384 réponses à ce sujet

[spiritage]

Malfurus wrote...

ladydesire wrote...

Malfurus, here is a quote of what David Gaider said in this thread on this very subject:

Clerics in the classic sense of D&D won't work in Dragon Age. There
is no proof of the Divine, no 'holy power" as it were, any were such
power to suddenly manifest itself that would pretty much handle the
issue of the Maker's existence, wouldn't it? And that's not going to
happen -- the existence of the Divine is a matter of Faith. Were the
Maker to suddenly let his power be felt (especially in such a mundane
manner) that would only call into question the truth of his status as a
deity (as opposed to some powerful, extraplanar being... there is a difference, after all).

That
does not mean that Clerics couldn't potentially exist as a class,
however. They would not be the recipients of holy spells, but that
doesn't mean they couldn't be a form of warrior or have access to some
form of magic-like talents -- we would be talking, after all, about
Clerics with some form of special training and not your average priest
in a Chantry. Granting all Chantry priests some form of special power
just isn't going to happen, period.

This, in essence, is what Reynen Starfyre did with his community Cleric class, though it is somewhat overpowered compared to a DA Warrior; I'd hazard a guess that it's no more overpowered than a Mage/Arcane Warrior could be.

Again, it does not have to be the Maker that grants those powers. Even in his quote he acknowledges the possibility of "some powerful, extraplanar being", and THAT could be the source of the power. And did everyone forget about Morrigan's child? Whether you slept with her or not I'm sure that their is a big storyline in that direction. She stated that the child bears the soul of the Old Gods and that shes not interested in the tainted form but rather the true form and power of the Old Gods that it posses. You seriously can't tell me that after all that Bioware is going to be like "Oh no, Morrigan was wrong all along, she couldn't do crap with the kid, it didn't have any powers, actually he got twisted into an abomination of a darkspawn after it matured." He could come back and start a crusade, granting his followers powers, convincing them he's a God reborn . Granted he may not dwell in some divine plane, but none the less, its the POSSIBILITY. Having said that to have a Cleric is still a possibility in the game, so don't dismiss it. 

No. Take harry potter for instance, he doesnt know hes a "divine being" (in a sense being able to do magic) so the child wouldn't be able to know, he houses it. If you go through different real religions, you'd find that most say our bodies "house" a soul, but we don't understand it.  Seeing your obsession with clerics, make a DAO spinoff with them.

(I feel I didn't explain this correctly, and in a jumbled fashion)

Modifié par spiritage, 07 janvier 2010 - 01:28 .

[David Gaider]

Schwapp wrote...
Doesn't the above paragraph negate your whole position that the existence of clerics would confirm the existence of The Maker, though? The same argument could be made that the clerics are just attributing their abilities to The Maker based on their feelings and faith, while the rest of the world doubts the veracity of their claims.

I understand that, for whatever reason, clerics still won't be put into the game, but the logic behind the explanation as to why is flawed.

Perhaps it's because you don't understand the argument.

If you have someone who is casting spells, the fact that they *believe* that those spells come from the Maker is pretty irrelevant. They're mages. It's also something the Chantry would not agree with. The Maker doesn't go around granting magic to his followers. That goes against the very fundamental beliefs of the Chantry regarding magic in the first place.

Even if you had followers of some other religion who were going around casting their spells, they would still be considered mages. The entire premise of clerics as a class (or so I'm led to believe) is that they have holy power. Not pretend holy power, but actual holy power that drives off undead and evil -- the direct intervention of their god. And while I speculated that their "god" could simply be some extraplanar being, we don't have any such being in Dragon Age. I'll allow that we could always introduce such a thing, but it would have to pretty specifically not be an omnipotent god in any shape or form that would challenge the nature of faith in our setting. Because we consider that to be very important.

[YunDog]

I was reading in one of the loading screens that the fade has justice, and other good attribute demons as well, they just are not as 'extraverted'. Couldnt one these be acting as a deity for some cult/order - they empower the demon by belief and he empowers them with magical powers. The demon also get to influence to mortal world through his believers utilizing its powers. The true nature of the demon as either a fade demon or old god could be a matter of contention - like all the different religions in real life - there doesnt need to be one god (the maker) - the chantry believes in 'the one maker' - but that doesnt give them a monopoly on deities. In the real world we have many gods - all believers think theirs is the one true one. Or maybe Ive missed some critical point reagrding the makers uniqueness and undeniability.

[DBHolm]

David Gaider wrote...
If you have someone who is casting spells, the fact that they *believe* that those spells come from the Maker is pretty irrelevant. They're mages. It's also something the Chantry would not agree with. The Maker doesn't go around granting magic to his followers. That goes against the very fundamental beliefs of the Chantry regarding magic in the first place.

The Chantry might not agree, but that matters only as far as the populace will let it. If a majority could be convinced that the Maker is the source of a specific branch of magic (or all magic, for that matter), they could pass those teachings on instead of the Chantry's -- a rival religion, if you will.

Yes, they would be mages -- they'd be wielding magic. Their power would not stem from the Maker, no matter how much they believed it, and any mage capable of learning the magic could do so without being affiliated with them. That isn't really in dispute. But they can claim just about anything, as long as the question of faith remains unanswered.

David Gaider wrote...
Even if you had followers of some other religion who were going around casting their spells, they would still be considered mages. The entire premise of clerics as a class (or so I'm led to believe) is that they have holy power. Not pretend holy power, but actual holy power that drives off undead and evil -- the direct intervention of their god. And while I speculated that their "god" could simply be some extraplanar being, we don't have any such being in Dragon Age. I'll allow that we could always introduce such a thing, but it would have to pretty specifically not be an omnipotent god in any shape or form that would challenge the nature of faith in our setting. Because we consider that to be very important.

Does it matter whether the magic itself is holy? If it accomplishes what you describe, and the mages who cast such magic claim it is holy, who can disprove them? Even claims of mages unaffiliated with such a religion wielding their magic could be discredited by simply saying it is a magical mimicry of their holy powers -- and that would only be a concern if they attempt to divorce their powers from the current idea of magic. They could instead promote the Maker as the source of all magic, though that would be an extremely controversial claim. 

I think clerics can be explained without challenging the nature of faith in Dragon Age, but it all depends on what kind of archetypes you will allow. If the cleric archetype is not what you seek, then that's that. 

[David Gaider]

DBHolm wrote...
I think clerics can be explained without challenging the nature of faith in Dragon Age, but it all depends on what kind of archetypes you will allow. If the cleric archetype is not what you seek, then that's that. 

Except that clerics as you describe them would just be a mage class by another name. Presumably a mage class that also allowed non-magical talents giving the use of weapons, which -- ignoring the Tank Mage design issue -- would also require the existence of a stamina bar in addition to a mana bar (which the engine does not currently allow). I assume we could just have all their talents, including weapon talents, run off the mana bar... but wouldn't that be weird?

And these wouldn't be Chantry clerics. Priests aren't suddenly going to start casting spells in our setting, healing or otherwise. It would have to be something else entirely. At which point what exactly is the purpose of calling it a "cleric" when they have no actual holy power and it's not actually a member of the clergy?

[addiction21]

YunDog wrote...

I was reading in one of the loading screens that the fade has justice, and other good attribute demons as well, they just are not as 'extraverted'. Couldnt one these be acting as a deity for some cult/order - they empower the demon by belief and he empowers them with magical powers. The demon also get to influence to mortal world through his believers utilizing its powers. The true nature of the demon as either a fade demon or old god could be a matter of contention - like all the different religions in real life - there doesnt need to be one god (the maker) - the chantry believes in 'the one maker' - but that doesnt give them a monopoly on deities. In the real world we have many gods - all believers think theirs is the one true one. Or maybe Ive missed some critical point reagrding the makers uniqueness and undeniability.

I dont think you missed the a point about the maker but you missed the "magice comes from the fade"  Even if these followers of some cult believe its a god and that they were granted were "holy powers" it is not the truth. They still follow a demon and it is still magic they are using.

I am not saying your example is impossible ( I am also not a writer or involved in crafting the lore so maybe I am wrong) Maybe how he empowers his/her followers would differ from the more common well known forms of of magic in DAO but it would still just be magic.

[DBHolm]

David Gaider wrote...

DBHolm wrote...
I think clerics can be explained without challenging the nature of faith in Dragon Age, but it all depends on what kind of archetypes you will allow. If the cleric archetype is not what you seek, then that's that. 

Except that clerics as you describe them would just be a mage class by another name. Presumably a mage class that also allowed non-magical talents giving the use of weapons, which -- ignoring the Tank Mage design issue -- would also require the existence of a stamina bar in addition to a mana bar (which the engine does not currently allow). I assume we could just have all their talents, including weapon talents, run off the mana bar... but wouldn't that be weird?

The powers and abilities available to them would be different than those available to warriors or mages. Otherwise, there would be little point. Design the class around the concept of a cleric, and you avoid the "tank mage" issue by never bringing it into that concept. They would not have the powers of a mage, even if they logically should have -- the game mechanics are forced to be divorced from the lore of the setting in some capacity. (Which is already done in the current game -- there is no logical reason why a warrior should be unable to learn certain rogue talents, for instance.)

As for their energy source... I am not a designer, but a cleric class should not have to have powers that are not mana-dependent -- any martial skills could be either passive or magic-based. A "holy smite" ability, for instance.

David Gaider wrote...
And these wouldn't be Chantry clerics. Priests aren't suddenly going to start casting spells in our setting, healing or otherwise. It would have to be something else entirely. At which point what exactly is the purpose of calling it a "cleric" when they have no actual holy power and it's not actually a member of the clergy?

I fully agree that the normal priests should not start casting spells. That would certainly change the nature of faith in the setting. But I do not see a conflict of interest in having a subgroup of priests, a group whose members are actually a kind of mage, take up the role of clerics, believing that their powers come from the Maker. It is not everyone who can become a mage, after all.

But really, the main reason why it is called a "cleric" is because that is what the archetype is called. I hesitate to describe the archetype exactly - the closest I can think of is "a warrior-priest wielding magic" - and it is much easier to simply call it by the commonly accepted name.

Modifié par DBHolm, 07 janvier 2010 - 03:30 .

[essarr71]

DBHolm wrote...
"a warrior-priest wielding magic"

So an arcane warrior with a deep loyalty to the chantry? 

Don't fix whats not broke, imo.  I just don't see how you can make a new class without it overlapping two existing specalizations or breaking the setting. 

[JTBehnke]

essarr71 wrote...

DBHolm wrote...
"a warrior-priest wielding magic"

So an arcane warrior with a deep loyalty to the chantry? 

Don't fix whats not broke, imo.  I just don't see how you can make a new class without it overlapping two existing specalizations or breaking the setting. 

Exactly.  I was just about to say myself that an Arcane Warrior/Spirit Healer Mage basically fits the archetype D&D established for clerics.  I'm gonna play one of these at some point.

[FieryDove]

David Gaider wrote...

DBHolm wrote...
I think clerics can be explained without challenging the nature of faith in Dragon Age, but it all depends on what kind of archetypes you will allow. If the cleric archetype is not what you seek, then that's that. 

Except that clerics as you describe them would just be a mage class by another name. Presumably a mage class that also allowed non-magical talents giving the use of weapons, which -- ignoring the Tank Mage design issue -- would also require the existence of a stamina bar in addition to a mana bar (which the engine does not currently allow). I assume we could just have all their talents, including weapon talents, run off the mana bar... but wouldn't that be weird?

You might as well ignore the tankmage issue anyhow. Mages for many people could most likely solo the game on nightmare except the "big bad" fights. As to clerics, I do recall the temp party members used weapons and Lilly even stunned things like a rogue if I recall correctly. However if someone wants to go healer and use weapons isn't that what arcane warrior is for?

I see clerics in DA more akin to warrior/rogue without any spells/mana at all. Many will disagree I'm sure. More options is always nice but I'm not complaining with what we have at all.

[hardvice]

The biggest fallacy I keep seeing people who think the existence of the Maker is confirmed in the game making again and again and again is equating "someone or something in the game says" with "the game says".



The *game* does not say the Black City is this or that, Andraste was this or that, the Ashes are this or that, etc. People and books *in the game* say these things. That's important; it's what makes for the ambiguity.



The fact that the Chantry says Andraste was a prophet can no more be cited as "proof" than the fact that Morrigan says there is no Maker. People in the game call Andraste a prophet; that does not necessarily make it so. People in the game say the ashes are the remains of Andraste and blessed with holy rather than magical powers; that does not necessarily make it so. They are expressing their beliefs, their interpretation of the evidence at hand. And in a world were (non-divine) magic is an every-day part of life, it would take some extraordinary proof to distinguish the divine from the merely magical.



This, of course, is not the same as saying there is no Maker, that Andraste was not a prophet, and that the ashes are not sacred. It's merely saying that divinity can neither be proven nor disproven within the current lore.

[JTBehnke]

vilnii wrote...

I truly wish the Maker were more active in this game, however that is implemented. Or at least the rewards of faith in him

Something simply does not hang together about a scenario where human beings en masse pursue a course without tangible rewards. Why are people having this faith? What has it done for them?

I have not seen the impact of faith anywhere in the game. There is all this calamity happening, powerful demons intervene in mortal affairs, the taint constantly threatens to annihilate society.

How has faith brought aid?

The same way faith brings aid in the real world.  Emotional succor and community.  The only thing in the game that relates to divine intervention might be the culmination of the Urn of Sacred Ashes quest, and even then, there's no guarantee that was the Maker doing it.

The templars have powers, but it doesn't seem to come from being devoted to the Maker.  Otherwise Alistair would probably not have the ability to use the templar powers, and neither would any PC who doesn't believe in the Maker, like a dwarf or a Dalish elf.

The Chantry isn't a fantasy world faith where their god actively walks the earth and does miracles for the heck of it.  It's based on religions here in our world, where we don't have conclusive proof our various god figures exist.

I think Leliana said it best when she told Shale, "Believing in something even when there is no proof is what faith is all about."

[Frozeal]

Arcane Warrior / Spirit Healer...





(?) Just an idea

[JTBehnke]

Frozeal wrote...

Arcane Warrior / Spirit Healer...


(?) Just an idea

I mentioned this already.

[Frozeal]

JTBehnke wrote...

Frozeal wrote...

Arcane Warrior / Spirit Healer...


(?) Just an idea

I mentioned this already.

hehehe that's cool, so more reasons for not adding "clerics" but... why would you think that someone who only makes a post with 7 words has read all the 11 pages ?

Modifié par Frozeal, 07 janvier 2010 - 04:57 .

[Schwapp]

David Gaider wrote...

Schwapp wrote...
Doesn't the above paragraph negate your whole position that the existence of clerics would confirm the existence of The Maker, though? The same argument could be made that the clerics are just attributing their abilities to The Maker based on their feelings and faith, while the rest of the world doubts the veracity of their claims.

I understand that, for whatever reason, clerics still won't be put into the game, but the logic behind the explanation as to why is flawed.

Perhaps it's because you don't understand the argument.

If you have someone who is casting spells, the fact that they *believe* that those spells come from the Maker is pretty irrelevant. They're mages. It's also something the Chantry would not agree with. The Maker doesn't go around granting magic to his followers. That goes against the very fundamental beliefs of the Chantry regarding magic in the first place.

Even if you had followers of some other religion who were going around casting their spells, they would still be considered mages. The entire premise of clerics as a class (or so I'm led to believe) is that they have holy power. Not pretend holy power, but actual holy power that drives off undead and evil -- the direct intervention of their god. And while I speculated that their "god" could simply be some extraplanar being, we don't have any such being in Dragon Age. I'll allow that we could always introduce such a thing, but it would have to pretty specifically not be an omnipotent god in any shape or form that would challenge the nature of faith in our setting. Because we consider that to be very important.

Right...it is that I don't understand your argument.

I, personally, believe that you're being a bit short-sighted on this. You're so intent on sticking to your "clerics have no place" position that you're not seeing all the possible ways they could fit.

Just because the established Chantry currently doesn't believe that The Maker would interact with its believers in a way that would grant them such powers doesn't mean there couldn't be an off-shoot that did.

And your argument said that having clerics wouldn't be appropriate because it would confirm the existence of The Maker in a world that has a lot riding on its existence being in question. It had nothing to do with how the Chantry would feel about it. I don't know how I was supposed to understand an argument that you didn't make, regardless of whether it was a sound one. 

The idea that powers that specifically effect undead would be confirmation of holy power is only a fact if you're intent on writing it that way in the game. We have a member of our party insisting she was given a sign by The Maker to join the party, so I don't know how a small group of characters insisting their powers against the undead come from The Maker breaks the game world. 

Heck, no one believes that a dwarf is worth anything to the study of magic, right? Yet there is a quest involving a dwarf and magic, no? The Chantry is supposed to hunt down mages like Morrigan, but they look the other way the entire game, no? The presence of a cleric class really screws up the sense of "reality" in game world more?

Again, keep clerics out of the game if you like. But don't try to say that it is a matter of rock-solid logic, rather than just an arbitrary decision made during the planning stages of the game.

[David Gaider]

Schwapp wrote...
Again, keep clerics out of the game if you like. But don't try to say that it is a matter of rock-solid logic, rather than just an arbitrary decision made during the planning stages of the game.

Err... of course it's an arbitrary decision made during the formation of the setting. How else do you think settings are made? I'm talking about the logic of how the setting works -- which I happen to know quite well, thank you. In terms of adding a base class to the game, one based on magic-wielding holy men, it doesn't work without adding something entirely new to the world... which, in the end, is simply another type of mage, insofar as the setting will view it.

How this is me being short-sighted I really can't imagine. But apparently anyone who doesn't agree with you just isn't thinking it through enough? I'm telling you that clerics, as they exist as an archetype, don't fit. You can do with that what you will.

[Schwapp]

hardvice wrote...

This, of course, is not the same as saying there is no Maker, that Andraste was not a prophet, and that the ashes are not sacred. It's merely saying that divinity can neither be proven nor disproven within the current lore.

But nothing is proven or disproved by the presence of clerics, either. Where they feel that their abilities come from proves as much as where people feel the healing power of the ashes comes from. 

[Schwapp]

David Gaider wrote...

Schwapp wrote...
Again, keep clerics out of the game if you like. But don't try to say that it is a matter of rock-solid logic, rather than just an arbitrary decision made during the planning stages of the game.

Err... of course it's an arbitrary decision made during the formation of the setting. How else do you think settings are made? I'm talking about the logic of how the setting works -- which I happen to know quite well, thank you. In terms of adding a base class to the game, one based on magic-wielding holy men, it doesn't work without adding something entirely new to the world... which, in the end, is simply another type of mage, insofar as the setting will view it.

How this is me being short-sighted I really can't imagine. But apparently anyone who doesn't agree with you just isn't thinking it through enough? I'm telling you that clerics, as they exist as an archetype, don't fit. You can do with that what you will.

And I'm pointing out to you that the your argument on why they couldn't fit is full of holes, really. A cleric class proves as much as a reformed bard/spy who believes she was sent on a mission from God or a prophet's ashes healing the deathly ill. 

I say you're short-sighted because you keep making statements that assert that clerics couldn't work in this world, rather than Bioware didn't feel it was worth the effort to fit them into the game. You're making statements of fact that the cleric class would just blow up the whole thing when that's far from being the case. In your mind, a spell that works specifically against the undead, wielded by a character that feels God grants them that power, is clear, indisputable proof of the divine. You apparently decided that for yourself some time ago and refuse to see anything else, which is evidence that you're being short-sighted/closed-minded on the subject (which, fyi, isn't as insulting or a clear example of "just because you don't agree with me, you're ____" as implying someone is too stupid to understand your argument).

I get that you know why decisions were made and all that, but knowing what can and can't fit into the game world is something that a player can have a fairly educated opinion on, as well. You're arguing there was something other than a plain ol' arbitrary decision made here when you defend the decision by suggesting that the cleric class just couldn't exist in the world as built. When confronted by the bits in the game that seem to confirm the existence of The Maker, you present arguments that would just as easily defend the presence of clerics unassociated with the Chantry as they would defend Andraste's ashes. But you're stubbornly refusing to entertain the idea.

[NONYAMUFF]

The thread still lives lol



http://social.biowar...561645/1#562849

[Schwapp]

David Gaider wrote...

DBHolm wrote...
I think clerics can be explained without challenging the nature of faith in Dragon Age, but it all depends on what kind of archetypes you will allow. If the cleric archetype is not what you seek, then that's that. 

Except that clerics as you describe them would just be a mage class by another name. Presumably a mage class that also allowed non-magical talents giving the use of weapons, which -- ignoring the Tank Mage design issue -- would also require the existence of a stamina bar in addition to a mana bar (which the engine does not currently allow). I assume we could just have all their talents, including weapon talents, run off the mana bar... but wouldn't that be weird?

And these wouldn't be Chantry clerics. Priests aren't suddenly going to start casting spells in our setting, healing or otherwise. It would have to be something else entirely. At which point what exactly is the purpose of calling it a "cleric" when they have no actual holy power and it's not actually a member of the clergy?

There is an admittedly crazy sect that has a man as its leader of the faith and believes some other wild things, but an off-shoot of the faith that has their clergy practicing magic that they claim to be holy just brings the game world crashing down around the player?

I do get that the stam/mana bar concern, but all the previous hangups about the possibility of clerics have hinged on the world-building concerns, not game mechanics. 

[David Gaider]

Schwapp wrote...
I get that you know why decisions were made and all that, but knowing what can and can't fit into the game world is something that a player can have a fairly educated opinion on, as well. You're arguing there was something other than a plain ol' arbitrary decision made here when you defend the decision by suggesting that the cleric class just couldn't exist in the world as built. When confronted by the bits in the game that seem to confirm the existence of The Maker, you present arguments that would just as easily defend the presence of clerics unassociated with the Chantry as they would defend Andraste's ashes. But you're stubbornly refusing to entertain the idea.

I've entertained the idea as far as I'm willing to, and I've already provided possible ways that a type of cleric class could be incorporated and still fit with the setting. And I think I've pretty clearly stated what won't work in the setting. And now I will take my stubborn, short-sighted self elsewhere. 

[Schwapp]

JTBehnke wrote...

vilnii wrote...

I truly wish the Maker were more active in this game, however that is implemented. Or at least the rewards of faith in him

Something simply does not hang together about a scenario where human beings en masse pursue a course without tangible rewards. Why are people having this faith? What has it done for them?

I have not seen the impact of faith anywhere in the game. There is all this calamity happening, powerful demons intervene in mortal affairs, the taint constantly threatens to annihilate society.

How has faith brought aid?

The same way faith brings aid in the real world.  Emotional succor and community.  The only thing in the game that relates to divine intervention might be the culmination of the Urn of Sacred Ashes quest, and even then, there's no guarantee that was the Maker doing it.

The templars have powers, but it doesn't seem to come from being devoted to the Maker.  Otherwise Alistair would probably not have the ability to use the templar powers, and neither would any PC who doesn't believe in the Maker, like a dwarf or a Dalish elf.

The Chantry isn't a fantasy world faith where their god actively walks the earth and does miracles for the heck of it.  It's based on religions here in our world, where we don't have conclusive proof our various god figures exist.

I think Leliana said it best when she told Shale, "Believing in something even when there is no proof is what faith is all about."

Well, actually, I'd argue the reverse on Alistair. He quite obviously isn't addicted to lyrium, so what else is the source of his abilities if not faith? I would think learning to be a templar as a specialty in the game would possibly carry with it conversion to faith in The Maker.

Not saying it proves the existence, just that it does more to prove than disprove.