766 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

People dislike the handwaves, and not just for Leliana. The devs contradict handwaved Oghren's death, the Magi boon, the Dalish boon, Anders' death, Justice's death... and for a franchise where we were told choice matters, this bothers some of us.

You first mistake was to think your choice actually matters. Killing one person or not doesn't really matter (especialyl if that person is no one important).

Your second one was to think it will carry over.
It's simply too difficult to write a long, braching story with so many possiblilites.

So my mistake was trusting the devs when they said our choices would matter and carry over?

[Shadow Fox]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Auintus wrote...

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Morrigan deserves death.

Leliana does not.

Nonsense. She saved me from evil archdemony-soul-magic. I literally owe her my life. Except I paid her an Old God's soul instead, so we're even.

Well Leliana saved my Warden's soul and her a better person. While Morrigan stood around in the back of the camp and complained about everything and the only good thing she was ever for getting knocked up by Allistair.  

When I play as a female Warden I feel sorry for guilting Alistair into it but on the other hand nobody dies and the Wardens are all about sacrifice right?

[Shadow Fox]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

People dislike the handwaves, and not just for Leliana. The devs contradict handwaved Oghren's death, the Magi boon, the Dalish boon, Anders' death, Justice's death... and for a franchise where we were told choice matters, this bothers some of us.

You first mistake was to think your choice actually matters. Killing one person or not doesn't really matter (especialyl if that person is no one important).

Your second one was to think it will carry over.
It's simply too difficult to write a long, braching story with so many possiblilites.

So my mistake was trusting the devs when they said our choices would matter and carry over?

Feh as a comic book reader I'm used to unkept promises.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Auintus wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And do you recall my response?
Here it is again.

I don't know.
I suspect it's because she didn't think you would go trough with it and were only bluffing Kolgrim. Sound plausible enough.
Also, deliberatly using such strong languge IS trying to goad Leliana fans.

No, I mean when we were right there. I've got the vial of dragon blood out and everything and she just stands there until after I pour it in the urn. She never said a word until after I'd done it.

Again - she didn't think you'd do it. OR maybe she didn't react in time. Maybe she was so stunned when you did whip it out. OR maybe she was looking in anotehr direction.
Or maybe it was just simpler to trigger the conversation after the deed was done.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Auintus wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

 You just didn't kill them dead-dead. They were...mostly dead.

Her head came off! I saw it. That's not something you can patch up and say "You'll be fine in the morning."
Thus, she's undead.

That's a random combat animation.
Those really shouldn't be used as arguments. (especially since I don't think Bio would bother with changing the game code just to disable combat finishers for that)

Now, if it was a cutscene...

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 17 septembre 2012 - 06:59 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Auintus wrote...

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Morrigan deserves death.

Leliana does not.

Nonsense. She saved me from evil archdemony-soul-magic. I literally owe her my life. Except I paid her an Old God's soul instead, so we're even.

You actually paid with your child and it's soul...

So yeah...gambling with your childs soul to save your own bacon. Aten't you the epitome of parenthood?

[Cultist]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Irrelevant.
He suceeded despite his flaws, not because.
I can play a person that wants ot destroy Ferelden and doign EVERYTHING in my power to destroy it - it won't work.

Nope. You use Blood Magic to succeed in quests to unite the land and kill Archdemon=> you succeed because of Blood Magic Powers.
Because we have no in-game option to destroy Ferelden. You can do whatever you want to achieve your goal- answer accordingly in dialogues, but there is no in-game support for that path. But we have option to oppose Chantry and, for example, free mages. The main part is - Blood Mage succeeds. Nothing else matters.

IRRELEVANT. How many times do we have to go over this? You cannot retroacticely justify decisions.
BioWare can give you the option to jump from a cliff  on the rocks head first.
Just because oyu end up surviving doesn't make it a sensible or good decision.
And yes. Warden is a faliure because he's talking steps that logicly hurt what should be his goal.

Blood Magic is powerful => I choose, logically, to be powerful via BM=> I succeed in my goals. At the moment of your decision to side or kill cultists Chantry offered or promised you nothing. It is logical to side with those, who promise you something, instead of nothing.

No, you won't be proven right, because you are wrong.
On such a fundamental level that it's stunning. You keep insisting that game mentality (like bursting into every house and robbing everything that isn't nailed, talking to everyone, etc...) is somethingthat wouldbe considered "normal behavior".

From the position of role-playing it is. Even more so with plot behind it. Where you pointed at some aspect as absurd or impossible  - I  presented every example from actual games.

For one, the Warden doesn't know he must fight the Archdemon.
For another, the Warden doesn't have to fight him - he just has to be there when the Archdemoin dies.
And third - the Warden won't even reach the arhdemon wihout an army and united Ferelden
And 4th (since you cna't help but go meta, then so will I) you cna get the Chapoin specialization.

It absolutely doesn't matter what Warden should do - kill Archdemon, unite the land or simply survive, being stronger and more powerful is a universal advantage. And again - you became stronger - you managed to unite the land. You can bring army that mostly ignores or even hates Chantry, actually - golems, werewolves, mages.

You know, taking my example, and then compeltey changing what I was saiyng is NOT proper debating.
Anyone can do that and it makes everything pointless.

I see giving exampels is utterly lsot on you, sinceyou can't accept anythnig and will change scenarios to something that has no semblance to events in DAO.

But it is you who asked me for examples and then, when i persented them, ignored them completely. And when they did not fit or broke your theories, started adding a conditions to them. It's like:
"Paint me a house." And then "That's completely wrong! There's no river and farm near it!"
I told you that your examples could be logical should we add some adjustments to the plot behind them. And you tell me that my examples should only be presented as they are - if we were talking about attacking the king then there may be only mindless attack with no plot behind it.

AdAbsurdum is considered BAD DEBATING. Altough what you are doing is closer to a Straw Man, since you tend to arge skewed things. Examples I never made.

Ad Absurdum is a common debate method used to point logical contradiction in opponent's thesis. And i operate only with thing we have in the game. You know that your arguments are based on assumptions at best so I just used your own tactics so this time you have to deal with an assumption I made up.
And during all those post, again and again I ask you to present me any proof of Chantry support. You keep ignoring the question and try to slide from the discussion or respond with theories of what may happen..

Irrelevant.
What support did hte elves giveyou before?
Or the cultist?

Elves promised me army. Now, again, it's your turn - Examples of Chantry support, please.

That's not a faliure. The goal of a Warden is to stop the blight.
No, in realtaion to actual arguments of weather a action is logical or not.
But you cannot help but metagame, even when trying to reason the validity of actions as a character.

Even better -you can't fail with every decision you've made, that only supports my position.
And even without metagaming every action is logical because, as you said before, we can justify everything. And if we can justify it - it is logical for those, who do it. People here already presented examples of killing Leliana, that are considerably different from my own. I smple explained mine.

[Cultist]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
You actually paid with your child and it's soul...

So yeah...gambling with your childs soul to save your own bacon. Aten't you the epitome of parenthood?

And in the end of Witch Hunt it was worth it and Warden lost nothing.

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You actually paid with your child and it's soul...

So yeah...gambling with your childs soul to save your own bacon. Aten't you the epitome of parenthood?

Nuh-uh. I get to keep my kid, went with Morrigan through the mirror, and the kid really didn't have a soul by the time it was replaced with the Old God's, thus no conflict between souls, and neither die.

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Auintus wrote...

No, I mean when we were right there. I've got the vial of dragon blood out and everything and she just stands there until after I pour it in the urn. She never said a word until after I'd done it.

Again - she didn't think you'd do it. OR maybe she didn't react in time. Maybe she was so stunned when you did whip it out. OR maybe she was looking in anotehr direction.
Or maybe it was just simpler to trigger the conversation after the deed was done.

...You have a point. If she made the assumption that I wasn't going to do it, she wouldn't need to be watching me like a hawk...could've just noticed too late...maybe.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Auintus wrote...

Her head came off! I saw it. That's not something you can patch up and say "You'll be fine in the morning."
Thus, she's undead.

That's a random combat animation.
Those really shouldn't be used as arguments. (especially since I don't think Bio would bother with changing the game code just to disable combat finishers for that)

Now, if it was a cutscene...

If The Warden is trying to kill someone, he's going to do bodily harm; stabbing them through the heart with a blade or incinerating them with fireballs, and I doubt the fight to the death with Leliana would be any different.

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]Cultist wrote...
Nope. You use Blood Magic to succeed in quests to unite the land and kill Archdemon=> you succeed because of Blood Magic Powers.
Because we have no in-game option to destroy Ferelden. You can do whatever you want to achieve your goal- answer accordingly in dialogues, but there is no in-game support for that path. But we have option to oppose Chantry and, for example, free mages. The main part is - Blood Mage succeeds. Nothing else matters.[/quote]

Wrong.
If I have a option between a machinegun and a knife, and I take a knife, that is objectively a worse choice.
If I suceeded and win, then it wasn't the knife that made the victory possible. If I would have won easier with the machinegun, then my decisionn reamins stupid.






[quote][quote]
IRRELEVANT. How many times do we have to go over this? You cannot retroacticely justify decisions.
BioWare can give you the option to jump from a cliff  on the rocks head first.
Just because oyu end up surviving doesn't make it a sensible or good decision.
And yes. Warden is a faliure because he's talking steps that logicly hurt what should be his goal.[/quote]

Blood Magic is powerful => I choose, logically, to be powerful via BM=> I succeed in my goals. At the moment of your decision to side or kill cultists Chantry offered or promised you nothing. It is logical to side with those, who promise you something, instead of nothing. [/quote]

It is logical to assume you will be rewarded by the Chantry.
It is logical to assume that the fantaical murderous cultist, who's men you killed, will not keep his word. He has no reason to keep you alive.

Also, blood magic gives you personal power, but what you need most at that point in the game is political power. You need support. Something the cultists can't provide. And something the chantry can.

Of course, the game is written in way that you cannot loose, so even if the entire Ferelden hates your guts and you murder their nobility, for some incredible reason peopel still follow you.

Choosing Kolgrim over the ashes is stupid for any Warden that takes his job seriously.
Heck, even a for a power-hunry Warden, destroying the ashjes is short-sighted.
Political power, fame and clout = power and wealth.



[quote]
From the position of role-playing it is. Even more so with plot behind it. Where you pointed at some aspect as absurd or impossible  - I  presented every example from actual games.[/quote]

No, you didn't. You keep using abrormal behavior and try selling it as standard. It's not.
You barbarian is a retard - no sane human would attack an army just like that.



[quote]
It absolutely doesn't matter what Warden should do - kill Archdemon, unite the land or simply survive, being stronger and more powerful is a universal advantage. And again - you became stronger - you managed to unite the land. You can bring army that mostly ignores or even hates Chantry, actually - golems, werewolves, mages.[/quote]

You have a shallow definition of power. Swining your sword better is of limited utility.

And as you said yourself - you can win regardless of what. The Warden can unite the land even if he shouldn't be able to do so. So your point is moot.



[quote]
But it is you who asked me for examples and then, when i persented them, ignored them completely. And when they did not fit or broke your theories, started adding a conditions to them. It's like:
"Paint me a house." And then "That's completely wrong! There's no river and farm near it!"
I told you that your examples could be logical should we add some adjustments to the plot behind them. And you tell me that my examples should only be presented as they are - if we were talking about attacking the king then there may be only mindless attack with no plot behind it. [/quote]

You continually change the conditions to not resemble the DAO scenario at all - making it all pointless.
Doesn't matter how good a swordsman you are - your'e not surviving a fight against a dozen elite guard. Period.
So what reason would you have to attack the king just like that? Without informing your party emembers? Without any plans?
Revenge? Hate?
Whatever it is, it doesn't change the fact that its' STUPID and would get you and your party killed.

Your claim that people constantly use real-worl logic in games is so utterly wrong I cannot even process it.
Go ahead..tell me that that fire is cold.




[quote]
Ad Absurdum is a common debate method used to point logical contradiction in opponent's thesis.[/quote]

No, ad absurdum is pushing the opponents theory into the ludicorous extreemes, to make them sound stupid.
Like me saying "that criminal is horrible. He should be killed"
And you replaying "What? All criminals shoudl be killed? No!"..if one criminal is to be killed, then all are.

There is no logical contradiction. There's only refuge in oponnents illusory audacity


[quote]
And during all those post, again and again I ask you to present me any proof of Chantry support. You keep ignoring the question and try to slide from the discussion or respond with theories of what may happen.[/quote]

I aks you to prove it wouldn't happen.
Common human behavior and history or religion dictates that those in power (Divine) would be VERY (understatment) interested in the ashes.
If you have a counter-example (of a religion ignoring it's most holy relics), then provide it.



[quote][quote]
Irrelevant.
What support did hte elves give you before?
Or the cultist?[/quote]
Elves promised me army. Now, again, it's your turn - Examples of Chantry support, please.[/quote]

*BEEEP* wrong answer. I asked BEFORE.
What did they give you before that meeting? Nothing. You only got a promise.
You only get a promise from the cultists.



[quote]
Even better -you can't fail with every decision you've made, that only supports my position. [/quote]

No, it doesn't.
It tells you that devs made the game impossible to loose, regardless if it logicly makes sense or not.

And again - METAGAMING.


[quote]
And even without metagaming every action is logical because, as you said before, we can justify everything. And if we can justify it - it is logical for those, who do it. People here already presented examples of killing Leliana, that are considerably different from my own. I smple explained mine.
[/quote]

Personal justification does not equal logical.
I can persoanlly justify killing you...why? Just because you irritate me. It's justified for me, therefore it is logical? No..just ..no.


The Wardens goal is to stop the blight. Period.
And decision that makes reaching that goal easier is logical. Any decision that is sub-optimal is inferior.

Logicly, destroying the ashes is sub-optimal, sicne the projected payoff is less than the projected payoff of saving them.
Gratitude of the cultists is in every way an ifnerior boon to the gratitude of the Chantry

[Lotion Soronarr]

Cultist wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
You actually paid with your child and it's soul...

So yeah...gambling with your childs soul to save your own bacon. Aten't you the epitome of parenthood?

And in the end of Witch Hunt it was worth it and Warden lost nothing.

No.

STILL remains gambling (thus still making your a horrible parent).
And it is still unclear.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Auintus wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You actually paid with your child and it's soul...

So yeah...gambling with your childs soul to save your own bacon. Aten't you the epitome of parenthood?

Nuh-uh. I get to keep my kid, went with Morrigan through the mirror, and the kid really didn't have a soul by the time it was replaced with the Old God's, thus no conflict between souls, and neither die.

So she said...but is it hte truth?
It's not like Morrigan ever did this ritual before. All she got, she got from decyphering an old book.

So risking the life (and SOUL) of your child on the off chance that the cold, duplicious witch deciphered the book correctly, did everything in the ritual correctly, and is actually right about the baby (how the hell would she know?)

[Cultist]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Wrong.
If I have a option between a machinegun and a knife, and I take a knife, that is objectively a worse choice.
If I suceeded and win, then it wasn't the knife that made the victory possible. If I would have won easier with the machinegun, then my decisionn reamins stupid.[/quote]
Wrong. If you trained with knife and stealth all your life and never shoot anything then knife is an optimal choice. And when you have to kill your target without rising an alarm then machinegun turns into a stupid choice. See, I adjusted conditions and plot only a little and look how perspective drasticly changed. Blood Magic provided Warden with practical benefits in-game, Chantry provided NOTHING. Goodwill at best. BM is a viable tool to complete Warden's goal, goodwill - hardly so.

[quote]
It is logical to assume you will be rewarded by the Chantry.
It is logical to assume that the fantaical murderous cultist, who's men you killed, will not keep his word. He has no reason to keep you alive.
[/quote]
Warden never get benefits from the Chantry - logically, he'll never will. And this hoild true in Dragon Age games.
Logically, cultists is ready to convert you to their cause and provide you with dragon's blood. And they prove their position by holding the dragon from attacking you.
[quote]Also, blood magic gives you personal power, but what you need most
at that point in the game is political power. You need support.
Something the cultists can't provide. And something the chantry can.[/quote]
Chantry never provided even that. Personal poer allowed Warden to obtain political power. Thus, personal power is more important that ephemeral approval.

[quote]Choosing Kolgrim over the ashes is stupid for any Warden that takes his job seriously.
Heck, even a for a power-hunry Warden, destroying the ashjes is short-sighted.
Political power, fame and clout = power and wealth.[/quote]
You gain power here and now. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

[quote]No, you didn't. You keep using abrormal behavior and try selling it as standard. It's not.
You barbarian is a retard - no sane human would attack an army just like that.[/quote]
I never sold something as "standart" behaviour because there is no standart behaviour. There is only his, her, mine, their behaviour but not "standart template human behaviour".

[quote]You have a shallow definition of power. Swining your sword better is of limited utility.

And as you said yourself - you can win regardless of what. The Warden can unite the land even if he shouldn't be able to do so. So your point is moot.[/quote]
Swinging your sword better is the only option in Dragon Age to gain any other power, apart from martial.
And as we can win no matter what our every decision is logical as victory is the only merit here. And doing everything to achieve victory is fundamentally logical.

[quote]You continually change the conditions to not resemble the DAO scenario at all - making it all pointless.
Doesn't matter how good a swordsman you are - your'e not surviving a fight against a dozen elite guard. Period.
So what reason would you have to attack the king just like that? Without informing your party emembers? Without any plans?
Revenge? Hate?
Whatever it is, it doesn't change the fact that its' STUPID and would get you and your party killed.

Your claim that people constantly use real-worl logic in games is so utterly wrong I cannot even process it.
Go ahead..tell me that that fire is cold.[/quote]
Skilled swordsman that killed king and fled\\defeated all guards? Seriously? I can lost count of games we saw this in. Skyrim is only the latest example. You can have all kind of reasons to kill the king even by yourself without party. It seems like you never played Witcher 2 with Roche's path. otherwise you never would've started this laughable argument about kings - because characters acted like that through entire human history and in uncountable books, games and other works of fiction.
and let me remind you that it is you who insisted that every roleplayed character should have a reasoning behind his every action, and now you start arguing with yourself? I gave you logic that Blood Mage may use, if you interpret it as a real-life logic, then it's your problem.

[quote]No, ad absurdum is pushing the opponents theory into the ludicorous extreemes, to make them sound stupid.
Like me saying "that criminal is horrible. He should be killed"
And you replaying "What? All criminals shoudl be killed? No!"..if one criminal is to be killed, then all are.

There is no logical contradiction. There's only refuge in oponnents illusory audacity[/quote]
I used YOU tactic against you. If you wish to operate with your imagination as a proofs, then why can't I? You imagine, that Chantry will help Warden, I imagined, that Connor will kill every darkspawn. Both stories never happened. Both are equal.

[quote]I aks you to prove it wouldn't happen.
Common human behavior and history or religion dictates that those in power (Divine) would be VERY (understatment) interested in the ashes.
If you have a counter-example (of a religion ignoring it's most holy relics), then provide it.[/quote]
What next you'll ask me to prove? You stated that Chantry will help Warden, you have to prove it. Not me - you. "The necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."© And as is no in-game proofs, my statement remains true - Chantry gave Warden no support. All your common behaviour of the religious power(really? before you were so baffled by people, who try to use real-lioe logic in the game, lol) is irrevelent. Because it's just a fiction and assumptions.

[quote]*BEEEP* wrong answer. I asked BEFORE.
What did they give you before that meeting? Nothing. You only got a promise.
You only get a promise from the cultists.[/quote]
Read my posts more carefully, please. Elves opromised me an army. Promised. Chantry promised me NOTHING. Promise is more than nothing, you know.

[quote]No, it doesn't.
It tells you that devs made the game impossible to loose, regardless if it logicly makes sense or not.[/quote]
It tells us that there is lore to be reconed with. And every our decision makes sense and is logical as they lead us to victory.

[quote]Personal justification does not equal logical.
I can persoanlly justify killing you...why? Just because you irritate me. It's justified for me, therefore it is logical? No..just ..no.[/quote]
Yes. If it's justified for you then it is logical for you.

[quote]The Wardens goal is to stop the blight. Period.
And decision that makes reaching that goal easier is logical. Any decision that is sub-optimal is inferior.
Logicly, destroying the ashes is sub-optimal, sicne the projected payoff is less than the projected payoff of saving them.
Gratitude of the cultists is in every way an ifnerior boon to the gratitude of the Chantry[/quote]
Projected payoff from defiling the Ashes is power and saving them gives you nothing as before that quest you never saw any sign of Chantry's gratitude. Gaining power via cultists' offer makes reaching the goal easier, then, by you own words - desecration of the Ashes is logical.
I'm glad you agree with me at last)

[Cultist]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
No.

STILL remains gambling (thus still making your a horrible parent).
And it is still unclear.

Let's see, you can die. Or you can have a deal, giving you a chance of survival and then try to seek for her.
Hmmmm...tough choice.

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So she said...but is it hte truth?
It's not like Morrigan ever did this ritual before. All she got, she got from decyphering an old book.

So risking the life (and SOUL) of your child on the off chance that the cold, duplicious witch deciphered the book correctly, did everything in the ritual correctly, and is actually right about the baby (how the hell would she know?)

If it had a soul, that soul would have come into conflict with Urthemiel's. That's what destroys the Grey warden. Since there was no conflict and the child still lives, the ritual must've worked.

[ejoslin]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

ejoslin wrote...
While people CAN recover from trauma, in those two slides I'm referring to, Cullen either totally snaps and murders some mages then goes missing, or he's leader of the Ferelden circle and a complete dictator.  This is not about whether people can recover from trauma.  It's that these two particular endings are completely handwaved and for no good reason.

IIRC; aren't most of the ending RUMORS?

Well, that's what they said after DA2 was announced which was a headsup that they'd be doing some handwaving of the epilogues.  But is saying someone snapped, murdered some mages, then gone missing really something of rumors?  Or saying that they're the knight-commander of the Ferelden circle and a harsh leader something that is only rumored?  I did like the epilogue cards, I liked seeing some of the longer-term consequences of my warden's choices, and just declaring them irrelevant and actually, just rumors and heresay, takes away a lot of the, for lack of a term, impact, of the DAO endings.

[Rawgrim]

I do belive Cultist just owned the other fellow.

[Cultist]

Rawgrim wrote...

I do belive Cultist just owned the other fellow.

No! I cannot let walls of text perish before we reach 50 pages!

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]Cultist wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Wrong.
If I have a option between a machinegun and a knife, and I take a knife, that is objectively a worse choice.
If I suceeded and win, then it wasn't the knife that made the victory possible. If I would have won easier with the machinegun, then my decisionn reamins stupid.[/quote]
Wrong. If you trained with knife and stealth all your life and never shoot anything then knife is an optimal choice. And when you have to kill your target without rising an alarm then machinegun turns into a stupid choice. See, I adjusted conditions and plot only a little and look how perspective drasticly changed. Blood Magic provided Warden with practical benefits in-game, Chantry provided NOTHING. Goodwill at best. BM is a viable tool to complete Warden's goal, goodwill - hardly so.[/quote]


Wrong. Your chaning the conditions to NOT match the plot proves nothing.
Knife is never an optimal choice when the other guy is in a clearing with a gun he knows how to use.

Again - wrong. Wrong. Wrong. You keep saying "BM gave me something, Chantry didn'". You keep fallign back to that metagaming argument - BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOTHING ELSE.
Stop usingthat argument,. It doesn't work. It's NOT applicable.
Knowledge of game mechanics or future events is NOT applicable. It simply isn't. Logic don't work that way son!
Only the knowledge available at hte time of decision making. Nothing else.



[quote][quote]
It is logical to assume you will be rewarded by the Chantry.
It is logical to assume that the fantaical murderous cultist, who's men you killed, will not keep his word. He has no reason to keep you alive.
[/quote]

Warden never get benefits from the Chantry - logically, he'll never will. And this hoild true in Dragon Age games.
Logically, cultists is ready to convert you to their cause and provide you with dragon's blood. And they prove their position by holding the dragon from attacking you.[/quote]

Bollocks. That position is undefensible because your Warden doesn't know that.
It doesn't follow logicly. Actually, it's the compeltle opposite.
And the cultists prove nothing other than they are good at groweling and APPEASING a dragon..at least temporarily. If I bring meat to the lion it may think twioce before attacking me because it knows I bring meat. But that's no guarantee I have any control over it.

Also, if we want ot argue your logic, then if a rich Duke loses his soon, and you find him - according to you it is ILLOGICAL to assume the duke will reward you...based on...well, the duke never giving you anything before?
Yeah, your logic is flawles...




[quote]
[quote]Also, blood magic gives you personal power, but what you need most
at that point in the game is political power. You need support.
Something the cultists can't provide. And something the chantry can.[/quote]

Chantry never provided even that. Personal poer allowed Warden to obtain political power. Thus, personal power is more important that ephemeral approval.[/quote]

Again with the metagame, unaplicable arguments. This is really frustrating.
YOU CANNOT USE THAT AS AN ARGUMNET.
When making decision you calculate what you CAN get (pros and cons) of every choice. You do not know what you WILL get. Even the most logical of decisions can sometimes not yield the desired result, HOWEVER, that doesn't make them any less logical. (and again, I'll point out the Bioware slip up ghere)

You know what - from this point on, every time you bring forth this argument I'm jstu gonan ignore it. Stupidity of this caliber isn't not worth even quoting.


[quote]
[quote]Choosing Kolgrim over the ashes is stupid for any Warden that takes his job seriously.
Heck, even a for a power-hunry Warden, destroying the ashjes is short-sighted.
Political power, fame and clout = power and wealth.[/quote]
You gain power here and now. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.[/quote]

No it's not. Especailly not when what you need is not a bird, but a battering ram.



[quote]
I never sold something as "standart" behaviour because there is no standart behaviour. There is only his, her, mine, their behaviour but not "standart template human behaviour".[/quote]

Wrong. There is such a thing as normal human behavior. Normal reactions and thought patterns.
When you come to greet the king, your two party member bow and you stick a thumb up your ass - that ain't normal.
Plnety of "roleplayers" do thing for the lolz (their lolz, regardless of the PC) or simply because tehy think in term of rules and metagaming, not actual human behavior.


[quote]
[quote]You have a shallow definition of power. Swining your sword better is of limited utility.

And as you said yourself - you can win regardless of what. The Warden can unite the land even if he shouldn't be able to do so. So your point is moot.[/quote]

Swinging your sword better is the only option in Dragon Age to gain any other power, apart from martial.
And as we can win no matter what our every decision is logical as victory is the only merit here. And doing everything to achieve victory is fundamentally logical.[/quote]

Which is a faliure from Bioware. You arne't given any alternatives (so much for roleplaying..everythnig is decided by the sword)

And no. This does not stand. You are again, using metagame thinking.
So if you have an option for your Warden to commit suicide - which should logicly end the game - but insted this awakens a spirit that  wins you the game - your'e saying that the warden deciding to kill himself was a logical decision on his part (even tough he didn't know about the spirit)?

Dear god man.



[quote][quote]
Whatever it is, it doesn't change the fact that its' STUPID and would get you and your party killed.

Your claim that people constantly use real-worl logic in games is so utterly wrong I cannot even process it.
Go ahead..tell me that that fire is cold.[/quote]

Skilled swordsman that killed king and fleddefeated all guards? Seriously? I can lost count of games we saw this in. Skyrim is only the latest example. [/quote]

*facepalm*

congratulations....I've never seen someoen missing the point so much.
Just because you CAN manage to do something isn the gmae (either trough cheats, exploits OR the game being just too easy or silly) doesn't make it smart or logical.
Skyrim? In any REAL town there would be a LOT more guards and you would be dead. The entire town being populated by 4 guards and the PC being overpowered at higher levels is completely irreelvant I suppose?


[quote]
and let me remind you that it is you who insisted that every roleplayed character should have a reasoning behind his every action, and now you start arguing with yourself? I gave you logic that Blood Mage may use, if you interpret it as a real-life logic, then it's your problem.[/quote]

your logic sucks and is broken as hell.
I'm taking as a logical choices for a WARDEN. WARDEN. As in - job descritpion: stop Blight.
You Blood mage doesn't interest me. If he does things to futher his agendas, but which hurt his chances agaisnt hte Blight, then he is a ******-poor Warden (regardless if those move make sense for him). Which IS what I have been saying.


[quote]
[quote]No, ad absurdum is pushing the opponents theory into the ludicorous extreemes, to make them sound stupid.
Like me saying "that criminal is horrible. He should be killed"
And you replaying "What? All criminals shoudl be killed? No!"..if one criminal is to be killed, then all are.

There is no logical contradiction. There's only refuge in oponnents illusory audacity[/quote]
I used YOU tactic against you. If you wish to operate with your imagination as a proofs, then why can't I? You imagine, that Chantry will help Warden, I imagined, that Connor will kill every darkspawn. Both stories never happened. Both are equal.[/quote]

No, they are not.

For one, it's not my tactic. Abysmal debating techinques are your signature move, not mine.
For another, if you realyl think the probabily is equal for both ofhte events, you are beyond redicolous.

Really...a singel mage killing all of darkspawn? REALLY?
That is equally likely as the Chantry rewarding you for recovering their most holy artifact AND being indorsed by the Gaurdian?

:lol::lol::lol::lol:
Oh man... Oh man.



[quote]
[quote]I aks you to prove it wouldn't happen.
Common human behavior and history or religion dictates that those in power (Divine) would be VERY (understatment) interested in the ashes.
If you have a counter-example (of a religion ignoring it's most holy relics), then provide it.[/quote]

What next you'll ask me to prove? You stated that Chantry will help Warden, you have to prove it. Not me - you. "The necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."© And as is no in-game proofs, my statement remains true - Chantry gave Warden no support. All your common behaviour of the religious power(really? before you were so baffled by people, who try to use real-lioe logic in the game, lol) is irrevelent. Because it's just a fiction and assumptions.[/quote]

*sigh*
What an EPIC FAIL on your part.

It is you who must prove that atypical behavior will happen. Not the other way around.

And no, I don't have to prove that the Chantry WILL do it, I have to prove that it is LIKELY they will do it and that they CAN do it. And both of those are easy.

Your statement reamins IRRELEVANT, as again - you cannot use future knowledge to justify the logic of decisions made in the past.



[quote]
Read my posts more carefully, please. Elves opromised me an army. Promised. Chantry promised me NOTHING. Promise is more than nothing, you know.[/quote]

A documents older than methusalem that doesn't mean anything, and none of hte current generation elves have to uphold it.
Now what abotu the cultists? What did they do to you before (other than try to kill you repeatedly)?
At least you got some small amount of help from the Chantry in Lothering.


[quote]
[quote]No, it doesn't.
It tells you that devs made the game impossible to loose, regardless if it logicly makes sense or not.[/quote]
It tells us that there is lore to be reconed with. And every our decision makes sense and is logical as they lead us to victory.[/quote]

NO. Flawed logic.



[quote]
Yes. If it's justified for you then it is logical for you.[/quote]

No.
Personal justification DOES NOT equal logic



[quote]
[quote]The Wardens goal is to stop the blight. Period.
And decision that makes reaching that goal easier is logical. Any decision that is sub-optimal is inferior.
Logicly, destroying the ashes is sub-optimal, sicne the projected payoff is less than the projected payoff of saving them.
Gratitude of the cultists is in every way an ifnerior boon to the gratitude of the Chantry[/quote]

Projected payoff from defiling the Ashes is power and saving them gives you nothing as before that quest you never saw any sign of Chantry's gratitude. Gaining power via cultists' offer makes reaching the goal easier, then, by you own words - desecration of the Ashes is logical.
I'm glad you agree with me at last)
[/quote]

Wrong. I don't agree with you and never will.

Your statement that saving them gives you nothing is utterly false in the context of decision making. You make a projected payoff based on nothing but your own hatered of Chantry. That's it.
At the same time, you over-inflate the importance and probability of the cultists payoff.


Seriously. I'm getting sick of you and your abysmal debating and your immunity to common sense.
If I hear that "chantry gives you nothing" un-argument just one more time - I'm putting you on my ignore list.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 18 septembre 2012 - 07:36 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Cultist wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
No.

STILL remains gambling (thus still making your a horrible parent).
And it is still unclear.

Let's see, you can die. Or you can have a deal, giving you a chance of survival and then try to seek for her.
Hmmmm...tough choice.

Still remains gambling with the life and soul of your child.

Yes, tough choice.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Auintus wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So she said...but is it hte truth?
It's not like Morrigan ever did this ritual before. All she got, she got from decyphering an old book.

So risking the life (and SOUL) of your child on the off chance that the cold, duplicious witch deciphered the book correctly, did everything in the ritual correctly, and is actually right about the baby (how the hell would she know?)

If it had a soul, that soul would have come into conflict with Urthemiel's. That's what destroys the Grey warden. Since there was no conflict and the child still lives, the ritual must've worked.

How woudl oyu nkow that?

Everything you think you know about souls is told to you by Morrigan.
Absolutley no one else knows anything about it.
Even circle mages don't have magis that deals with souls.

So all you have to go on with is Morrigans theory. Unconfirmed. How would oyu know what happens with the baby and it's soul?
For all you know the Archdemon might gobble it's tiny soul and take over the body.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Rawgrim wrote...

I do belive Cultist just owned the other fellow.

Only in your wet dreams.

[Cultist]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Wrong. Your chaning the conditions to NOT match the plot proves nothing.
Knife is never an optimal choice when the other guy is in a clearing with a gun he knows how to use.

Again - wrong. Wrong. Wrong. You keep saying "BM gave me something, Chantry didn'". You keep fallign back to that metagaming argument - BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOTHING ELSE.
Stop usingthat argument,. It doesn't work. It's NOT applicable.
Knowledge of game mechanics or future events is NOT applicable. It simply isn't. Logic don't work that way son!
Only the knowledge available at hte time of decision making. Nothing else.[/quote]
Your example of knife and gun means nothing because BM actually helps Warden in the game. Not theoretically, like Chantry, but in practice.
No matter how many times you'll call my argument wrongwrongwrong, it'll not be less important. Chantry never provided me with at the moment of making decision, should I help Chantry or oppose it. So no metagaming here.

[quote]Bollocks. That position is undefensible because your Warden doesn't know that.
It doesn't follow logicly. Actually, it's the compeltle opposite.
And the cultists prove nothing other than they are good at groweling and APPEASING a dragon..at least temporarily. If I bring meat to the lion it may think twioce before attacking me because it knows I bring meat. But that's no guarantee I have any control over it.

Also, if we want ot argue your logic, then if a rich Duke loses his soon, and you find him - according to you it is ILLOGICAL to assume the duke will reward you...based on...well, the duke never giving you anything before?
Yeah, your logic is flawles...[/quote]
Warden don't need control over dragon, he just needs to pass to the temple. Thus, cultists proved to be useful. If the Duke never promised anything as a reward, I won't care much about son. And if that Duke hates my kind, then I will blackmail or slay his son. Same goes if I hate the Duke.

[quote]Again with the metagame, unaplicable arguments. This is really frustrating.
YOU CANNOT USE THAT AS AN ARGUMNET.
When making decision you calculate what you CAN get (pros and cons) of every choice. You do not know what you WILL get. Even the most logical of decisions can sometimes not yield the desired result, HOWEVER, that doesn't make them any less logical. (and again, I'll point out the Bioware slip up ghere)

You know what - from this point on, every time you bring forth this argument I'm jstu gonan ignore it. Stupidity of this caliber isn't not worth even quoting.[/quote]
I can and I will because that is logical. I calculate and take in account my previous experience with different organizations, and Chantry stands in a disadvantage here. I KNOW that cultists promised me power, I DON'T know that Chantry will reward me, and not strangle in a backyard to keep their secret. and that's assuming Warden is neutral or pro-chantry.
Of course you will ignore it, because you cannot counter it. Except for your fanfiction.

[quote]No it's not. Especailly not when what you need is not a bird, but a battering ram.[/quote]
Fictional battering ram you expect to get from some unknown people

[quote]Wrong. There is such a thing as normal human behavior. Normal reactions and thought patterns.
When you come to greet the king, your two party member bow and you stick a thumb up your ass - that ain't normal.
Plnety of "roleplayers" do thing for the lolz (their lolz, regardless of the PC) or simply because tehy think in term of rules and metagaming, not actual human behavior.[/quote]
Really? In roman society it was normal to have slaves. and if you decided to free them peopel looked at you and said "There's something wrong with this one.". Roleplayers can do whatever they want - and fictional world must respond to their abnormal behaviour. People are not playing GTA to drive by the rules you know.

[quote]Which is a faliure from Bioware. You arne't given any alternatives (so much for roleplaying..everythnig is decided by the sword)

And no. This does not stand. You are again, using metagame thinking.
So if you have an option for your Warden to commit suicide - which should logicly end the game - but insted this awakens a spirit that  wins you the game - your'e saying that the warden deciding to kill himself was a logical decision on his part (even tough he didn't know about the spirit)?[/quote]
So you basically say that because you think BioWare's story is flawed you know how should it be done? That is exactly fanfiction. You eithe can deal with BioWare's plot, or go look for another game...or make a mod. And again I ask you to read my posts more carefully - I already presented you with numerous examples of in-game plot-backed suicide options. Warden suicide is logical at the moment of his decision to sacrifice his life to stop the blight - spirit or anything that follows is irrevelent.

[quote]
Just because you CAN manage to do something isn the gmae (either trough cheats, exploits OR the game being just too easy or silly) doesn't make it smart or logical.
Skyrim? In any REAL town there would be a LOT more guards and you would be dead. The entire town being populated by 4 guards and the PC being overpowered at higher levels is completely irreelvant I suppose?[/quote]
Make up your mind. Either you use real-world examples to prove your position in the game, or not. Want to use real town example? Ok, then take in account population, crowds among which you can hide and miriad other factors. Otherwise - use game examples we have. We are talking about GAMES. Not "how this situation would look in real life". And in the games, if you do something, that leads you to victory it is fundamentally logical.

[quote]
your logic sucks and is broken as hell.
I'm taking as a logical choices for a WARDEN. WARDEN. As in - job descritpion: stop Blight.
You Blood mage doesn't interest me. If he does things to futher his agendas, but which hurt his chances agaisnt hte Blight, then he is a ******-poor Warden (regardless if those move make sense for him). Which IS what I have been saying.[/quote]
Warden cannot be a Blood Mage? Warden uses BM to stop the Blight - he fulfills his agenda as a Warden, so no problem here. If Warden BM harms Chantry in a process -all the better.

[quote]
No, they are not.

For one, it's not my tactic. Abysmal debating techinques are your signature move, not mine.
For another, if you realyl think the probabily is equal for both ofhte events, you are beyond redicolous.

Really...a singel mage killing all of darkspawn? REALLY?
That is equally likely as the Chantry rewarding you for recovering their most holy artifact AND being indorsed by the Gaurdian?[/quote]
Both examples never happened. Both are a work of fiction.

[quote]
It is you who must prove that atypical behavior will happen. Not the other way around.

And no, I don't have to prove that the Chantry WILL do it, I have to prove that it is LIKELY they will do it and that they CAN do it. And both of those are easy.

Your statement reamins IRRELEVANT, as again - you cannot use future knowledge to justify the logic of decisions made in the past.[/quote]
It is you, who appeals to future logic. Chantry will, Chantry may, Chantry should. My examples were based on what actually happened. So if you remember we started all this on desecration ofthe Ashes and if this desecration is logical and reasonable. I got real, backed by actual in-game lines, promise of cultists you, on the other hand, imagined some chantry reward. Promise made is more than promise imagined. Power - here and now. Chantry reward - later....maybe...probably.

[quote]A documents older than methusalem that doesn't mean anything, and none of hte current generation elves have to uphold it.
Now what abotu the cultists? What did they do to you before (other than try to kill you repeatedly)?
At least you got some small amount of help from the Chantry in Lothering[/quote]
that document is more than nothing.
Cultist made a promise, still more than Chantry did.
You mean when Warden have to threaten revered mother into giving up her key? Great help indeed!

[quote]NO. Flawed logic.[/quote]
Acheving victory at all costs is a flawed logic? Well, I guess you have a hard time with walkthroughs.

[quote]No.
Personal justification DOES NOT equal logic[/quote]
Of course it does. if I can back my decision by reasons then it is logical.

[quote]Wrong. I don't agree with you and never will.
Your statement that saving them gives you nothing is utterly false in the context of decision making. You make a projected payoff based on nothing but your own hatered of Chantry. That's it.
At the same time, you over-inflate the importance and probability of the cultists payoff.
Seriously. I'm getting sick of you and your abysmal debating and your immunity to common sense.
If I hear that "chantry gives you nothing" un-argument just one more time - I'm putting you on my ignore list.[/quote]
Chantry gave you nothing before meeting the cultists. Chantry give(or promised) you nothing at the moment of meeting. Chantry will not give you nothing for the rest of the game. It's a fact. You can't deny them as they are written in Dragon Age: Origins plot.
See, you can ignore me now and not embarass yourself further with proving your arguments by your own fantasies.
it's like god exists because bible says so. And bible is true because god says so.