353 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

A purge of the nobility who oppose the protagonist, and are actively trying to kill the protagonist, which Xil confirmed was what we were discussing. 

And you think that the human population living in the territory you want to give to the elves are just going tp pack up and move things? That you wouldn't have to kill many and more of them?

I'm sure Alistair and Anora ran into the same situation, which might be what King Alistair eluded to Merrill in the "King Alistair" scene where you imported the Dalish Boon.

MisterJB wrote...

But fine, let's talk about the nobles. Let's assume that the elves were given...Redcliff by Anora. And let's assume that the humans have to move.
Eamon does not accept this and you can't blame him. His people have lived there for generations, that is their land.
He may or may not be willing to let the elves live alongside the humans and he may or may not be about to use violence but he is not moving and neither is anyone else in Redcliff.

And your suggestion is to kill him and Teagan and Connor certainly unless you want to have him try to retake his father's Arling eventually. 

Let me be frank. What's the point of this discussion? I already said I would prefer to help the elves reclaim the Dales, rather than see them continue to live under the rule of Orlais. In a civil war between the Empress and the Duke, I would prefer to aid the elves. You seem to disagree, so you aren't going to change your mind. I haven't changed my mind. Is there really an endgame to this discussion, because this seems to have turned from a discussion between friends (Xil and myself) throwing ideas out into an argument with people I never agree with on anything.

TheJediSaint is right. This is turning into a flame war, and I don't think there's a point in continuing this discussion when we never, ever agree.

[Sir JK]

Guys, can we please steer this back towards mage leadership. That's an interesting topic on it's own and the moral arguments aren't leading anywhere. A friend once told me that once you start splitting up posts you know the conversation has derailed and quite frankly, the truth of that statement is becoming rather clear here.

Also... on a sidenote... I'm concerned for you Lobsel. I have a nagging suspicion that you'll be terribly disappointed in any future games' potential to actually help you with the cause you've made up for yourself.

[TheJediSaint]

Sir JK wrote...

Also... on a sidenote... I'm concerned for you Lobsel. I have a nagging suspicion that you'll be terribly disappointed in any future games' potential to actually help you with the cause you've made up for yourself.

Near as I can tell, he wants to overthrow the Chantry and replace it with a secular humanist(or elfist) magocracy.  So yeah, he's in for some disapointment, I think.

[MisterJB]

LobselVith8 wrote...
If the homeland is given to the elves, logic dictates that the humans would need to relocate somewhere else because the land belongs to the elves, and they are going to move in to live there. The ruler of Ferelden gives the Hinterlands to the Dalish, up to and including the ruins of Ostagar.

So, you admit that you are simply assuming.
Assuming that Alistair or Anora drew a circle over an entire area and declared it a sovereign territory rather than simply allowing the elves to settle on the unhabited areas and govern themselves.
That anyone in their right minds would simply be ok with forced deportation. And that David Gaider would actually write this as an happy ending.

MisterJB wrote...
Elves still live in the occupied Dales, so that argument doesn't really work.

And now humans have been living there for 700 years worthy of generations. They have as much right to be there as the elves.
Not to mention you included Orlais.

I imagine that's pretty much what the elves have had to deal with every day of their lives - which is why I would prefer to see them govern themselves. Again, this was part of a hypothetical discussion, since I said I would like the option to help the elves reclaim the Dales rather than help either the Empress or the Duke, so I don't see the point in arguing my opinion over yours over a hypothetical scenario.

So, in your opinion, the proper response to Vaughan kidnapping some elven women is to just force every single man, woman and child in Denerim to pack up and move out.
I see a lot of point in opposing horrors such as these.

[LobselVith8]

Sir JK wrote...

Also... on a sidenote... I'm concerned for you Lobsel. I have a nagging suspicion that you'll be terribly disappointed in any future games' potential to actually help you with the cause you've made up for yourself.

You're concerned I'll be disappointed with Inquisition? The voiced protagonist and the paraphrases will return, so that already bothers me. As for the option to help the elves in the occupied Dales, I don't sincerely think we will have such an option. Xil and I were simply throwing around ideas in this thread - since no one really knows what Inquisition will be about (besides having mages and templars in some capacity), and I thought it'd be interesting to help the elves, rather than the Empress or the Duke.

Genuinely, I would like to help the elves, but I'm under no illusion that this will actually be one of the options available. I'm hoping that the narrative explores other aspects besides the schism between mages and templars, because I think most people have already made up their minds about the issue. I wonder how Lord Renvil Harrowmont might be doing, now that he's in Karl-Sharok (since my Hawke spared him). I want to see Kal-Sharok. I'd like to learn more about the other Dalish clans. I'd like to see what the Tevinter Imperium is like. I have other interests that still make be curious about how Inquisition will be.

As for Inquisition, I'm genuinely hoping for a proactive and intelligent protagonist who will have choices that matter. I'm still thinking that Fiona will be one of the leaders (and faces) of the mage rebellion. As long as I'm not helping the status quo...

Modifié par LobselVith8, 09 janvier 2013 - 08:54 .

[LobselVith8]

TheJediSaint wrote...

Sir JK wrote...

Also... on a sidenote... I'm concerned for you Lobsel. I have a nagging suspicion that you'll be terribly disappointed in any future games' potential to actually help you with the cause you've made up for yourself.

Near as I can tell, he wants to overthrow the Chantry and replace it with a secular humanist(or elfist) magocracy.  So yeah, he's in for some disapointment, I think. 

Actually, I suggested helping the elves reclaim the Dales, as opposed to helping the Empress or the Duke in their civil war, and also building a society that would be a mecca for mages as an overall goal of the Mage-Templar War, where mages and non-mages could live together. Hypothetical scenario, hypothetical goal.

Glad I could clarify the issue for you, TheJediSaint.

[Sir JK]

No... I'm afraid that when the struggle for mage rights do come up... you'll be terribly disappointed with it overall. The choices you're offered, the people you meet, the actions taken by npc, or even further explanations on how magic and fade works and interact. That just about anything that does not fit in perfectly will actually ruin what you desire.

The struggle for mage rights does sound like by far your biggest interest in the setting (closely followed by elves) and I'm concerned that your firm opinion on the matter leaves little room for any alternate interpretation. (I agree with just about everything you list you wish to see though).

I do agree on a level that Fiona will be one of the leaders. If Asunder really is a "half-canon" prelude she's certainly set up to be so. As is Adrian (not the leader, but a prominent voice). Though I suspect that it might also be someone completely new, since the books shouldn't be neccessary. It's just us "BSN freaks" (tounge-in-cheek in case anyone missed that) that really cares that much about the setting.

As my comments earlier indicated though, I'm very pessimistic about whether one can consider the prospective mage leader a genuinely good person though. I think we're far more likely (and the story better served) with someone more akin to Bhelen, Anora or Loghain as the overall warleader (who might not be the same person as the actual leader). Someone that might actually play real foul tactics and even be blind to better alternatives due to their own pride for the (in their eyes) greater good.

[MisterJB]

LobselVith8 wrote...
What's the point of this discussion?

Here is a point, I think it's a good one.
These ideas are wrong, these things have happened in the real world and it's always tragic, it's always horrible. Causing conflict because of what our ancestors did years ago, using the actions of a few to justify actions against all, forced deportations. These things just are not correct, they should not exist.
I hope that we have, at least, made you think a bit about what you're suggesting; that your lack of responses are because you realize the implications of it. Maybe it was all for nothing, I don't know.

I'm fine with an option to help the elves, I agree that they do not live privilleged lives. But this is the wrong way to go about it.

[LobselVith8]

Sir JK wrote...

No... I'm afraid that when the struggle for mage rights do come up... you'll be terribly disappointed with it overall. The choices you're offered, the people you meet, the actions taken by npc, or even further explanations on how magic and fade works and interact. That just about anything that does not fit in perfectly will actually ruin what you desire.

The struggle for mage rights does sound like by far your biggest interest in the setting (closely followed by elves) and I'm concerned that your firm opinion on the matter leaves little room for any alternate interpretation. (I agree with just about everything you list you wish to see though).

Helping the mages maintain their autonomy is a goal I would like to accomplish. I would like it to be like New Vegas, where you meet different people in the land, see the different extremes in the respective group, and be able to steer course in a certain direction (like how you can seek aid from a moderate in the NCR to deal with the situation with The Kings, rather than an extremist). As long as the characters are three-dimensional, I'll be fine with that. I thought mages and templars were given a bad hand in Dragon Age II, overall.

If the goal in Inquisition is simply to restore the status quo, then I'll certainly be dissapointed with it.

Sir JK wrote...

I do agree on a level that Fiona will be one of the leaders. If Asunder really is a "half-canon" prelude she's certainly set up to be so. As is Adrian (not the leader, but a prominent voice). Though I suspect that it might also be someone completely new, since the books shouldn't be neccessary. It's just us "BSN freaks" (tounge-in-cheek in case anyone missed that) that really cares that much about the setting.

Perhaps it might be the protagonist? Which might explain the "human only" choice for the player.

Sir JK wrote...

As my comments earlier indicated though, I'm very pessimistic about whether one can consider the prospective mage leader a genuinely good person though. I think we're far more likely (and the story better served) with someone more akin to Bhelen, Anora or Loghain as the overall warleader (who might not be the same person as the actual leader). Someone that might actually play real foul tactics and even be blind to better alternatives due to their own pride for the (in their eyes) greater good.

I imagine, given the scope of the rebellion, there will be multiple leaders for the mage rebellion. Given how war has broken out across Thedas, I don't imagine only one person is leading the mages across the continent. I think they would vary in ideas and goals.

[RaenImrahl]

Sir JK wrote...

Guys, can we please steer this back towards mage leadership. That's an interesting topic on it's own and the moral arguments aren't leading anywhere. A friend once told me that once you start splitting up posts you know the conversation has derailed and quite frankly, the truth of that statement is becoming rather clear here.

I agree. If LobselVith8  or anyone else wants to start new threads on these new, divergent topics, then go for it.  But this is turning into less of a discussion and more of a melee.  So let's please steer things back towards the subject in the original post.

Thanks,

RI
"Your Friendly Neighborhood Moderator"

[Sir JK]

I doubt New Vegas style interaction will be given to you. It has not really been Bioware's style so far. I mean, it could happen, but I doubt it. And it will for certain not be as open ended as New Vegas was. I think we can take that for granted. I kind of agree with your assesment of their treatment (though I attribute it more to not being to develop the plot threads enough, rather than the actual plots. As you know, I kind of like Meredith and Grace). I think status quo might actually be one of better endings (as in... less innocent people killed worldwide), or rather status quo under reforms. So I think you should prepare yourself for that. A pro-mage ending might actually be very very grim (possibly on equal terms with a templar one).

If that plot will even end at all. That's certainly a possibility too. That it's left hanging and unresolved at the end of the game.

As for the PC being the warleader? No. I'm fairly certain of that. It simply does not fit well with the traditional recipe of travelling about and helping people out. If the entire game was dedicated to that? Sure. Then it might be something. But I've never seen Bioware do that kind of game and I doubt they'll start with DA:I. It's going to go along similar as DA:O and DA2 and thus a warleader mainplot (because anything less could not do it justice) isn't very suitable. Expect to be the formost agent and on-and-off advisor to the leader, at most. Like usual.

And let me just say... I'd love multiple leaders and byzantine politics. Seriously, nothing would make me happier than a massive political story and mazelike relationships in the mage leadership. But I doubt it. 2-3 prominent mages and up to 6 people we see once or twice and are told are very important to the cause. And that's if it is mainplot. Less if it's not. Simply because of practical reasons.
If you need a wiki to keep track of each and everyone, you've gone into very niche territory. My niche, sure. But I'm a realist (and have enough experience in storytelling) enough to know it won't be catered to fully.

[LobselVith8]

Sir JK wrote...

I doubt New Vegas style interaction will be given to you. It has not really been Bioware's style so far. I mean, it could happen, but I doubt it. And it will for certain not be as open ended as New Vegas was. I think we can take that for granted. I kind of agree with your assesment of their treatment (though I attribute it more to not being to develop the plot threads enough, rather than the actual plots. As you know, I kind of like Meredith and Grace). I think status quo might actually be one of better endings (as in... less innocent people killed worldwide), or rather status quo under reforms. So I think you should prepare yourself for that. A pro-mage ending might actually be very very grim (possibly on equal terms with a templar one).

Meredith and Orsino had potential, but I would have preferred to see a treatment similar to Skyrim - with both leaders remaining sane, even if you oppose them. I'm hoping that the leaders for the mages and templars get that kind of treatment, because I don't think either side should be vilified. The leaders (and the face of the mage rebellion) can be flawed people leading imperfect groups, without either side resorting to villainy.

Also, I would hope that it would be more like the New Vegas endings - good and bad with each possible ending, rather than one ending being ideal overall while the others are terrible (in essence, like the endings with King Bhelen v. King Harrowmont).

Sir JK wrote...

If that plot will even end at all. That's certainly a possibility too. That it's left hanging and unresolved at the end of the game.

As for the PC being the warleader? No. I'm fairly certain of that. It simply does not fit well with the traditional recipe of travelling about and helping people out. If the entire game was dedicated to that? Sure. Then it might be something. But I've never seen Bioware do that kind of game and I doubt they'll start with DA:I. It's going to go along similar as DA:O and DA2 and thus a warleader mainplot (because anything less could not do it justice) isn't very suitable. Expect to be the formost agent and on-and-off advisor to the leader, at most. Like usual.

I suppose that will be the case for Inquisition. Like you said, that might be left for a future game.

The mention of the protagonist as a leader does leave me curious how they'll handle pro-mage and pro-templar companions. Might we end up only getting certain companions if we make it clear from the start that we are going to side with either the mages or the templars? If the protagonist decides to help the mages, for instance, how will pro-templar companions react? And vice versa? Would someone like Cullen or Cassandra remain at the side of the protagonist if the protagonist is doing something they oppose, or will the developers allow us to convince them that this is the right path? I'm also wondering if they will already have opinions about certain leaders, like the possible mage leaders.

Sir JK wrote...

And let me just say... I'd love multiple leaders and byzantine politics. Seriously, nothing would make me happier than a massive political story and mazelike relationships in the mage leadership. But I doubt it. 2-3 prominent mages and up to 6 people we see once or twice and are told are very important to the cause. And that's if it is mainplot. Less if it's not. Simply because of practical reasons.
If you need a wiki to keep track of each and everyone, you've gone into very niche territory. My niche, sure. But I'm a realist (and have enough experience in storytelling) enough to know it won't be catered to fully.

I think it would be good if the mages and templars only have 2-3 leaders governing their actions across the entire continent. I sincerely hope we get more than that.

[Sir JK]

Agreed on Meredith and Orsino. Especially Orsino... his turning to blood magic as actually quite disappointing (I would have been totally fine with him being the puppeteer in the background too, goading all the rebellious mages to a fight and have been the one that manipulated Anders into blowing uyp the chantry... as long as you could have seen his influence throughout all the game. That would have been great and a more interesting counterbalance to Meredith).
But I do think both sides need their villainy. The templar need people like Meredith, Ser Kerras and Ser Alrik (as well as their Thrasks and Cullens). And the mages need their dark sides as well. But more due to good intentions and practical limitations than insanity, demons (demons are interesting stories fi they are rare and subtle) or raw megalomania. If they suggest subjugating non-mages it should be for protection of their own members and they should swear it's just temporary. If they dabble in blood magic, it should be because they're hard pressed and need the advantage. If they summon demons... it should be because the demons tricked them (as they're wont to do).
Both sides need to be sympathetic enough to make us nod in agreement, but have enough conflict to make us step in to stop them once in a while.

Quite the challenge. I hope they pull it off.

I don't think you can expect pro-mage/pro-Chantry/pro-templar exclusive companions though. It'll be the stock cast, they'll have their stances, you'll get to discuss it with them, they'll have their companion quests and the usual. Maybe a few points of no return. Something new perhaps, but the same recipe they always have. Anything else would not be practical for a game that's not entirely about the conflict and even then it's a stretch. Companions are very expensive and time consuming to make after all.

2-3 across the continent is way too few... I'm thinking 30-70 (yes, leaders... but I'm counting advisors, adjutants and such too). 2-3 is more like a small band. Buuut... it's probably what we'll see... and they'll be in the same area too.

[The Elder King]

LobselVith8 wrote...



Meredith and Orsino had potential, but I would have preferred to see a treatment similar to Skyrim - with both leaders remaining sane, even if you oppose them. I'm hoping that the leaders for the mages and templars get that kind of treatment, because I don't think either side should be vilified. The leaders (and the face of the mage rebellion) can be flawed people leading imperfect groups, without either side resorting to villainy.

Agreed, the insane route of both Meredith and Orsino was something I hated. The same goes for facing both of them regardless of your side choice.

S

The mention of the protagonist as a leader does leave me curious how they'll handle pro-mage and pro-templar companions. Might we end up only getting certain companions if we make it clear from the start that we are going to side with either the mages or the templars? If the protagonist decides to help the mages, for instance, how will pro-templar companions react? And vice versa? Would someone like Cullen or Cassandra remain at the side of the protagonist if the protagonist is doing something they oppose, or will the developers allow us to convince them that this is the right path? I'm also wondering if they will already have opinions about certain leaders, like the possible mage leaders.

It depends if the mage-templar war will be the main quest. If it's not, you can work together with both pro-templar and pro-mages companions. Of course some critical decision that might lead a companion to leave the party might happen.

[Yalision]

My Hawke. But probably Rhys.

[karushna5]

I would like a character who is a hypocrite. Charismatic, well loved, but authority figures are rather hated by Video games so make them a hypocrite, someone who talks of the mages big fight, but isn't the best caster and is more of a leader. Someone who talks of the hardships faced by mages, but actually lived a great life, and might even sell out to the Templars in dramatic fashion.

[LobselVith8]

Yalision wrote...

My Hawke. But probably Rhys.

Yeah, I can see Hawke becoming a leader in the mage rebellion. I remember Anders telling my apostate Hawke that he should become a leader to the mages, and eventually telling him at the Gallows that Hawke was the leader the mages had been waiting centuries for. It would seem like a logical step, especially since Hawke can tell Anders that he seeks to overthrow the templars.

I'm also curious how the Magi Boon might come into play. Ferelden could be fairly stable with the Mage-Templar War, with the new ruler (or rulers) having proclaimed that he (or she) thought that mages of the Circle of Ferelden should be free to govern themselves. I wonder if the mages would flock to Ferelden as a result, including some of the mage leadership.

Xilizhra wrote...

History can do that, but that tends to take a century or two, and if things go bad sooner, it's a relatively poor way to remember the gensis of a nation. If, however, we can ally with Celene and allow her to retain power in exchange for her granting greater concessions to the mages and elves, and somehow help her squash the rest of the nobility... we wouldn't be blamed directly and a power structure may be in place that we would have far more input in. I wouldn't actually suggest the use of blood magic to tilt things a bit in our favor, because of course many people would be upset if that came to light, but emergencies do happen.

Adding to my last comments about your response, I suppose I preferred my hypothetical idea about a kwisatz haderach for the Dalish clans leading the People to reclaiming their homeland, which simply isn't possible with a "human only" protagonist. I still lament the loss of the racial options for Inquisition.

I genuinely have to wonder what options will be available for the player to choose from, in regards to what the overall goal could be for the protagonist. Having a protagonist who is a member of a group named after the proto-templars is already odd, but I wonder what the overall goal could be. The Dalish Warden could ask for a homeland for his people as a royal boon, and get the Hinterlands for the Dalish, while the Hero of Ferelden from the Circle of Ferelden could ask for his people to be given their independence, and the ruler of Ferelden will proclaim that the mages will be free. The goals seemed more limited in Dragon Age II because we could only be Malcolm's progeny; Hawke could seek to enforce the rule of the Order of Templars, or oppose the templars and seek to overthrow them. With a "human only" protagonist, I wonder how much range we will have to determine the protagonist's ideas, views, and overall goals.

Speaking of the Inquisitor, I'm not sure how the mage leadership might react to the protagonist, given the whole 'Inquisitor' aspect that's rumored from the survey. , I suppose the mage leadership may react positively or negatively based on who the Inquisitor is allied with. If the survey is accurate, I suspect the Inquisitor might lend itself more to a BBC's Luther type of protagonist, especially if the person is going to be investigating certain issues (based on the survey that was leaked months ago).

[Sir JK]

Karushna: Interesting.

Lobsel:
You're really quite obsessed about that mage boon, aren't you? Seriously though, I doubt the Warden, Hawke or the mage boon will figure very much. Mention of the former two certainly, perhaps even a cameo if they find a way they're satisfied with. The mage boon will hardly figure at all. If we're really lucky they might mention it. But none of the three will have any larger role to play in the mage rebellion. There's simply too many Wardens or Hawke's that would not fit at all as leaders. Not to mention that some did the complete opposite. And the boon there's too many dufferent boons to cover. Focusing on one and excluding the others will no doubt leave a sour note with many of us (not to mention that it's probably a hassle to make it work properly).

As for how the mage leadership's reaction... intitially I'd guess cold, perhaps even hostile. The title Inquisitor has baggage after all. And I have a nagging suspicion there's really only one (actually two) people in the world that could appoint someone to it (which is not to say we'll work for either of them). So I'm guessing the mage leadership will not exactly welcome the inquisitor with open arms.

But then again I know nothing of the plot at all.

[Mad_Hattie]

I always thought that it was canon that Hawke was the face of the rebellion.
No matter what side you took, Hawkes name was used by the mages in their cause.

Mage side
Hawke's name became a rallying cry to all Thedosian mages; an inspirational beacon which showed that the templars could be defied.

Templar side
Circles began to rebel against the Chantry; with Hawke's name becoming a reminder of the mages' oppression at the templars' hands.

[Renmiri1]

Anders

[Cobra's_back]

I had given up on DA2 and wasn't planning on playing DA3 until I read Asunder. Thanks David Gaider for writing it. I would love either Rhys or Fiona to be the leader. I won’t say why because not everyone read the book.

Personally, I would want my character to side with the mages and get them their freedom. I really dislike the Orlesian nobles and hope the Fereldens defeat them and free the mages from the Chantry.


Just please don't kill the main character. I like buying DLCs and it is not that much fun if the main character is dead.

[Cobra's_back]

LobselVith8 wrote:


“Would someone like Cullen or Cassandra remain at the side of the protagonist if the protagonist is doing something they oppose, or will the developers allow us to convince them that this is the right path? I'm also wondering if they will already have opinions about certain leaders, like the possible mage leaders.”


I would love it if these two characters had a change of heart with some serious soul searching. To admit they were wrong and feel remorse would be excellent.

[MartialArtsMaster]

I want both the leader of the Mage Rebellion and the leader of the Templars to be reasonable, altruistic, rational people.

I want the leader of the Mage Rebellion to be a Thomas Jefferson-like figure: he/she certainly recognizes that you can't just rebel against people willy-nilly, but if they've committed a long train of abuses and have ignored appeals to their better nature, then revolution is the only choice. And I want him to acknowledge that innocent people may die in the war against the Templars, that they are pledging their fortunes and sacred honor in this quest, but I want him/her ultimately to believe that mage freedom will benefit all of humanity, just as Thomas Jefferson ultimately believed that humanity was better off if America could demonstrate that countries could govern themselves without the British Crown or any other monarch.

Now as for the Templar leader, I want him/her to be a Confucius-like or Edmund Burke-like figure. I want him/her to truly and deeply believe that Thedas would be a better place with as much order and harmony as possible, even if tragically means injustices against a few people might go unpunished from time to time. I want this person to truly realize that defending the Templar traditions is going to result in the continuing misery of mages, but also to genuinely and deeply believe that that misery would be best corrected by organic evolution of tradition, not through revolution or rebellion, just as Edmund Burke thought. It's sort of like John Taylor Gatto's argument that the Puritans had a diseased worldview, but it was ultimately superior to our modern view because the Puritan descendants eventually walked away from it on their own, after many generations' worth of "hashing things out" within the culture. That's the attitude I want the Templar leader to have; I want him/her to sympathize with the mages but ultimately believe that if this (relatively) minor injustice is corrected it will open the gateway to even greater injustices, lawlessness, or criminality later on. I want him/her to genuinely believe, like Confucius did, that it's better for close ties, families, societies, etc. to maintain social glue to stay together to maintain stability, even if they periodically abuse each other now and then, because the alternative is widespread immorality.

Modifié par MartialArtsMaster, 27 février 2013 - 09:28 .

[Pierce Miller]

I wanted to be the leader of the mage rebellion :'(