Wei wrote...

While the Old God Baby storyline could have the most potential I hope Bioware does something like ME2 for the sequels. My warden was way too smart to fall for Witches of the Wilds plots but unfortunately wasn't smart enough to not knock her up normally.

Y'all could've mentioned I was about to hit it raw Bioware. I damn sure would've put on the Glyph of Trojan (my character was mage) .

"Y'all could've mentioned I was about to hit it raw Bioware."   <- that made my entire nigh, hillarious my friend, i can imagine the giant flashing letters on screen "warning about to tap that a**!"

[Lotion Soronarr]

Squiggles1334 wrote...

Sidney, I think you might have misread that. We all seem pretty much in agreement that Cailin probably only has a 20 watt bulb in a 100 watt lamp.

No, we're not all in agreement.

[Ski Mask Wei]

kraftykid114 wrote...

Ski Mask Wei wrote...

While the Old God Baby storyline could have the most potential I hope Bioware does something like ME2 for the sequels. My warden was way too smart to fall for Witches of the Wilds plots but unfortunately wasn't smart enough to not knock her up normally.

Y'all could've mentioned I was about to hit it raw Bioware. I damn sure would've put on the Glyph of Trojan (my character was mage) .

"Y'all could've mentioned I was about to hit it raw Bioware."   <- that made my entire nigh, hillarious my friend, i can imagine the giant flashing letters on screen "warning about to tap that a**!"

I try.  But seriously, if I knew game sex would've made babies (like in Fable 2) I NEVER would've slept with Morrigan.  I couldn't put myself or my kid through that.  And you thought Morrigan disapproved before...

[DarkCamel]

The dark ritual is not needed. A sequel can continue if there is another (6th blight) in Orlais. If you or Alistair didn't impregnate Morrigan, another Grey Warden did. This allows the player to confront Morrigan in the sequel, and allows the player to finish of the final blight in the third and final game. The player, not the player character.



Mass Effect and Bladur's Gate both have a kill a big bad in story one, do something else related to the plot (Collectors/Irenicus) in story two, and finish off the big bad (Repears, Bhall children) in Story three.

[Dzikv]

The assumption that the Old God child is "evil" is actually funny if you look on it through the perspective of the game. Nothing in DA:O is black and white. Is the chantry good? Drugging the templars and throwing crusades left and right called "Exalted marches". Will honourable Harrowmont be a better king then the corrupt Bhalen? Nothing is that simple here...



I like how Morrigan talks about the child herself... "It will represent freedom..."



If any consequence comes from this union (and i am sure it'll be the "canon" ending) is war between the chantry and the Old God.... Which is looking rather fine to me.



Or maybe we'll get BG3 out of it... You playing the old god protagonist might be a cool if not over the head thing.



Who knows...



Just don't call the child evil...

[Original182]

Dzikv wrote...

The assumption that the Old God child is "evil" is actually funny if you look on it through the perspective of the game. Nothing in DA:O is black and white. Is the chantry good? Drugging the templars and throwing crusades left and right called "Exalted marches". Will honourable Harrowmont be a better king then the corrupt Bhalen? Nothing is that simple here...

I like how Morrigan talks about the child herself... "It will represent freedom..."

If any consequence comes from this union (and i am sure it'll be the "canon" ending) is war between the chantry and the Old God.... Which is looking rather fine to me.

Or maybe we'll get BG3 out of it... You playing the old god protagonist might be a cool if not over the head thing.

Who knows...

Problem is we have many cases of selective thinking.

On one hand, people want to give the Old Gods the benefit of the doubt, that maybe they're not evil. On the other hand, these very same people automatically label the Chantry as evil and liars.

On one hand, people are quick to believe that the Old Gods exist, but on the other hand denies the existence of the Maker.

Just don't call the child evil...

That would be akin to telling people not to call the Chantry evil, which can be quite difficult...

Modifié par Original182, 21 décembre 2009 - 10:21 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]Dzikv wrote...

The assumption that the Old God child is "evil" is actually funny if you look on it through the perspective of the game. Nothing in DA:O is black and white. Is the chantry good? Drugging the templars and throwing crusades left and right called "Exalted marches". Will honourable Harrowmont be a better king then the corrupt Bhalen? Nothing is that simple here... [/qutoe]

ERm..only one Exalted march is mentioned. How is that "throwing them left and right"?

I love it when people overblow the issues to obsurdity.

Regarding Bhelen and Harrowmont - they suck for different reasons. Bhelen isn't really better. People suffer under his rule - he is a tyranical dictator.



[quote]
Just don't call the child evil... [/quote]

EVIL!!!

[SeanMurphy2]

I think if Morrigan has sex at any time, she ends up pregnant in the epilogue.

The developers might be more interested in the idea of Morrigan having a child. And having parallels with the Flemeth mother daughter relationship.. Rather than focusing too much on the child being a superpowerful old god.

Morrigan could start the game with a child with magical ability. Then they could leave it up to the player's imagination whether

1) It is the offspring from the old god ritual
2) due to Casual sex with the DA1 character
3) Morrigan Kidnapped some kid with magical ability
4) Morrigan was Impregnated by someone else

Modifié par SeanMurphy2, 21 décembre 2009 - 10:52 .

[LynxAQ]

I agree that Cailan was not a fool, maybe blinded by the glory etc, but to me he was alot more intelligent and clever than people made him out to be. I definately think the battle plan would of worked if Loghain hadn't pulled out, unfortunately Loghain did not.



TheMadCat you are constantly and conveniently leaving out the part where if Morrigan did finish the ritual with Rioldan, why did any Grey Warden die? Really its pretty straight forward, Grey Warden die when the Arch Demon was slain = no ritual God Baby. You cant convince otherwise and this nonsense about the essenses lingering about etc... please how convenient it doesnt linger around and kill the grey warden first when you do the ritual yourself with Morrigan, but does kill the grey warden and linger about when / if she did it with Rioldan...? Please pulling at strings. Cant be both people, either or.



And like I said, I dont want a sequel this way, the whole god baby thing has been played already and would be extremely unoriginal and tired.

[Sidney]

LynxAQ wrote...

I agree that Cailan was not a fool, maybe blinded by the glory etc, but to me he was alot more intelligent and clever than people made him out to be. I definately think the battle plan would of worked if Loghain hadn't pulled out, unfortunately Loghain did not.

...of course Loghain lays out the battle plan so that isn't Cailan's idea. The only thing Cailan is "right" about is that this is a Blight but he has no reason to think it is other than the wish to play hero- as he says to you. Where do you find anything in game that says he's clever?

[Squiggles1334]

"And dammit, Loghain, the plan would have worked brilliantly too, without the unnecessary loss of life, if you hadn't been a jerk and pulled out early!"

"Wait, are we talking about the battle at Ostagar, or Morrigan's ritual?"

"Hmm, good question."

:innocent:

[robertthebard]

Sidney wrote...

LynxAQ wrote...

I agree that Cailan was not a fool, maybe blinded by the glory etc, but to me he was alot more intelligent and clever than people made him out to be. I definately think the battle plan would of worked if Loghain hadn't pulled out, unfortunately Loghain did not.

...of course Loghain lays out the battle plan so that isn't Cailan's idea. The only thing Cailan is "right" about is that this is a Blight but he has no reason to think it is other than the wish to play hero- as he says to you. Where do you find anything in game that says he's clever?

If we metagame a bit at the strategy meeting, he does seem at least manipulative to get his way.  Whether he's clever, or just a little bit cunning we'll never truly know.  Although, in hindsight, Loghain could easily have allowed himself to be led around by the short hairs on Cailin taking the field, and had to just give up on the Wardens in the Tower.  So it can still go either way.

Regarding whether the Chantry is evil or not, selling people into slavery is evil, but keeping slaves is not?  Since children are sent to the Chantry at 10 years old, and trained or brainwashed into doing what ever job they end up with, Priest or Templar, or any other jobs, if there are other jobs.  Brainwashed qualifies here because they, like any other organization will teach their dogma, to the exclusion of all else.  It could be that this is a harsh use of the term, but it's certainly applicable.  Is it Rexel in Howe's dungeon that is the missing Templar?  Full blown Lyrium withdrawal.  As we know, the Chantry gives the Templars lyrium in order to make their powers work, or to be more effective, but, and this irony is rich, Alistair questions whether it even does that.  One of your conversation options in that dialog is that it's an effective means to control people.  Blood Magic is bad, but mind control by addiction to lyrium is good?  By the way, this is the Chantry's view, not the general populace, although the general populace will fear Blood Magic, ironically again, because the Chantry says so.  Kolgrim and the crazy mage at Soldier's Peak will question the validity of the Chantry's view, although they do have alterior motives.

So, all that means is that their is evidence to suggest that the Chantry is not what it appears to be at face value.  Which, interestingly enough, brings into question whether the Old Gods are.  The Old Gods are always painted as Archdemons.  However, this goes against lore.  They aren't Archdemons until they are corrupted.  This is evident so many times throughout the game as to make it undeniable.  Yet people still cling to the notion that Old God means Archdemon.  You get your first taste of how the taint affects people as a Dalish Elf, because it's affecting you.  You then get a vision of what it can do to somebody as a Dalish Elf when you meet Tamlen again.  So, is it the position of the Old God is evil crowd that Tamlen was evil before he was tainted?  One of the loading screen tips talks about tainted people becoming ghouls, and serving the darkspawn.  Does this only happen if they are evil?  Cailin talks about riding into battle with the Grey Wardens against a Tainted God, not just an Old God.

So, we have just as much evidence that the Old Gods are evil anyway as we do that the Chantry is.  Worshipping the Maker doesn't make one evil, and yet the Chantry keeps slaves.  This despite the claim that slavery doesn't exist in Ferelden.  If you're addicting a whole group of people to lyrium to keep them subservient to you, they are slaves.

[robertthebard]

Squiggles1334 wrote...

"And dammit, Loghain, the plan would have worked brilliantly too, without the unnecessary loss of life, if you hadn't been a jerk and pulled out early!"

"Wait, are we talking about the battle at Ostagar, or Morrigan's ritual?"

"Hmm, good question."

:innocent:

Morrigan's ritual has the potential to save one person; which ever Grey Warden takes the killing blow.  By the tower, it's a 50/50 chance on who that is.

The plan drawn up at Ostagar could have worked.  I doubt seriously that it could have saved Cailin, but again, with time working like it doesn't in game, we have no idea how long the beacon was lit before Cailin dies, or if it was.  For all we know, Duncan looks up to the beacon just after it got lit.  However, it's also possible that it's been lit for an hour.  I find the latter unlikely, however, unless the darkspawn overwhelm you immediately after you light the beacon, which is what fires the cutscene, but we really have no idea of time because all cutscenes seem to ignore things like where characters are when it starts, preferring to group them all together.  We do know that you are supposed to be able to see the whole valley, hence you could see how the battle was going in a general sense by judging how far the darkspawn have progressed into the valley.  It's all academic, however, since Loghain pulls out when you light the beacon.

So I don't see what you're getting at here.

[edeheusch]

Original182 wrote...

Dzikv wrote...

The assumption that the Old God child is "evil" is actually funny if you look on it through the perspective of the game. Nothing in DA:O is black and white. Is the chantry good? Drugging the templars and throwing crusades left and right called "Exalted marches". Will honourable Harrowmont be a better king then the corrupt Bhalen? Nothing is that simple here...

I like how Morrigan talks about the child herself... "It will represent freedom..."

If any consequence comes from this union (and i am sure it'll be the "canon" ending) is war between the chantry and the Old God.... Which is looking rather fine to me.

Or maybe we'll get BG3 out of it... You playing the old god protagonist might be a cool if not over the head thing.

Who knows...

Problem is we have many cases of selective thinking.

On one hand, people want to give the Old Gods the benefit of the doubt, that maybe they're not evil. On the other hand, these very same people automatically label the Chantry as evil and liars.

On one hand, people are quick to believe that the Old Gods exist, but on the other hand denies the existence of the Maker.

Just don't call the child evil...

That would be akin to telling people not to call the Chantry evil, which can be quite difficult...

The big difference is that you know what the Chantry has made but you don't know what the god child would do if he exist (so you can let him the benefit of the doubt)!

With an elf PC I knew that the Chantry launched an Exalted March against the Dales and so the Chantry is responsible of the bad situation of my people. How could you give benefit of the doubt when you speak about know facts (that are recognized by everybody even the Chantry)?

About the child god we can't know very much yet and the only source of information we have about the old gods is the Chandry (which want to forbid also the worship of the elven gods).
To my knowledge (and the knowledge of my PC), even the invasion of Elvhenan by the Tevinder imperium was not launched by the Tevinder church (in contrast with the Exalted March against the Dales) so it can neither be imputed to the old god themselves nor to their church.

[Original182]

robertthebard wrote...
Regarding whether the Chantry is evil or not, selling people into slavery is evil, but keeping slaves is not?  Since children are sent to the Chantry at 10 years old, and trained or brainwashed into doing what ever job they end up with, Priest or Templar, or any other jobs, if there are other jobs.  Brainwashed qualifies here because they, like any other organization will teach their dogma, to the exclusion of all else.  It could be that this is a harsh use of the term, but it's certainly applicable.

It is unfortunately a very thin argument trying to pin slavery to the Chantry. If sending children to the Chantry at 10 is slavery, then any learning institution is considered slavery. The Circle of Magi is slavery. Dalish elves teaching history to their elves in isolation is slavery, since it teaches them to hate humans and the Chantry.

It's a poor definition of slavery and is not applicable.

An example of slavery is what Loghain did to the Alienage Elves. They have no rights. They are like property.
The children in the Chantry grow up free. Brother Genetivi doesn't seem like a slave. He goes around freely doing research.
Leliana came to the Chantry out of her own free will. She wasn't sold into it. She also could leave with the Revered Mother's blessings in Lothering. Does that sound like a slave?

Is it Rexel in Howe's dungeon that is the missing Templar?  Full blown Lyrium withdrawal.  As we know, the Chantry gives the Templars lyrium in order to make their powers work, or to be more effective, but, and this irony is rich, Alistair questions whether it even does that.

Here you assume that the Chantry lies, and Alistair is telling the truth. However, Alistair doesn't have all the facts. Maybe lyrium does make you become a templar, and I read somewhere that Bioware did plan to add lyrium withdrawal to gameplay mechanics, but they decided to take it out at the last minute. This isn't the first case where lore conflicts with gameplay mechanics. E.g., raw lyrium is poisonous, yet you can use it to heal and recharge your mana with them at the Anvil of the Void.

And I question you changing your tune to Alistair when it suits your argument, while you have been fanatically attacking Alistair as a wimp in another thread.

One of your conversation options in that dialog is that it's an effective means to control people.  Blood Magic is bad, but mind control by addiction to lyrium is good?

Again, you base everything on what Alistair says. Only one source. Give me a Codex entry or other plausible sources that Lyrium is given to control Templars. The "lyrium addiction" theory could be the game writers' way to resolve lore vs gameplay mechanics.
Lyrium is the key to a templar's power, and withdrawal is an unfortunate side effect.
It is no different to how drinking darkspawn blood is the key to the Grey Warden's powers to kill the archdemon, and death is an unfortunate side effect.

And if you do the quest in Dust Town to deliver lyrium to Godwin, Godwin admits that he supplies lyrium illegally. This is solid proof that the mages are the ones giving lyrium overdose to the templars, making it even worse. So what the mages do in secret, the Chantry gets the blame as the scapegoat. You blame the Chantry, but not mages like Godwin? Selective thinking.

By the way, this is the Chantry's view, not the general populace, although the general populace will fear Blood Magic, ironically again, because the Chantry says so.

False. Caridin the dwarf does not believe in the Maker and the Chantry, and still thinks that the Anvil of the Void (a form of blood magic), must be destroyed.

First Enchanter Irving labels blood mages as deviants.
http://dragonage.wik...ing.27s_Mistake

I have screenshots of Niall refusing Blood Magic even if it was offered to him on a silver platter. He did not have to fear Chantry persecution, he was already dying. Therefore what he says can be truth and not due to Chantry dogma.
http://s394.photobuc...lbloodmagic.jpg
http://s394.photobuc...tbloodmagic.jpg

Conclusion: There is no proof that the Chantry encourages lyrium addiction or practises slavery.

[robertthebard]

Original182 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
Regarding whether the Chantry is evil or not, selling people into slavery is evil, but keeping slaves is not?  Since children are sent to the Chantry at 10 years old, and trained or brainwashed into doing what ever job they end up with, Priest or Templar, or any other jobs, if there are other jobs.  Brainwashed qualifies here because they, like any other organization will teach their dogma, to the exclusion of all else.  It could be that this is a harsh use of the term, but it's certainly applicable.

It is unfortunately a very thin argument trying to pin slavery to the Chantry. If sending children to the Chantry at 10 is slavery, then any learning institution is considered slavery. The Circle of Magi is slavery. Dalish elves teaching history to their elves in isolation is slavery, since it teaches them to hate humans and the Chantry.

Stopped reading right here.  Nowhere in my post do I say that taking children into the Chantry at 10 was slavery.  I said controlling the Templars with lyrium was slavery.  You may feel free to villify this information if you wish, but since my source for this information can do no wrong any where else, why is it that he can now?  Inconsistency in the Alistair fan club?

No, it's not.  I get it now, it's just another lie told by Alistair to garner sympathy?  It would, after all fit into what we know of his character.  However, this also gives the lie to Godwin.  You know, that guy in the mage tower that's taking advantage of the Templar's addiction to lyrium to make some money.  That's the problem with blind followers, they follow, no matter what.  Even to the point of questioning their heroes if the information doesn't fit what they want.

Modifié par robertthebard, 21 décembre 2009 - 02:46 .

[Original182]

edeheusch wrote...

With an elf PC I knew that the Chantry launched an Exalted March against the Dales and so the Chantry is responsible of the bad situation of my people. How could you give benefit of the doubt when you speak about know facts (that are recognized by everybody even the Chantry)?

Yet you ignore Andraste's Exalted March that freed the Dalish Elves from the Telvinter in the first place. Selective thinking.

And within the context of the medieval ages, there are many wars. Orlais invaded Ferelden. Antiva has the Crows committing assassinations wantonly. Why are you blaming only the Chantry for mistakes? At the very least, the Chantry deserves the benefit of the doubt as much as anything else. Throughout the game, you see the Chantry trying to help the general populace.

Old Gods on the other hand, do nothing but sleep underground, to be corrupted by the darkspawn and kill a lot of people. And the Chantry and templars in Lothering are the ones who have to clean up the mess.
Despite that, you still want to give Old Gods the benefit of the doubt, but not the Chantry.

My original point was that people are not giving the Chantry the benefit of the doubt, but we are supposed to give everything else some benefit of the doubt.

[Sialater]

I really want to know where people find evidence that Anora ruled effectively in Cailan's stead? Yeah, she may have done the administrative crap, but by the time you get to Denerim, the Bannorn is in ruins, ruffians and mercenaries are running rampant around Denerim, Elves are being sold into slavery to fund a civil war, and Blood Mages are holding rituals in abandoned buildings. (I'm sure there are other things going wrong, but that's just off the top of my head.) Her father railroads her into giving up a great deal of her powerbase to him. How is that effective rulership? (And by some time lines, some of this stuff went on from before Cailan's death.)