Aller au contenu

Photo

There's no way the Dark Ritual should have been optional.


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
343 réponses à ce sujet

#176
Original182

Original182
  • Members
  • 1 111 messages

Asylumer wrote...

Original182 wrote...
Lorewise raw lyrium is poisonous and deadly. Yet you can use them to heal and recharge your mana.
Lorewise blood magic is illegal, yet you can make Wynne a blood mage with no consequences.

I've already explained that what Alistair said could have been the devs' attempt to reconcile lore and gameplay mechanics.
I've already explained gameplay mechanics != lore.


Look at what you're saying real closely. You're saying that the lore that's in the game... is NOT the lore for the game, and your reason for that is because you think the devs rewrote the lore of the game.

Think about it.


If what you say is true, if templars don't need lyrium for their powers, explain this "lore" entry.

The templars' power derives from the substance lyrium, a mineral
believed to be the raw element of creation.
While mages use lyrium in
their arcane spells and rituals, templars ingest the primordial mineral
to enhance their abilities to resist and dispel magic. Lyrium use is
regulated by the Chantry, but some templars suffer from lyrium
addiction, the effects of which include paranoia, obsession, and
dementia. Templars knowingly submit themselves to this "treatment" in
the service of the Order and the Maker.


http://dragonage.wik...ligion#Templars

The Codex is written by a First Enchanter, not the Chantry. So don't try to explain it as Chantry propaganda please.

Edit: So you're saying only Alistair's lore is correct, and the devs put the above codex entry for.......what exactly? To give people like you a chance to speculate the Chantry covering up things? I see.

Modifié par Original182, 21 décembre 2009 - 03:40 .


#177
Squiggles1334

Squiggles1334
  • Members
  • 579 messages
PS: Regarding the Lyrium Is Harmful/Helpful thing, I'm not certain it's necessarily an inconsistency.

Take for example fluorine. In its refined elemental state, it is one of the most noxious, toxic, and reactive substances known to man. Bubble it through water, and you'll likely get an explosion. Inhale a tiny amount, and you'll drop dead pretty quickly.

But in nature, it is found in salts and ores that are pretty much harmless rocks.

Amazing the difference one single valence electron can make. :wizard:

#178
Original182

Original182
  • Members
  • 1 111 messages

Squiggles1334 wrote...

PS: Regarding the Lyrium Is Harmful/Helpful thing, I'm not certain it's necessarily an inconsistency.

Take for example fluorine. In its refined elemental state, it is one of the most noxious, toxic, and reactive substances known to man. Bubble it through water, and you'll likely get an explosion. Inhale a tiny amount, and you'll drop dead pretty quickly.

But in nature, it is found in salts and ores that are pretty much harmless rocks.

Amazing the difference one single valence electron can make. :wizard:


Yeah but the raw lyrium in places like the Anvil of the Void hasn't been refined in any form. It's raw, and should be poisonous. But you can heal and recharge your mana too. Not only that, Branka, a dwarf who is not supposed to be able to cast magic, could use them to form illusions of her.

There are inconsistencies between lore and gameplay, and whether Alistair's templar abilities and words are lore or inconsistent gameplay mechanic is the point of contention.

#179
Squiggles1334

Squiggles1334
  • Members
  • 579 messages

Original182 wrote...

Asylumer wrote...

Original182 wrote...
Lorewise raw lyrium is poisonous and deadly. Yet you can use them to heal and recharge your mana.
Lorewise blood magic is illegal, yet you can make Wynne a blood mage with no consequences.

I've already explained that what Alistair said could have been the devs' attempt to reconcile lore and gameplay mechanics.
I've already explained gameplay mechanics != lore.


Look at what you're saying real closely. You're saying that the lore that's in the game... is NOT the lore for the game, and your reason for that is because you think the devs rewrote the lore of the game.

Think about it.


If what you say is true, if templars don't need lyrium for their powers, explain this "lore" entry.

The templars' power derives from the substance lyrium, a mineral
believed to be the raw element of creation.
While mages use lyrium in
their arcane spells and rituals, templars ingest the primordial mineral
to enhance their abilities to resist and dispel magic. Lyrium use is
regulated by the Chantry, but some templars suffer from lyrium
addiction, the effects of which include paranoia, obsession, and
dementia. Templars knowingly submit themselves to this "treatment" in
the service of the Order and the Maker.


http://dragonage.wik...ligion#Templars

The Codex is written by a First Enchanter, not the Chantry. So don't try to explain it as Chantry propaganda please.

Edit: So you're saying only Alistair's lore is correct, and the devs put the above codex entry for.......what exactly? To give people like you a chance to speculate the Chantry covering up things? I see.

First Enchanters work for the Circle of Magi, which is a Chantry-sponsored deal.

Not hard to explain it as Chantry propaganda. The lore is just there to give a different perspective, just because so much of this game deals with lore filtered through different biased sources.

#180
Damar Stiehl

Damar Stiehl
  • Members
  • 333 messages
I find it amusing that Morrigan thinks that she can "influence" a reborn god in any fashion. The child might not be aware of what it is early on, but it IS a god, and it will realize it sooner or later. Nothing Morrigan does will change what this child will become.

That said, the current Archdemon is a corrupted god of beauty, and he just might be a viable alternative to the Maker, who, let's face it, is a petulant jerk.

#181
robertthebard

robertthebard
  • Members
  • 6 108 messages

Original182 wrote...

Squiggles1334 wrote...

Original182 wrote...
Lorewise, templars do need lyrium to have their powers.

Yes, lorewise, which in this case means it is lore filtered through Chantry sources, which turns this into somewhat of a circular argument to say templars need lyrium for their powers.


Yes, the same lore you get from Alistair regarding you don't need lyrium to be a templar. The same Alistair who was raised by the same Chantry.

But yeah no problem accepting Alistair's "unbiased" views of course.

You know me better than that.  I love to dismiss Alistair out of hand.  However, there are more facts leading up to this being right than there are to it being wrong.  Why is underground lyrium trade profitable?  Why does the Chantry control the lyrium trade?  This has another answer, and I'll give it here, to limit what's available to the mages.  However, this does not preclude, or justify addicting Templars to lyrium to control them.  None of the Templars that I fought in the mage tower were more effective than Alistair, and they are strung out on lyrium.  I can state this as an absolute fact because I have delivered lyrium to Godwin to feed that addiction.  I have seen what happens to a Templar that isn't given lyrium.  All of this taken even individually is damning, but when you add it all up, it means that the Chantry isn't as squeaky clean as some would like to believe.

Now, lets put this into perspective:  It has been stated as fact, with far less evidence than what we have against the Chantry, that Old Gods are evil, and thus Morrigan's baby can be nothing else.  In another conversation on this very topic, it was stated that doing the ritual would cause another Blight, and someone even postulated there that it creates an 8th Old God, instead of saving the 5th one.  Now, this is with far less information than we have against the Chantry.

However, even in light of the fact that the Chantry willingly subjects it's Templars to lyrium addiction to control them, saying that it somehow enhances their powers, or gives them their powers in the first place, this despite the fact that you can have a whole party of Templars that never touch the stuff.  All of a sudden we go outside of game for the answers?  That is so not a valid position.  All we should be using for in game knowledge is what's in game.  If you read the books, that predate this game, then you have some additional lore from there, however, jumping to game mechanics to defend an in game entity doesn't work.  From the available information, it is easy to say that the Chantry is every bit as evil as the Old Gods, and they must be stopped.  Afterall, it's not a jump, or thin, to say that controlling a segment of the population by drug addiction is slavery.

#182
Sialater

Sialater
  • Members
  • 12 600 messages

Original182 wrote...

Asylumer wrote...

Original182 wrote...
Lorewise raw lyrium is poisonous and deadly. Yet you can use them to heal and recharge your mana.
Lorewise blood magic is illegal, yet you can make Wynne a blood mage with no consequences.

I've already explained that what Alistair said could have been the devs' attempt to reconcile lore and gameplay mechanics.
I've already explained gameplay mechanics != lore.


Look at what you're saying real closely. You're saying that the lore that's in the game... is NOT the lore for the game, and your reason for that is because you think the devs rewrote the lore of the game.

Think about it.


If what you say is true, if templars don't need lyrium for their powers, explain this "lore" entry.

The templars' power derives from the substance lyrium, a mineral
believed to be the raw element of creation.
While mages use lyrium in
their arcane spells and rituals, templars ingest the primordial mineral
to enhance their abilities to resist and dispel magic. Lyrium use is
regulated by the Chantry, but some templars suffer from lyrium
addiction, the effects of which include paranoia, obsession, and
dementia. Templars knowingly submit themselves to this "treatment" in
the service of the Order and the Maker.


http://dragonage.wik...ligion#Templars

The Codex is written by a First Enchanter, not the Chantry. So don't try to explain it as Chantry propaganda please.

Edit: So you're saying only Alistair's lore is correct, and the devs put the above codex entry for.......what exactly? To give people like you a chance to speculate the Chantry covering up things? I see.



Actually, I can explain it.  Sometimes, the First Enchanter is a Chantry apologist and flunky.  And the above post is not discounting Allistair.  He says Lyrium makes what he can do better.  It is not required, however.

#183
Original182

Original182
  • Members
  • 1 111 messages

Sialater wrote...

Whether they took it out or not, doesn't matter.  If they took it out, it's not part of the lore.


So if you spec blood magic, and no templars come hunting you, that means blood magic is legal? And the numerous instances where blood magic is evil like Jowan being jailed, Uldred, Codex entries are all.... for what exactly?

#184
Original182

Original182
  • Members
  • 1 111 messages

Squiggles1334 wrote...

First Enchanters work for the Circle of Magi, which is a Chantry-sponsored deal.

Not hard to explain it as Chantry propaganda. The lore is just there to give a different perspective, just because so much of this game deals with lore filtered through different biased sources.


First Enchanters are raised in the Circle of Magi, but what they say are due to Chantry propaganda.
Alistair was raised by the Chantry, but what he says isn't Chantry propaganda? I see.

#185
Sialater

Sialater
  • Members
  • 12 600 messages
You're a Grey Warden, they're kinda above the law.

#186
Original182

Original182
  • Members
  • 1 111 messages

Sialater wrote...

Actually, I can explain it.  Sometimes, the First Enchanter is a Chantry apologist and flunky.  And the above post is not discounting Allistair.  He says Lyrium makes what he can do better.  It is not required, however.


So does that mean we can never trust the words of all mages and First Enchanters because they are all potentially Chantry apologists? When is the First Enchanter telling the truth, and when is he telling a lie? He tells the truth when he says something that strengthens our arguments, and he tells a lie if he weakens our arguments?

The probability that the First Enchanter's facts are lies which work in your favor, is about as probable as Alistair;s lines being added by the devs to reconcile gameplay mechanics vs lore.

#187
robertthebard

robertthebard
  • Members
  • 6 108 messages

Squiggles1334 wrote...

Original182 wrote...

Asylumer wrote...

Original182 wrote...
Lorewise raw lyrium is poisonous and deadly. Yet you can use them to heal and recharge your mana.
Lorewise blood magic is illegal, yet you can make Wynne a blood mage with no consequences.

I've already explained that what Alistair said could have been the devs' attempt to reconcile lore and gameplay mechanics.
I've already explained gameplay mechanics != lore.


Look at what you're saying real closely. You're saying that the lore that's in the game... is NOT the lore for the game, and your reason for that is because you think the devs rewrote the lore of the game.

Think about it.


If what you say is true, if templars don't need lyrium for their powers, explain this "lore" entry.

The templars' power derives from the substance lyrium, a mineral
believed to be the raw element of creation.
While mages use lyrium in
their arcane spells and rituals, templars ingest the primordial mineral
to enhance their abilities to resist and dispel magic. Lyrium use is
regulated by the Chantry, but some templars suffer from lyrium
addiction, the effects of which include paranoia, obsession, and
dementia. Templars knowingly submit themselves to this "treatment" in
the service of the Order and the Maker.


http://dragonage.wik...ligion#Templars

The Codex is written by a First Enchanter, not the Chantry. So don't try to explain it as Chantry propaganda please.

Edit: So you're saying only Alistair's lore is correct, and the devs put the above codex entry for.......what exactly? To give people like you a chance to speculate the Chantry covering up things? I see.

First Enchanters work for the Circle of Magi, which is a Chantry-sponsored deal.

Not hard to explain it as Chantry propaganda. The lore is just there to give a different perspective, just because so much of this game deals with lore filtered through different biased sources.

Nicely done, I couldn't have found better evidence to support what I've been trying to say.  The codex clearly indicates that there is addiction to lyrium.  While it tries to quantify it with "some", what happens if any templar doesn't get his/her fix?  This is the typical junky response of "I can quit any time I want".  Again, the codex does not counter that the Chantry addicts Templars to lyrium, it supports it.  Thanks for the support.

#188
Korva

Korva
  • Members
  • 2 122 messages
As I have said before, if the demonspawn becomes canon for this franchise, I will stay away from any future products. For me there is zero reason to like, trust or do anything for Morrigan. If the game allowed me to kill her, I would do so long before she makes that inane demand. I would not pay for a sequel revoling around a character and premise that I never chose, and despise too much to want to have anything to do with.

Completely ignoring the biggest choice players can make in this game, or handwaving it away with some half-arsed excuse for why she MUST get what she wants, would be extremely bad form and bad planning in my book.

SarEnyaDor wrote...

It is really simple, you want one, do
the ritual, stop coming on the forums and trying to convince everyone
that the way we played the game doesn't count as much as the way you
did it.


Amen.

Original182 wrote...

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.


Typical gamer reaction when faced with any form of authority, especially religious authority? :P

#189
Asylumer

Asylumer
  • Members
  • 199 messages

Original182 wrote...
The Codex is written by a First Enchanter, not the Chantry. So don't try to explain it as Chantry propaganda please.

Edit: So you're saying only Alistair's lore is correct, and the devs put the above codex entry for.......what exactly? To give people like you a chance to speculate the Chantry covering up things? I see.


To make it obvious the Chantry is covering things up and to show the player their motive for doing such. You say the entry was written by a First Enchanter as if the Circle weren't prisoners of the Chantry and didn't say things to appease their masters (Irving; Mage Origin) -- that Enchanter may have even been a Loyalist, the fraternity that swallows everything the Chantry says. That he is First Enchanter by itself is meaningless.

The hard facts are that Alistair doesn't need lyrium and tells you as much. This is the lore, from a credible source, given the weight of evidence as he never requires lyrium during your journey. There isn't even a Templar power sidequest for him, or the need to unlock it via a special quest like you do for Blood Mage, Reaver, and Champion. It's proven in both Gameplay and Lore that lyrium isn't essential to Templar powers..

There is no rational reason to assume otherwise.

#190
Original182

Original182
  • Members
  • 1 111 messages

Sialater wrote...

You're a Grey Warden, they're kinda above the law.


But not Wynne or Morrigan. There you go.

#191
Squiggles1334

Squiggles1334
  • Members
  • 579 messages

Original182 wrote...

Squiggles1334 wrote...

First Enchanters work for the Circle of Magi, which is a Chantry-sponsored deal.

Not hard to explain it as Chantry propaganda. The lore is just there to give a different perspective, just because so much of this game deals with lore filtered through different biased sources.


First Enchanters are raised in the Circle of Magi, but what they say are due to Chantry propaganda.
Alistair was raised by the Chantry, but what he says isn't Chantry propaganda? I see.

Considering there was little love lost between Alistair and the Chantry when he got conscripted...

#192
robertthebard

robertthebard
  • Members
  • 6 108 messages

Original182 wrote...

Sialater wrote...

Actually, I can explain it.  Sometimes, the First Enchanter is a Chantry apologist and flunky.  And the above post is not discounting Allistair.  He says Lyrium makes what he can do better.  It is not required, however.


So does that mean we can never trust the words of all mages and First Enchanters because they are all potentially Chantry apologists? When is the First Enchanter telling the truth, and when is he telling a lie? He tells the truth when he says something that strengthens our arguments, and he tells a lie if he weakens our arguments?

The probability that the First Enchanter's facts are lies which work in your favor, is about as probable as Alistair;s lines being added by the devs to reconcile gameplay mechanics vs lore.

When is the Chantry telling the truth, and when are they lying?

#193
Original182

Original182
  • Members
  • 1 111 messages

Asylumer wrote...

To make it obvious the Chantry is covering things up and to show the player their motive for doing such. You say the entry was written by a First Enchanter as if the Circle weren't prisoners of the Chantry and didn't say things to appease their masters (Irving; Mage Origin) -- that Enchanter may have even been a Loyalist, the fraternity that swallows everything the Chantry says. That he is First Enchanter by itself is meaningless.


Or he could be an Isolationist, and he could be telling the truth. We can't prove that. But you automatically assume he "lied" to appease his Chantry overlords.

The hard facts are that Alistair doesn't need lyrium and tells you as much. This is the lore, from a credible source, given the weight of evidence as he never requires lyrium during your journey. There isn't even a Templar power sidequest for him, or the need to unlock it via a special quest like you do for Blood Mage, Reaver, and Champion. It's proven in both Gameplay and Lore that lyrium isn't essential to Templar powers..

There is no rational reason to assume otherwise.


The same hard facts that raw lyrium can be used to heal, yet is considered poisonous in lore? The same hard facts that speccing blood mage won't get you any reaction from people, yet people like Jowan are condemned harshly lorewise? So all those lore are Chantry propaganda because they don't suit your argument?

I see you are a very rational person.

#194
Sialater

Sialater
  • Members
  • 12 600 messages

Original182 wrote...

Sialater wrote...

You're a Grey Warden, they're kinda above the law.


But not Wynne or Morrigan. There you go.



You CAN turn Morrigan over to the Chantry. 


Also, they're traveling with one who's above the law.  One whom the authorities can't quite find, after all.  And if they're caught, you have that handy writ of conscription.  You just fudge it and tell everyone they're recruits (cause you can't actually initiate them, unfortunately).  So, it would do what good for the Chantry to hunt down Wynne and Morrigan?

#195
Original182

Original182
  • Members
  • 1 111 messages

robertthebard wrote...

When is the Chantry telling the truth, and when are they lying?


When is Alistair telling the truth, and when is he telling a lie? He could be sniffing lyrium while you are on your Character Sheet. I can also wildly theorize. Could be possible.

#196
Original182

Original182
  • Members
  • 1 111 messages

Squiggles1334 wrote...
Considering there was little love lost between Alistair and the Chantry when he got conscripted...


Obviously Alistair is the only case where Chantry brainwashing and dogma has no affect. But everyone else who are in contact with the Chantry are biased. Nice one.

#197
TheMadCat

TheMadCat
  • Members
  • 2 728 messages

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.


As I said we don't know every little detail about the ritual. You've missed the point here. It's assumed that it can't be done but there is no concrete evidence anywhere in lore that would completely prevent them from seeking this route if that is indeed what they so choose. This is my point, everything about it is so vague. Obviously everything I say could be complete BS, perhaps not. I don't write the rules, I don't write the lore. The only things we no for sure about it is she must be impregnated within a few days prior to the death of the Archdemon, magic is involved though what type is unknown, and that she doesn't have to be anywhere near the Archdemon to pull in it's essence. That's it really, nothing else is set in stone and people like me and you go through these mental gymnastics trying to see what can and can't be done based on the lore.



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.


On the general subject we agree completely, and I think people are missing that about my posts. I'd prefer not to go into the demon child story, backtracks to much and just steps on almost every major choice we made in the last 10 hours of the game. If you are hellbent on going a certain route then don't give the players the ability to completely swerve around them. As for cliche, fantasy itself is cliche. Cliche doesn't equal bad however, nor does cliche have to mean been there done that. How it plays out, the little details in between if it's well written and well played I've got no problem with that notion. It's like making a pasta dish. You've probably had pasta a thousand times in your life, rather cliche so to speak. If I cook it up a way you've never had it before all of a sudden it becomes new, fresh, interesting. Point being just because the general idea has been done before, doesn't mean it's not something that can't be fresh and exciting.

At the same time now I'm also being a realist. You don't set up something THAT big and leave several epilogues open to serious interpretation simply to let it go, on top of the fact Gaider has said the story of Morrigan isn't quite over. So logic dictates that this is indeed the next chapter of the story. How, when, where, why are all speculation at this point. But it's rather obvious that somehow, someway, this is going to be heavily involved in the next chapter of the story. All I've tried to do, and perhaps it's nothing more then an attempt at self assurance, is to find and see weather or not it can be done without going back and kicking down 3 of the 4 possible major endings. To me it seems they left themselves enough room and the question remains weather or not they want to tackle the extra work. Perhaps my examples are poor, perhaps not. The examples have never been the sole point of my posts though, rather pointing out that there is an opportunity for them to allow our major choices to stick and continue on with what appears to be the next logical step in the story.

#198
Squiggles1334

Squiggles1334
  • Members
  • 579 messages
Far as I can tell right now, it's just Alistair's word versus a single codex entry written by a First Enchanter who may or may not be a Chantry patsy.









Plus the body of circumstantial evidence including templar addiction and Chantry control of the addicting substance...

#199
Squiggles1334

Squiggles1334
  • Members
  • 579 messages
Holy **** I forgot this thread was originally about Morrigan's DirtyLittleBastard being the canon plothook for a future sequel, haha

#200
Varenus Luckmann

Varenus Luckmann
  • Members
  • 2 891 messages
The Dark Ritual is completely retarded and only a complete idiot would go along with it. And I don't like my character being a complete idiot, so I'm glad it's possible to skip it.