357 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

An Inquisition is 99% of the time organized by a religious faction. In DA there is only one religious faction humans follow (Note we are only playing humans also), that is the Chantry.

The original one was not, it was just co-opted by the Chantry when Drakon didn't want them making a mess of his yard. Also, there are other human groups: the Chasind and some Avvars, for instance, not to mention human qunari and Old God cultists.

[In Exile]

Xilizhra wrote...
But you can do both. It'll lose approval with Alistair, but it's totally possible.

You can't. Just look at your dialogue with Wynne - you don't get a "**** this noise, don't call me a Grey Warden, I'm not one of them no matter how much Darkspawn blood Duncan and his fetishists make me swallow" option.

I assume you didn't romance Merrill, then, as mine was led by the nose into saying that Leandra was with the Maker.

I'm pretty sure that even if you romance Merril, you don't get railroaded in that without picking (and or being) Diplomatic.

The Hierophant wrote...
It depends on the beliefs, and
neutrality of the organization the Inquisitor belongs to. If they're a
chant of light spewing entity who's just the chantry with a new coat of
paint then it's likely that the pc is set in their beliefs to varying
degrees.

We'll have to see.

The Grey Wardens in comparison are an organization who's only
goal is to fight the darkspawn threat. The religious or sociopolitical
beliefs differ among it's members as the organization is comprised of
dwarven nobles, castless, Dalish, city elves, Justice(temporarily),
human nobility/commoners, and mages.

That's not what I'm talking about. I mean, DA:O has you care about Ferelden and/or the Warden as forced views no matter what. That's no different (design-wise) than what DA3 is (allegedly) doing. People just seem to not be as annoyed.

I think it's mostly an issue
of perceiving the pc to have set beliefs, and the lack of the ability
to shape them due to the word Inquisition and the irl stigma it holds.

Maybe ... but then it's selective, as I keep saying, because DA:O was the same way.

Xilizhra wrote...
I do play diplomatic and found it obnoxious,
but more tolerable than the non-battlecry lines. As for the rest, just
inserting lines that are allowable to be interpreted that way is fine,
assuming you're never at all forced to say anything religious.

That's my point - the design failure here (from our secular POV) is Bioware's anchoring of diplomatic and Andrastian lines. But, frankly, I think that there isn't a link between the faith and Hawke's faith.

The dominant culture (in Ferelden, and Kirkwall) is Andrastian. If you're being polite, you're likely using Andrastian phrases. You can bet that if I wanted to be socially normative (i.e., diplomatic) and I was in an uber religious zone, I'd be praising [insert Diety] whenver socially appropriate, without being religious.

That's the point of being secular - saying this thing without meaning it.

The Grey Wardens don't try to enforce any individual Warden's beliefs.

"I don't want to forcefully drink darkspawn blood or join your order; I love my wife and kids" (Totally Not Jory")

*STAB*

The GWs enforce a hell of a lot under force of death.

Modifié par In Exile, 22 octobre 2012 - 02:10 .

[Gewehr_fr]

I'm atheist IRL but in a fantasy universe where magic, spirits and demons exist, forcing my character to believe in the maker doesn't bother me either way.

Though I liked that in DA:O you could clearly express your opinion on the matter.

[Zobo]

A lot of people like to roleplay by projecting their own personality into their characters as far as possible. So should those players be atheist, they would like to be able to transfer this trait to their characters naturally. It feels really wrong when you can't do this because bein atheist/religious person is one of the fundamental human defining characteristics in terms of a mindset and philosophical views. It is not something insignificant you can cast aside, it is actually a really big deal in real life and so it is in fiction accordingly.

In some fantasy stories gods existing is a matter of fact, confirmed multiple times by their obvious recent interventions etc. There the question usually shifts from "Am I a believer?" to "I know for a fact some gods exist, now should I be a worshipper or shouldn't I?" or even to "What being a god even means, how much power they really have, what are their origins?" Dragon Age is not like this. Maker does not appear before people, things that can be explained by his deeds can be also explained by something else (like with The Urn of Sacred Ashes writers did specifically provide us with an alternative explanation to it's powers). Tales about Andraste are ancient. So it makes perfect sense to be an atheist in-lore.

The notion that atheism was nonexistent in middle ages that appears on this forums from time to time simply doesn't hold truth. Just check up Wikipedia.

As for why there are so many people asking for this. Well, it appears we have a lot of atheists withing this community. I'm pretty sure more than we have gay people for example. So it's only natural that atheists want some recognition as well.

Modifié par Zobo, 22 octobre 2012 - 02:22 .

[LobselVith8]

In Exile,

I didn't have an issue with the Grey Wardens. They seek to stop the Blight, and save the world from the Archdemons who would otherwise overrun all known civilization with their horde of darkspawn, who eat people and violate women. The difference between being coerced into working for Duncan, and working for the Chantry, is that I see no altruistic reason to help the Chantry restore the status quo; I don't agree with what they did to the Dales, I despise what they do to the mages in the Circles of Magi, and I wouldn't find any entertainment in working for them in Inquisition (assuming this is the case).

If I find no entertainment in working for the Chantry, why would I purchase a game that forces my protagonist to do so?

Also, I'm aware the Cousland Warden could say that he didn't believe in the Maker. That doesn't change the fact that Hawke didn't have the same option. As I said previously, I had to deal with Hawke invoking his faith to Feynriel and Merrill about Leandra's death, and he didn't feel like my character when I Bioware dictated who Hawke was.

[Xilizhra]

You can't. Just look at your dialogue with Wynne - you don't get a "**** this noise, don't call me a Grey Warden, I'm not one of them no matter how much Darkspawn blood Duncan and his fetishists make me swallow" option.

Well, you are a Grey Warden. It's impossible to not be.

I'm pretty sure that even if you romance Merril, you don't get railroaded in that without picking (and or being) Diplomatic.

You basically tell her to **** off if you don't take that line.

That's not what I'm talking about. I mean, DA:O has you care about Ferelden and/or the Warden as forced views no matter what. That's no different (design-wise) than what DA3 is (allegedly) doing. People just seem to not be as annoyed.

Because there's no logical reason one would have to have a certain religious belief to sort this war out, while one has to care about stopping the darkspawn to fight the darkspawn.

The dominant culture (in Ferelden, and Kirkwall) is Andrastian. If you're being polite, you're likely using Andrastian phrases. You can bet that if I wanted to be socially normative (i.e., diplomatic) and I was in an uber religious zone, I'd be praising [insert Diety] whenver socially appropriate, without being religious.

That's the point of being secular - saying this thing without meaning it.

A. that's unsatisfying, and B. Hawke was saying it to Merrill, who doesn't even believe in the Maker. There's no logical reason to uphold cultural values or whatever with her.

"I don't want to forcefully drink darkspawn blood or join your order; I love my wife and kids" (Totally Not Jory")

*STAB*

The GWs enforce a hell of a lot under force of death.

Not the issue I'm concerned about.

[upsettingshorts]

So let me get this straight.

You guys are talking about how you hate being restricted by character in one fashion, and this is a big deal to you.

In Exile talks about how in DA:O something similar happened to him, and you respond by saying it wasn't a big deal to you.

Just want to make sure I'm following along.

[Xilizhra]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

So let me get this straight.

You guys are talking about how you hate being restricted by character in one fashion, and this is a big deal to you.

In Exile talks about how in DA:O something similar happened to him, and you respond by saying it wasn't a big deal to you.

Just want to make sure I'm following along.

I disagree with In Exile's comparison in several points. I don't oppose at all his/her preference for having more options to express regarding one being a Warden, however.

[LobselVith8]

sandellniklas wrote...

I've always found it odd that people want their characters to be atheist/agnostic in a fantasy game.

I don't see why it would be odd. Atheism has existed for centuries. It isn't a new concept for people not believe there isn't a god or a higher power. Furthermore, the ability for the protagonist to express this makes the point moot. Also, Ferelden's medieval-like setting incorporates many modern concepts, such as the equality between genders, and the treatment of homosexuality. I don't see why you have an issue with atheism specifically.

Also, if Hawke says his deceased mother is with the Maker, if he tells Feynriel he hopes the Maker watches over them, then I'm not given a choice over my protagonist's religious beliefs. Hawke is essentially a religious Andrastian, regardless of what I think. That may not be an issue for you, but it is an issue for me.

[syllogi]

Although this isn't a big issue for me, I have a hard time believing that there are no atheists in Thedas. Belief in magic and dragons, for example, is easy to digest in this world, even if one has not seen it with their own eyes, because there is enough proof of the existence of magic and dragons to make it silly to deny them.

Belief in the Maker, however, is almost completely based on faith alone. In the real world, people have struggled with faith in a higher power since the beginning of organized religion. Even if the majority has no problem with their faith, it's not hard to believe that scholars and philosophers (and in Thedas, mages) would question the existence of a divine power which does not make its presence known.

I have no problem with "taking the name in vain" of Andraste or the Maker, since that doesn't necessarily mean one believes, but giving us the choice to play a non-believer would be interesting.

[Terrorize69]

Xilizhra wrote...

That's not what I'm talking about. I mean, DA:O has you care about Ferelden and/or the Warden as forced views no matter what. That's no different (design-wise) than what DA3 is (allegedly) doing. People just seem to not be as annoyed.

Because there's no logical reason one would have to have a certain religious belief to sort this war out, while one has to care about stopping the darkspawn to fight the darkspawn.

Actually, it does make sense. Both factions Templar and Mages are largely followers of the Maker, and both take his words in different ways.

Templars believe that "Magic is meant to serve man, not rule over him" means that Mages should also be watched and that if left alone, Mages will rule over man. Or some dumb logic like that .

Where as mages believe its not ruling over man just to have the same rights as anyone else.

Most likely it would take a fellow follower of the Maker to help bring about peace by playing on their beliefs.

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote..
I didn't have an issue with the Grey Wardens.

Yeah, but I (or, rather, most of my characters) did.

They seek to stop the Blight, and save the world from the Archdemons who would otherwise overrun all known civilization with their horde of darkspawn, who eat people and violate women.

Ignoring how bad they are at doing this, yes, they get to sell a story that we (the players) are more likely to believe. But in game, the Chantry is all about saving immortal souls and (kind of funny, this one) stopping horrors like the blight from ever happening because of their control of mages. Now, obviously, the Chantry's justficiation (from my actual POV) is a crock. But they get to have one, as much as the Wardens do.

The difference between being coerced into working for Duncan, and working for the Chantry, is that I see no altruistic reason to help the Chantry restore the status quo; I don't agree with what they did to the Dales, I despise what they do to the mages in the Circles of Magi, and I wouldn't find any entertainment in working for them in Inquisition (assuming this is the case).

I'm not denying any of that - and I'm not saying you should play a game where you have to do this.

All I'm saying is that Bioware's found a new thing to force players to do, so pretending like DA:O was about player choice isn't quite right. It provided you the kind of choices you wanted - and that was special, and I'm sorry that DA2 didn't do that for you, and I'm sorry if DA:3 won't.

Also, I'm aware the Cousland Warden could say that he didn't believe in the Maker. That doesn't change the fact that Hawke didn't have the same option. As I said previously, I had to deal with Hawke invoking his faith to Feynriel and Merrill about Leandra's death, and he didn't feel like my character when I Bioware dictated who Hawke was.

Hawke did. My hawke, (troll Hawke!) got to do this to everyone. I got to mock the Gland Cleric, mention religion exactly zero times, not have any religious-themed battle lines ...

... DA2 felt like I got to be just as irreverent as I was when I had the Warden in DAO.

[In Exile]

Xilizhra wrote...
Well, you are a Grey Warden. It's impossible to not be.

"Well, you are an Inquisitor. It's impossible to not be."

... How is that even an answer!? 

You basically tell her to **** off if you don't take that line.

I'll watch the video. I just don't recall ever having to say this to Merril and having it break my romance. But it might have been that I had Isabella show up, because I hadn't yet romance Merril at that point in the game ...

Because there's no logical reason one would have to have a certain religious belief to sort this war out, while one has to care about stopping the darkspawn to fight the darkspawn.

There's no "logical reason", as you put it, to have to be a Grey Warden to want to stop the darkspawn, any more than there is a "logical reason" you have to be an Inquisitor (if we are one) .. except that in (both) cases Bioware wanted us to be stuck as one, so, basically, F-us.

A. that's unsatisfying, and B. Hawke was saying it to Merrill, who doesn't even believe in the Maker. There's no logical reason to uphold cultural values or whatever with her.

Like I said: I'll look at the scene again. I don't remember the game well enough to know how this works, but I'm pretty sure that like is linked to having a dominat Diplomatic Personality. Which is totally Bioware's failing, but not per se about DA2 not supporting atheisticPC (because, again, for my sarcastic Hawke it totally does!).

Not the issue I'm concerned about.

But it's the same issue! It's Bioware forcing you into doing something you find morally abhorent with no way out. Your only answer to this is that this is morally better to you, the player, because you actually agree with the Grey Wardens.

[LobselVith8]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

So let me get this straight.

You guys are talking about how you hate being restricted by character in one fashion, and this is a big deal for you.

In Exile talks about how in DA:O something similar happened to him, and you respond by saying it wasn't a big deal for you.

If the point was that In Exile thinks there should have been more options to express his discomfort with the Wardens, then he has every right to argue that point; I certainly don't disagree that more options would be a good thing. If the point is that I shouldn't mind joining an organization with ties to the Chantry because The Warden can be coerced into joining the Grey Wardens, then I don't agree. I don't see the comparison between joining an organization that is focused on stopping the Blight, and working for a religious organization with values and morals you can strongly disagree with.

[Xilizhra]

"Well, you are an Inquisitor. It's impossible to not be."

... How is that even an answer!?

I have no objection to being an Inquisitor, just to being Andrastian.

I'll watch the video. I just don't recall ever having to say this to Merril and having it break my romance. But it might have been that I had Isabella show up, because I hadn't yet romance Merril at that point in the game ...

Oh, it doesn't break the romance. It's just rude.

There's no "logical reason", as you put it, to have to be a Grey Warden to want to stop the darkspawn, any more than there is a "logical reason" you have to be an Inquisitor (if we are one) .. except that in (both) cases Bioware wanted us to be stuck as one, so, basically, F-us.

Again, I don't mind being the Inquisitor, I just don't want to be Andrastian.

[MisterJB]

And the Grey Wardens are not an organization with values and morals you can strongly disagree with?
Sure, I don't think anyone would disagree with stopping the Blight but, similarly, would you disagree with the goal of protecting the world from mages who would abuse their powers?
Probrably not. So, the problem you have is with their method, yes? But the Grey Wardens also defend a "By any means necessary" approach. They will kill an soon to be father if he learns too much about the Joining, throw a man into a river of lava because they suspect he is tainted, keep an instrument that runs on the souls of the deceased.

You can say that your Warden would never have done those things. I'm sure your Inquisitor won't be forced to take mage children from their families.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

And the Grey Wardens are not an organization with values and morals you can strongly disagree with?
Sure, I don't think anyone would disagree with stopping the Blight but, similarly, would you disagree with the goal of protecting the world from mages who would abuse their powers?
Probrably not. So, the problem you have is with their method, yes? But the Grey Wardens also defend a "By any means necessary" approach. They will kill an soon to be father if he learns too much about the Joining, throw a man into a river of lava because they suspect he is tainted, keep an instrument that runs on the souls of the deceased.

You can say that your Warden would never have done those things. I'm sure your Inquisitor won't be forced to take mage children from their families.

And I want to keep people from doing such things ever again.

In any case, that's not a point. It's not about actions, it's about beliefs. I don't want my beliefs to be dictated into one religion by the game.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 22 octobre 2012 - 02:45 .

[LobselVith8]

In Exile,

If your contention is that you should have been able to express discomfort or outrage at being a Grey Warden, I don't disagree with you. I think more options could have also helped to explain why the protagonist might want to save Ferelden if they had reason not to care. However, I don't think the Chantry is altruistic; I think it's a vile and monstrous organization that enslaves an entire race of people for having magical ability, and that it sacked a nation to forcibly convert them to the Chantry of Andraste. You're welcome to your opinion on the Chantry, but it isn't going to change mine any more than mine will change yours.

Was DA:O perfect with choice? No, and that certainly wasn't my contention. My issue was that the choices we did have in Origins were not available in Dragon Age II. Instead of stripping away our choices, why not give us more? Why not improve on the flaws of Origins, instead of railroading our characters and taking away our ability to shape who the protagonist is?

Having disagreements with Grand Cleric Elthina over her passivity isn't quite what I wanted from Dragon Age II. Instead of looking at the missed opportunities from Origins and thinking "Why should they change now?" why shouldn't we seek to expand on our range of choices and freedoms with our protagonist?

[CS420]

Um IDK. Maybe some of them are pissed off that they can't do anything about that fact that organized religion, well, exists irl and want to use in-game religion as a stand in?

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...
If the point was that In Exile thinks there should have been more options to express his discomfort with the Wardens, then he has every right to argue that point; I certainly don't disagree that more options would be a good thing. If the point is that I shouldn't mind joining an organization with ties to the Chantry because The Warden can be coerced into joining the Grey Wardens, then I don't agree.

My point is neither. My point is that Bioware always forces you into choices like this. It's that DA:O and DA3 would be identical insofar as you'd have to force your PC into the mold that Bioware wants, with the only difference being that you liked DA:O's mold.

I don't see the comparison between joining an organization that is
focused on stopping the Blight, and working for a religious organization
with values and morals you can strongly disagree with.

Wait, are you kidding? The point is that it's an organization with values and morals I strongly disagree with.

Xilizhra wrote...
Oh, it doesn't break the romance. It's just rude.

Do you know what the line is? My google-fu is weak.

Again, I don't mind being the Inquisitor, I just don't want to be Andrastian.

Just like I don't mind being forced into the GWs, I mind being forced to say I identify as being one. But Bioware never cares about this sort of thing. Which is the only point I was trying to make.

[Wulfram]

I don't think equating "Everyone being eaten by evil zombies is bad" with "everyone should obey the Divine" makes sense. The first is not a controversial statement by any sane standards.

"I should do something about the evil zombies" is more debatable, but it's still a reasonable expectation that the protagonist in a heroic fantasy story should hold to it in some form, even if there's a coda along the lines of "because I can get rich/famous/powerful"

[Xilizhra]

And *I* don't want my beliefs to be dictated by the organization I am forced to join, and lead in DA:O. What's the difference?

Then DAO was an error for you, that I hardly think you'd want to see repeated in DA3.

Just like I don't mind being forced into the GWs, I mind being forced to say I identify as being one. But Bioware never cares about this sort of thing. Which is the only point I was trying to make.

And I want to campaign for this to hopefully show that it should.

Do you know what the line is? My google-fu is weak.

It's something along the lines of "you're not helping," or "go away, I want to be alone."

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...
Oh, it doesn't break the romance. It's just rude.

But it is not rude for Merril to suggest Leandra is with the Creators? My Hawke would have been extremely offended.