9 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

Viscount will not dead if

- Hawke never be in Kirkwal
- Aveline never be in Kirkwal become the guard captain

You can't definitively state this. The Arishok is in Kirkwall regardless of Hawke's return. The Arishok is the one that kills the Viscount, motivated by his hatred of the people that live in Kirkwall. Hawke is one of the few that the Arishok actually respects.

I see no reason why the Arishok would not have led his Qunari group to raze the city. Furthermore, without Hawke, I also don't see why it would not be possible for the Arishok to go even further. Hawke literally stops the Arishok.

[Allan Schumacher]

Wrong, one of the devs just told you the exact opposite situation. Your entire basis for this "Kirkwall would be fine" thing is now invalid. It's like arguing with a chef that's been baking for years and telling him how to toast bread.

Just to nip this sort of response in the bud, don't use my word entirely as absolute gospel ammunition for the idea that "Kirkwall would be fine" is not at all plausible.

If someone wishes to think that Hawke was the catalyst that set all these events in motion, I think that that is fine. However, given what we know from the game lore, I do think that definitively stating that it would not have happened is something we cannot conclude.

Hawke wasn't a small time player, but the Qunari are already a boiling pot. There's no logical reason to definitively state that without Hawke's influence, the Qunari situation would never have escalated. Although I do think, given Hawke is the one that breaks it up, Hawke does prevent it from becoming much, much worse.

[Allan Schumacher]

I did notice that.  Luckily for you my benevolence knows no bounds.

I'm definitely more of a... cordwainer >.>

[Allan Schumacher]

If your point is to make it aware that you'd like to make sure the mage storyline in DA3 is more consistent with the lore, you've made yourself pretty clear in that regard....

[Allan Schumacher]

Surely a Mage cannot be neutral, the one who can do that must be neutral.

Why not?

[Allan Schumacher]

So let say, i have a friend who is a member of Al Qaeda, the best i can do is advise him/her to get out from Al Qaeda, but if ever USA anti-terrorist troop storm his/her house, i will defend him/her to death.

That's nice. But if you can't imagine someone else in your shoes doing something different, then there's nothing that can be said to convince you, but that's not mine or anyone else's fault.

This thread is very, very close to being closed due to the inclusion of real life political discussions, however.

That YOU would choose differently is actually irrelevant. It doesn't mean that everyone agrees with your perspective.

The judge cannot be someone who is from both side or either side, or his judgment will be questioned. either he is bias or not, it will be questioned, therefore his judgement fall.

This doesn't present a logical restriction to a mage heading up the Inquisition. Even if we assume all your assumptions are true (they aren't), a desperate Chantry can still appoint a mage if they feel it's the best thing in helping stop the war. Saying it absolutely cannot be done and is illogical is incorrect. I can logically construe a plethora of reasons for doing so.

Of course, you continue to assume that the Inquisition is intricately linked to the Chantry, even though there are many logical avenues available to you that doesn't require that. You just choose to not go down those roads.

The real question starts to become: why do you not acknowledge other possibilities?

[Allan Schumacher]

I don't see other possibilitis, whether Inquisitor is from the Chantry or not, still Mage Inquisitor cannot fit the job out of sentiment

I can.

[Allan Schumacher]

Nizaris1 wrote...

you don't understand, it is not about Anders word, it is about hat he did, what he did is remove the chance of compromise, because there is NO COMPROMISE

surely you don't understand the game

It becomes unproductive to dismiss a differing opinion as "simply not understanding the game" especially after i asked those who disagreed with you to not use my disagreement with you as additional ammunition against you.

[Allan Schumacher]

Nizaris1 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I don't see other possibilitis, whether Inquisitor is from the Chantry or not, still Mage Inquisitor cannot fit the job out of sentiment

I can.

Great

because i can't...not in my calculations

i think your next game will have many "retconings"...maybe?

or maybe disredard Varric as a reliable narrator?

At this point this thread is done. I think your calculations are wrong. That you think the only way out is via retconning is your own issue.

You seem unwilling to accept your perspectve is anything but flawless. Nothing will convince you otherwise so there is no point in continuing the discussion.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 25 décembre 2012 - 02:06 .