895 réponses à ce sujet

[Adrian68b]

"We don't know that Morrigan is atheist, only that she questions others' beliefs. We do know that she believes what she can verify, which to me says that she's really more of a skeptic as a general rule of thumb."

Well said. What she said/did is the only relevant thing. And not only about Morrigan or Flemeth, but any DA character. It was kind a surprise for me to hear her dialogue line with Leliana, because I could have said the same lines myself. But we don't know for certain what Morrigan believes or not. She could be a believer of the Old Gods. For my part it's not just fine, it is fascinating. I very much like a game with realistic and evolving characters. For instance, Leliana and her story (starting with her DLC), Alistair, Loghain (if we think about DA books). Every NPC from DA:O and DA2 was well written, credible. I hated Sebastian (for being dogmatic selfish) but I admire Bioware for creating it.
Good stories and credible, memorable characters are the strong points of every Bioware RPG. We could agree with or hate those NPC's, but for me they are enjoyable and fascinating. Even the Bad guys (Irenicus or Loghain, for instance). Bioware's characters  were sort of "alive".
This very debate is testament of how well Bioware does its work concerning NPC development. Could anyone imagine such a debate about a Diablo character?
We could argue endlessly about these NPC's, but the fact is that David Gaider is the Dungeon Master; he and Bioware will lead the story in a direction they want. As long as the story is good and the NPC are well written, what more could I ask?

Modifié par Adrian68b, 22 septembre 2012 - 12:07 .

[Wereparrot]

Maclimes wrote...

I only need the option if it's ever relevant.

And that's the whole point: relevance, and it isn't relevant. I know all about it being a fantasy game and therefore not a like for like representation of the middle ages, but atheism as a distinct concept would not really have existed in the medieval world.

I think it's worth pointing out that while most people here want realism insofar as it pertains to human nature but as far as historical realism is concerned people are only interested if it does not offend their own precious modern views and sensibilities. I think this is quite arrogant and hypocritical.

That's my view. I'm not trying to turn it into historical fiction, but I don't think it's right to take a historical setting and just dump a modern agenda in it.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Wereparrot wrote...

Maclimes wrote...

I only need the option if it's ever relevant.

And that's the whole point: relevance, and it isn't relevant. I know all about it being a fantasy game and therefore not a like for like representation of the middle ages, but atheism as a distinct concept would not really have existed in the medieval world.

I think it's worth pointing out that while most people here want realism insofar as it pertains to human nature but as far as historical realism is concerned people are only interested if it does not offend their own precious modern views and sensibilities. I think this is quite arrogant and hypocritical.

That's my view. I'm not trying to turn it into historical fiction, but I don't think it's right to take a historical setting and just dump a modern agenda in it.

DA is full of modern agenda. DA is by far the most modernized fantasy setting in terms of general morals and sensibilities.

But i agree with you. Actively seeking to enlighten others to a particular religous view point (or lack there of) really isn't the point of DA. Nevertheless, it's still good to have more options to define your PC. To be able to say you don't believe in the maker when a Chantry priest is preaching at you, as was present in DAO, is a good thing.

Also, fun fact, Morrigan was an Athiest character. She didn't believe in the established religions, and often went ouut of her way to make known. So it's not like the topic is completely irrelevant when it comes to character definition. 

Modifié par Gibb_Shepard, 22 septembre 2012 - 12:41 .

[cindercatz]

Not believing the established religions' dogmas doesn't make one an athiest, though. I don't fully embrace any established religion, modern or ancient, but I'm not an athiest at all. Morrigan never tells us she's an athiest. She never says she believes in no god of any kind, at all, ever. Morrigan only demonstrates that she believes what she can verify with her own experience, which makes her a skeptic, not a dogmatic athiest.

edit: on the Templar oppression thing- Morrigan is oppressed by Templars as much as any mage, hence having to deflect their attentions elsewhere in one of her stories, or describing how they simply have to pick up and move whenever the hunters come for her and Flemeth in earnest. That's oppression. The difference with Morrigan is that she knows more than the templars. She's smarter than they are. She has no qualms about playing on their every flaw and every sympathy to her own advantage, and she has no mercy, just like her mother taught her. So why should she be scared when she's the baddest thing in the deep dark woods?

A lack of fear does not mean a lack of oppression.

Modifié par cindercatz, 22 septembre 2012 - 12:59 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

cindercatz wrote...

Not believing the established religions' dogmas doesn't make one an athiest, though. I don't fully embrace any established religion, modern or ancient, but I'm not an athiest at all. Morrigan never tells us she's an athiest. She never says she believes in no god of any kind, at all, ever. Morrigan only demonstrates that she believes what she can verify with her own experience, which makes her a skeptic, not a dogmatic athiest.

Which is the very definition of an athiest agnostic. In a banter with Leliana, she makes fun of the concept of a man in the sky watching over everyone. That leaves little room for interpretation.

[Adrian68b]

"but atheism as a distinct concept would not really have existed in the medieval world."

TOTALLY AGREE. Atheism in modern sense NEVER existed in Medieval society. Atheism is just a word, the meaning evolved in time. There were people who called themselves "atheists" in Middle Ages, but their statements differed form that of a present day atheist. Democritus introduced the concept "atom" in antiquity, but it doesn't meant even remotely a quantic viewpoint about elemental particles.

I was never offended if an avatar or NPC doesn't share my contemporary viewpoint about world. It is not only foolish, but unrealistic. My only concern was about any lack of a non-dogmatic or non-fanatic avatar in DA3. And simply because it is not for me, not because I am offended. I for instance wasn't even remotely offended by a DLC like Darkspawn Chronicles; it just wasn't for me. This doesn't even stopped me for buying it. I never questioned gay romance in Bioware games. By the contrary, I was really happy that there are romance options for everyone.
The fact that I am not able to play a fanatical templar or a dogmatic priest is NO WAY Bioware's fault. It is all my problem. It doesn't mean anything about Bioware's competence to create a good RPG. Why, Bioware is my favorite RPG studio. And I still rate any day DA2 higher than Skyrim.
In my case, an avatar option like Genitivi as a priest or Trask/Gregoire as templar works perfect.

Modifié par Adrian68b, 22 septembre 2012 - 01:23 .

[LobselVith8]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Which is the very definition of an athiest agnostic. In a banter with Leliana, she makes fun of the concept of a man in the sky watching over everyone. That leaves little room for interpretation.

You're right. Morrigan does explicitly say she doesn't believe in the Maker. Morrigan also says she doesn't believe in a higher power:

Leliana: So you truly do not believe in any sort of higher power?

Morrigan: It has been bothering you, I see. No, I do not. Must I?

[Xilizhra]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Which is the very definition of an athiest agnostic. In a banter with Leliana, she makes fun of the concept of a man in the sky watching over everyone. That leaves little room for interpretation.

You're right. Morrigan does explicitly say she doesn't believe in the Maker. Morrigan also says she doesn't believe in a higher power:

Leliana: So you truly do not believe in any sort of higher power?

Morrigan: It has been bothering you, I see. No, I do not. Must I?

Presumably she doesn't consider the Old Gods to count. Which is fine, as Andrastians don't either.

[TheJediSaint]

Xilizhra wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Which is the very definition of an athiest agnostic. In a banter with Leliana, she makes fun of the concept of a man in the sky watching over everyone. That leaves little room for interpretation.

You're right. Morrigan does explicitly say she doesn't believe in the Maker. Morrigan also says she doesn't believe in a higher power:

Leliana: So you truly do not believe in any sort of higher power?

Morrigan: It has been bothering you, I see. No, I do not. Must I?

Presumably she doesn't consider the Old Gods to count. Which is fine, as Andrastians don't either.

Actually, she did seem to think the Old God counted.  In fact, her goal was to litterally birth one free of the Taint.

[Xilizhra]

No, she certainly believes they exist. Just that they don't qualify as a "higher power" to her.

[LobselVith8]

TheJediSaint wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Presumably she doesn't consider the Old Gods to count. Which is fine, as Andrastians don't either.

Actually, she did seem to think the Old God counted.  In fact, her goal was to litterally birth one free of the Taint.

The Old Gods are powerful, and Morrigan respects power. She advocates sparing Sten and Jowan, who are powerful in their own ways. She implores The Warden toward goals that empower him. The Old Gods are near extinction because of the darkspawn taint; it doesn't automatically make her a believer simply because she had the soul of an Old God transferred to her womb.

[TheJediSaint]

Xilizhra wrote...

No, she certainly believes they exist. Just that they don't qualify as a "higher power" to her.

Eh, I don't know about that.  We don't really know enough about WHAT Morrigan really is to know her prespective on these things.

[LobselVith8]

TheJediSaint wrote...

Eh, I don't know about that.  We don't really know enough about WHAT Morrigan really is to know her prespective on these things.

Morrigan makes her views known; I don't see why we should dismiss what Morrigan explicitly tells Leliana when their personal views are discussed.

[Adrian68b]

The POSITIVE about this forum, in my opinion is: if David Gaider was really concerned about players considering Morrigan an atheist, this could mean a high chance that MORRIGAN WILL BE BACK IN ACTION in DA3!
Does anyone knows about any explicite statement from David about Morrigan and her supposed atheism?

Modifié par Adrian68b, 22 septembre 2012 - 01:36 .

[TheJediSaint]

Adrian68b wrote...

The POSITIVE about this forum, in my opinion is: if David Gaider was really concerned about players considering Morrigan an atheist, this could really a high chance that MORRIGAN WILL BE BACK IN ACTION in DA3!
Does anyone knows about any explicite statement from David about Morrigan and her supposed atheism?

Well, there's certainly a good chance that at least one Witch of the Wilds making an apperance.  But I think Gaider's presence on this thread has more to due with him being annoyed that certain posters are twisting what he said in order to advance an agenda.

Modifié par TheJediSaint, 22 septembre 2012 - 01:37 .

[Xilizhra]

TheJediSaint wrote...

Adrian68b wrote...

The POSITIVE about this forum, in my opinion is: if David Gaider was really concerned about players considering Morrigan an atheist, this could really a high chance that MORRIGAN WILL BE BACK IN ACTION in DA3!
Does anyone knows about any explicite statement from David about Morrigan and her supposed atheism?

Well, there's certainly a good chance that at least one Witch of the Wilds making an apperance.  But I think Gaider's presence on this thread has more to due with him being annoyed that certain posters are twisting what he said in order to advance an agenda.

We're hardly twisting anything he said, just making sure that no one forgets his words. And forgetfulness.

[The Elder King]

Adrian68b wrote...

The POSITIVE about this forum, in my opinion is: if David Gaider was really concerned about players considering Morrigan an atheist, this could mean a high chance that MORRIGAN WILL BE BACK IN ACTION in DA3!
Does anyone knows about any explicite statement from David about Morrigan and her supposed atheism?

Bioware confirmed with other media that other Witches of the Wilds exist. Maybe we'll get another as a companion, who knows.
About this, I have to say that I have some concerns about Morrigan's  appereance. I doubt that they'll going to change her appareance, but considering the new aspect of Flemeth, which is shared by the other Witch shown, maybe they'll want to make a offical "outfit" for Witches of the Wild.

[LobselVith8]

TheJediSaint wrote...

Adrian68b wrote...

The POSITIVE about this forum, in my opinion is: if David Gaider was really concerned about players considering Morrigan an atheist, this could really a high chance that MORRIGAN WILL BE BACK IN ACTION in DA3!
Does anyone knows about any explicite statement from David about Morrigan and her supposed atheism?

Well, there's certainly a good chance that at least one Witch of the Wilds making an apperance.  But I think Gaider's presence on this thread has more to due with him being annoyed that certain posters are twisting what he said in order to advance an agenda.

That's petty. It's not an agenda to think that Dragon Age III should give the player (at least) the same level of freedom and control Origins did for the protagonist. The Warden can be atheist, and Morrigan voices that she believes in neither the Maker or a higher power. It's not an agenda when posters address Morrigan's actual dialogue.

[Adrian68b]

Oh, so he was cautious. I just hopped for some statement about Morrigan from him on another forum. Still, I think that even a vaguely stated concern about atheism is a good chance regarding Morrigan. She was the only character with such explicit dialogue lines.

Modifié par Adrian68b, 22 septembre 2012 - 01:47 .

[TheJediSaint]

Xilizhra wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

Adrian68b wrote...

The POSITIVE about this forum, in my opinion is: if David Gaider was really concerned about players considering Morrigan an atheist, this could really a high chance that MORRIGAN WILL BE BACK IN ACTION in DA3!
Does anyone knows about any explicite statement from David about Morrigan and her supposed atheism?

Well, there's certainly a good chance that at least one Witch of the Wilds making an apperance.  But I think Gaider's presence on this thread has more to due with him being annoyed that certain posters are twisting what he said in order to advance an agenda.

We're hardly twisting anything he said, just making sure that no one forgets his words. And forgetfulness.

He certainly seems to thinks you're twisting his words.  As well as lecturing him on what you think he got wrong in a setting he co-designed.  

[Xilizhra]

He certainly seems to thinks you're twisting his words. As well as lecturing him on what you think he got wrong in a setting he co-designed.

It's very far from unheard of for setting creators to forget details about their settings. Quite common, really.

[Wereparrot]

Xilizhra wrote...

No, she certainly believes they exist. Just that they don't qualify as a "higher power" to her.

If they are more powerful than her, then surely that constitutes a higher power of sorts, if not the higher power? It seems to me that Morrigan is agnostic rather than atheist. Maybe even pagan.

Modifié par Wereparrot, 22 septembre 2012 - 01:51 .

[TheJediSaint]

Xilizhra wrote...

He certainly seems to thinks you're twisting his words. As well as lecturing him on what you think he got wrong in a setting he co-designed.

It's very far from unheard of for setting creators to forget details about their settings. Quite common, really.

It's more common for certain fans of certain settings to misinterpret them and then lecture said creators on what they got wrong because the setting continutiy does not match their head-canon.

Modifié par TheJediSaint, 22 septembre 2012 - 01:51 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

TheJediSaint wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

He certainly seems to thinks you're twisting his words. As well as lecturing him on what you think he got wrong in a setting he co-designed.

It's very far from unheard of for setting creators to forget details about their settings. Quite common, really.

It's more common for certain fans of certain settings to misinterpret them and then lecture said creators on what they got wrong because the setting continutiy does not match their head-canon.

Dude, stop arguing. Go and find the other thread. Gaider makes statements about how there was no option to doubt the existence of the Maker in DAO, and how Morrigan didn't disbelieve in the Maker. There's no need to argue when there is evidence.

@Wereparrot: Really? By that logic, Mr. T now constitutes a higher power, because he's more powerful than me. When some referes to a higher power, they refer to a life form that essentially created and has control over everything comprehensible to man.

The Old Gods most likely didn't create the world, and don't have control over everything. They do not constitute a "higher power".

AND, it's explicitly shown that she doesn't believe in a higher power. Why continue to dispute that?

Modifié par Gibb_Shepard, 22 septembre 2012 - 01:58 .

[Adrian68b]

"He certainly seems to thinks you're twisting his words. As well as lecturing him on what you think he got wrong in a setting he co-designed."

That is fortunate for me, because I have no issues in the line of twisting or lecturing David. I only admire his work.
My only alarm was about the name DA3 Inquisition, because for me it was like DA3 Serial Killer. A fanatical templar mage killer or a dogmatic mass murderer priest were disturbing options (in order to play) for me. But now I am positive it will not be the case.