79 réponses à ce sujet

[Sable Rhapsody]

 So there's been a lot of requests on the forums for DA3 to let us pick sides.  Mages, templars...bah.  I'd like DA3 to preserve a dialogue option we had in DA2--a roleplaying choice that sides with neither.

Sure, you eventually had to throw your lot in with either Meredith or Orsino, but DA2 didn't automatically assume that Hawke sympathized with either based on that final decision.  Throughout the game, and especially in Act 3, Hawke can try and act as the voice of reason with middle dialogue options.  I'd like to see that continue with the new protagonist in DA3.  There's more to the conflict than just being pro-mage or pro-templar, and I hope the dialogue continues to reflect that.

I would also like to draw a distinction between roleplaying a character who wants to end the war without picking sides, and actually being able to do so in-game.  IMO it makes sense that Hawke, who is just one person, can't really stop a war that's centuries in the making.  The point is that in trying to do so, we get to define Hawke's personality and beliefs as a person rather than having them pushed on us.  

Thoughts?

[Emzamination]

If you're not with us, you're our enemy.

[Sylvanpyxie]

Thoughts?

Please gods, yes.

Neutrality is something I always try to maintain in an RPG that has warring factions. I find it never helps to side with one political or fanatical faction over another, so it's nice to have the option to avoid both until the final moments where a decision must be made.

I don't expect to remain neutral forever, but at the very least it would be nice to remain neutral until I know the agendas of all factions involved. I would like to see how each side holds itself and what cards they're intending to play before I'm forced to make a decision.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 28 septembre 2012 - 10:17 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

Emzamination wrote...

If you're not with us, you're our enemy.

If y'all have the option to be fanatics come DA3, some of us should have the option to be a bit more evenhanded in our approach 

[Emzamination]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

If you're not with us, you're our enemy.

If y'all have the option to be fanatics come DA3, some of us should have the option to be a bit more evenhanded in our approach 

The order dictates: To go against the templars is to go against the maker himself 

[Icinix]

New Faction?

The Grey Inquisitors?

But yes - being forced to pick a side would suck. Player freedom doesn't need to necessarily affect the way the game plays out in any major way - but the players motivations and reasoning being free to define by the player is always awesome.

[Dave of Canada]

Asunder created a third faction, the Divine which seeks to recreate the Circles with more leniant tendancies. She'd probably be the closest thing to "neutral" you get.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Sylvanpyxie wrote...
I don't expect to remain neutral forever, but at the very least it would be nice to remain neutral until I know the agendas of all factions involved. I would like to see how each side holds itself and what cards they're intending to play before I'm forced to make a decision.

Hmm.  It made sense that we couldn't stay neutral at the end of DA2--the mages and templars were coming to blows after Anders' little temper tantrum no matter what, and the battle lines ended up being drawn across Hawke's own party.  

But preventing a war (DA2) and ending a war (DA3) are two very different things.  Maybe we will be able to end the war without picking sides in DA3.  Yay for speculation!

[Coachdongwiffle]

all I care s that their is a chance to fail. Maybe dancing in the middle just won't work. And if you don't pick a side soon enough they destroy each other. just be different.

[jkflipflopDAO]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

 So there's been a lot of requests on the forums for DA3 to let us pick sides.  Mages, templars...bah.  I'd like DA3 to preserve a dialogue option we had in DA2--a roleplaying choice that sides with neither.

Sure, you eventually had to throw your lot in with either Meredith or Orsino, but DA2 didn't automatically assume that Hawke sympathized with either based on that final decision.  Throughout the game, and especially in Act 3, Hawke can try and act as the voice of reason with middle dialogue options.  I'd like to see that continue with the new protagonist in DA3.  There's more to the conflict than just being pro-mage or pro-templar, and I hope the dialogue continues to reflect that.

I would also like to draw a distinction between roleplaying a character who wants to end the war without picking sides, and actually being able to do so in-game.  IMO it makes sense that Hawke, who is just one person, can't really stop a war that's centuries in the making.  The point is that in trying to do so, we get to define Hawke's personality and beliefs as a person rather than having them pushed on us.  

Thoughts?

Personally, I'm just sick of the Mage/Templar/Chantry dynamic as a whole. Churches are beyond boring. I like that it's there in the background like DA:O. . . it gives you a grounded feeling that Theadas is a real place with history and religon. But as a main storytelling device? Ugh. . . just put me to sleep now. I may as well buy $50 worth of Ambien. 

There was no real choice in DA2, and that's one of the things that made it really, really suck. You are forced to side with either the sniveling little mages or the overbearing templars. I couldn't care less about either of them, really. And now here we go with yet another game with a storyline just like the universally panned DA2.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Asunder created a third faction, the Divine which seeks to recreate the Circles with more leniant tendancies. She'd probably be the closest thing to "neutral" you get.

That's true, and I think Justinia's one of the few reasonable, sane people left at this point.  But you don't necessarily have to have a neutral faction to play a neutral-minded character.

I just don't want the Inquisitor to railroaded into sympathizing with one side or another.  Whether neutrality is actually a viable option for stopping the war is a different (but still interesting) issue.

[filetemo]

LOL at the thought of a neutral Inquisitor.

"Everybody with strong opinions on whatever will be executed"
"I condemn you to 20 years in prison for strongly liking cookies"

[joshko]

I agree, I don't sympathize with ether side at all. I would love option to crush them both and bend them to my evil will!

[jkflipflopDAO]

filetemo wrote...

LOL at the thought of a neutral Inquisitor.

"Everybody with strong opinions on whatever will be executed"
"I condemn you to 20 years in prison for strongly liking cookies"

[Sable Rhapsody]

filetemo wrote...
"Everybody with strong opinions on whatever will be executed"
"I condemn you to 20 years in prison for strongly liking cookies"

For the bland biscuits!

In all seriousness, you can have very scary characters who don't pick obvious sides.  An Inquisitor who is ruthlessly devoted to ending the war no matter the cost might see both mage and templar as violent troublemakers, and respond with overwhelming force.  

[Darkin30]

I find all this mage vs templar stuff pretty boring, just give me some darkspawn to kill

[Emzamination]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Asunder created a third faction, the Divine which seeks to recreate the Circles with more leniant tendancies. She'd probably be the closest thing to "neutral" you get.

How sad that even the divine has succumbed to blood magic.Is there no moral ground too low for mages to stoop? smh...

[Quicksilver26]

Darkin30 wrote...

I find all this mage vs templar stuff pretty boring, just give me some darkspawn to kill

here here lets killey darkspawn 

Modifié par Quicksilver26, 28 septembre 2012 - 10:57 .

[filetemo]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

filetemo wrote...
"Everybody with strong opinions on whatever will be executed"
"I condemn you to 20 years in prison for strongly liking cookies"

For the bland biscuits!

In all seriousness, you can have very scary characters who don't pick obvious sides.  An Inquisitor who is ruthlessly devoted to ending the war no matter the cost might see both mage and templar as violent troublemakers, and respond with overwhelming force.  

"I apathically condemn you to be beheaded. The butcher will execute you with moderate cruelty  in front of a non particularly interested crowd"

[Sable Rhapsody]

filetemo wrote...
"I apathically condemn you to be beheaded. The butcher will execute you with moderate cruelty  in front of a non particularly interested crowd"

Neutral =/= apathetic.  Though it would be very funny if you could troll the fanatics in-game, and I would love BioWare forever if they let me do it.

"Yeah, yeah, freedom, oppression, Maker's will, whatEVER.  I just wanna get to the goddamn weekend, this job doesn't pay enough to be worth the trouble."

[Icinix]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

filetemo wrote...
"I apathically condemn you to be beheaded. The butcher will execute you with moderate cruelty  in front of a non particularly interested crowd"

Neutral =/= apathetic.  Though it would be very funny if you could troll the fanatics in-game, and I would love BioWare forever if they let me do it.

"Yeah, yeah, freedom, oppression, Maker's will, whatEVER.  I just wanna get to the goddamn weekend, this job doesn't pay enough to be worth the trouble."

I think having the option of being able to do that all through the game would be enough to make me pre-order the CE.

[filetemo]

"neutral inquisitor" is the new "sarcastic hawke"

"Inquisitor, what should be do with this morally grey issue?"
"Let's go home and return tomorrow to see if it has fixed itself"
"I...strongly agree, Inquisitor"
"Strongly you said?"
"no!, I mean... your solution is just kind of correct"
"excellent"

[Dr. wonderful]

Yes.

I'm really, really really sick of hearing Mages and Templar. Varric said it best"

Hawke: Mage this, Templar that, is there anywhere in Kirkwall people don't talk about this?
Varric: No, and I've looked, believe me. Even the rats in Darktown are following this mess.
Merrill: Really? Which side are they on?
Varric: About a third support the templars, a third are pro-mage, and the rest support more cheese on both sides.
Sebastian: The last time the mages rebelled against the Chantry, they ended up ruling Tevinter. Should we just ignore them?
Anders: Well, if it's not too much trouble...

[Big I]

I just hope that DA3 is the last time Bioware makes mages vs templars a major plot point. As it is it's the third time so far.


In origins I saved the Circle and used the boon to give the mages autonomy. I even helped out the mage underground and helped Jowan escape (twice). In DA2 I sided with Orsino, after taking every opportunity to help mages prior to that (sent Feynriel to the Dalish, helped the Starkhaven mages escape, etc). Now (if as seems likely) DA3 presents us with the mage vs templars dilemma yet again. How many times am I going to have to side with the mages before there's some sort of resolution to the issue?