330 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexanderCousland]

addiction21 wrote..

Nope sorry, it does not work that way. As you have repeatedly argued the cause and effect are totally separate and one can be proactive by taking steps to stop the effect. Which Hawke does. So they are either both proactive or both reactive.

See this is the thing I keep mentioning. How you selectively apply the definitions as you want, where you want, and how you want. What is the point in a definition if they mean whatever you want them to as you need them to?

But Duncan on the other hand. Remember him? That guy who covers the possibility of things going sideways and orders you to retrieve the treaties. Ya, I suspect he doesn't matter either but the Warden just comes up with all that on their own.

You keep dodging the question, and telling me both are the same without proving how. Dont argue my position, which I have proven, without supplying evidence to support you case for Hawke.  Essentially saying Im wrong without saying WHY you' re right.

Im not selectivly applying anything, by every definition I proved my case, and you keep saying other character' s had Ideas or Plans  like that has any bearing on the word Proactive as it relates to the Warden and the step' s he personally takes to defeat the blight;)

And It' s not Cause/Effect that Im arguing here genius, It' s Proactive/Reactive reaction.  

[Rob James]

FreshIstay wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

Your entire argument hinges on the fact that you have separated the cause (the blight) from the effect (it spreading).

And now apparently since proactive/reactive can be applied (to your logic) at anytime and place for whatever reason you pull out of this air the words are meaningless.

Both the Warden are proactive and reactive at all times in every situation so theres no point in even continuing this.

P.S.
I am rather sure Upsettingshorts was referring to you moving the goalposts.

Actually my argument hinges upon the Plot of DAO and the Hero we are provided with as opposed to the "Hero" we are provided with in DA2, which stemmed the Proactive/Reactive debate, a debate which can cleary be proved In my favor with sound theory, not my logic.

Issac Newton " Every action has and EQUAL and opposite Reaction" Proactive and Reactive responses would be your types of reaction' s (because they are not Action' s standing alone) to the Blight. The Blight (Inertia) is set in to motion by the Architect' s action (external force)  3rd Law.  

Warden- Fight it before it spreads (Proactive Response)
Hawke - Run to Safety. (Reactive Response)

 
If you want to deny this, it' s certainly your perogative. 

What if you Word it Hawk saved his family before he blight could kill them? It sounds like the same thing on a smaller scale. Hawk saw his family would die and was Proactive in getting them the hell out. isnt that how you are useing the word?  

Modifié par Rob James, 17 janvier 2013 - 06:02 .

[AlexanderCousland]

Rob James wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

Your entire argument hinges on the fact that you have separated the cause (the blight) from the effect (it spreading).

And now apparently since proactive/reactive can be applied (to your logic) at anytime and place for whatever reason you pull out of this air the words are meaningless.

Both the Warden are proactive and reactive at all times in every situation so theres no point in even continuing this.

P.S.
I am rather sure Upsettingshorts was referring to you moving the goalposts.

Actually my argument hinges upon the Plot of DAO and the Hero we are provided with as opposed to the "Hero" we are provided with in DA2, which stemmed the Proactive/Reactive debate, a debate which can cleary be proved In my favor with sound theory, not my logic.

Issac Newton " Every action has and EQUAL and opposite Reaction" Proactive and Reactive responses would be your types of reaction' s (because they are not Action' s standing alone) to the Blight. The Blight (Inertia) is set in to motion by the Architect' s action (external force)  3rd Law.  

Warden- Fight it before it spreads (Proactive Response)
Hawke - Run to Safety. (Reactive Response)

 
If you want to deny this, it' s certainly your perogative. 

What if you Word it Hawk saved his family before he blight could kill them? It sounds like the same thing on a smaller scale. Hawke saw his family would die and was Proactive in getting them the hell out. isnt that how you are using the word?  

There is the Blight and then there is the reaction to it. Hawke' s family dying isn't the problem, the problem that causes the reaction is the Blight.

To react proactively towards The Blight would be to intervene with the expected occurrence that It would destroy Ferelden. How is running away from the expected occurrence proactive? 

[Plaintiff]

FreshIstay wrote...
To react proactively towards The Blight would be to intervene with the expected occurrence that It would destroy Ferelden.

Why?

How is running away from the expected occurrence proactive?

Because running away is a valid action. Flight is not less proactive than Fight.

[esper]

Plaintiff wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...
To react proactively towards The Blight would be to intervene with the expected occurrence that It would destroy Ferelden.

Why?

How is running away from the expected occurrence proactive?

Because running away is a valid action. Flight is not less proactive than Fight.

FreshIStai is very obvious confusing proactive with heroic. He has been doing that during the whole discussing.

[AlexanderCousland]

Plaintiff wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...
To react proactively towards The Blight would be to intervene with the expected occurrence that It would destroy Ferelden.

Why?

Because the expected occurrence is that The Blight would swallow Ferelden, The Warden intervene' s  in anticipation of that future problem. Read the definition of Proactive please.

How is running away from the expected occurrence proactive?

Plantiff wrote...
Because running away is a valid action. Flight is not less proactive than Fight.

Validly Reactive, out of emotional stress.

When there' s a problem and you try to stop it before it gets worse that' s being Proactive,
When there is a problem and you run from it, that' s reactive.

I really dont feeling like spelling this out anymore, Proactive and Reactive are reactions.
Every Action has an Equal and opposite reaction, my explanation for the  Warden fits every definition of of the word Proactive and synonymous words with it, Reactive is not the antonym of Proactive.  Running for your life is not a proactive repsonse to a threat, its a self preservation technique. 

Modifié par FreshIstay, 17 janvier 2013 - 09:11 .

[AlexanderCousland]

esper wrote...

FreshIStai is very obvious confusing proactive with heroic. He has been doing that during the whole discussing.

FreshIstay is educating people on the differences between Proactive and Reactive responses.

but we can discuss Heroism if you' d like Esper? 

[Plaintiff]

FreshIstay wrote...

Because the expected occurrence is that The Blight would swallow Ferelden, The Warden intervene' s  in anticipation of that future problem. Read the definition of Proactive please.

Your smug condescencion does you no favours.

How is running away from the expected occurrence proactive?

How is it not? By the very parameters you set for defining proactivity, Hawke is absolutely proactive.

Hawke anticipates the problem: The destruction of Ferelden and subsequent death of his family.

Hawke intervenes: he takes his family and leaves the country.

Hawke is proactive.

Validly Reactive, out of emotional stress.

This sentence is gibberish.

When there' s a problem and you try to stop it before it gets worse that' s being Proactive,

Hawke did stop the Blight from getting worse. He saved himself and several other people who would've otherwise died.

When there is a problem and you run from it, that' s reactive.

Not by the definition you provided.

I really dont feeling like spelling this out anymore, Proactive and Reactive are reactions.
Every Action has an Equal and opposite reaction, my explanation for the  Warden fits every definition of of the word Proactive and synonymous words with it, Reactive is not the antonym of Proactive.

I know what the words mean. I'm betting I know better than you.

Running for your life is not a proactive repsonse to a threat, its a self preservation technique.

Taking steps to ensure your self-preservation is a totally proactive action.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 17 janvier 2013 - 09:23 .

[esper]

FreshIstay wrote...

esper wrote...

FreshIStai is very obvious confusing proactive with heroic. He has been doing that during the whole discussing.

FreshIstay is educating people on the differences between Proactive and Reactive responses.

but we can discuss Heroism if you' d like Esper? 

Fleeing is not more and less proactive than staying and fighting. Planitiff is completely right.

As for heroism, no. It is not a subject I have ever cared for.

As for whever Hawke was proactive or not in fleeing it is not clear. Carver and nonmage Hawke flee when Ostagar is lost. Reaction. But foreseeing that their Mother and Sister might be in danger and go to their place to safe then is a proaction, just as it is a proaction if they being to evacuate the family before Lothering is lost, because Hawke know that the city is lost, wants his family to be safe and take the steps he deems necessary to get the desired result.

Then again, they might just have fled to Lothering because it was closet and fled Lothering again when the darkspaw was litterary standing on their doorstep in which case it is a reaction.

It is up to headcanon.

The warden's wish to stop the blight is a reaction. You don't get to come with any suggestion, preparation of ideas other than what Duncan says at first. But I do think that in some of the origions you could express a proactive wish to Duncan about wanting to join the wardens, and since asking a grey warden to join can be seen as the first step to being a grey warden you can be proactive about wanting to be a warden. In some Origins (But not with the blight, which you character knows so little about that they can't be proactive). As for after Ostagar then the warden is not proactive.  You are told, by Flemeth and Alistair that you have to use the treaties, you picking a,b,c,d first is just a reaction to that more and less demand you are met with.

I do think you can be proactive about some of the stories in the hubs. Conner, I think, that the idea, method and steps necessary to avoid anyone being sacrificed killed comes from the warden. Who can envision a different desired results than those presented and then suggest that result and the steps necessary to get there.

Domintantly though both Hawke and the warden are reactive. As is almost every fantasy hero ever. There is a reason that one of the most common tropes is villans act, heroes react.

[esper]

I have a question, FreshIStay are you english speaking as you mother langue. Because our differences might stem from there. I went to look it up in oxford dictionary and the definition I got was this:

According to oxford dictionary proactive means: Creating and controlling a situation, rather than just responding to it after it has happened. I know because I looked it up before entering the discussion.

Now the warden cannot begin to stop the blight before it has happened, hence in the large conflict he is reactive.

But if your langue is like mine then you might not have a word for 'proactive'. I know in danish we only have an action and reaction, which sound like something you discussed with Platiniff and those two are indeed not antonyms as a reaction is still an action.

Proaction, however, is taking the steps to create of control a situation before the situation has happened. So it is not as much an antonym to reactions as it is an insight (or and idea) about what action one should take in order to control or create the incoming situation.

[AlexanderCousland]

Plaintiff wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

Because the expected occurrence is that The Blight would swallow Ferelden, The Warden intervene' s  in anticipation of that future problem. Read the definition of Proactive please.

Your smug condescencion does you no favours.

How is running away from the expected occurrence proactive?

How is it not? By the very parameters you set for defining proactivity, Hawke is absolutely proactive.

Hawke anticipates the problem: The destruction of Ferelden and subsequent death of his family.

Hawke intervenes: he takes his family and leaves the country.

Hawke is proactive.

Validly Reactive, out of emotional stress.

This sentence is gibberish.

When there' s a problem and you try to stop it before it gets worse that' s being Proactive,

Hawke did stop the Blight from getting worse. He saved himself and several other people who would've otherwise died.

When there is a problem and you run from it, that' s reactive.

Not by the definition you provided.

I really dont feeling like spelling this out anymore, Proactive and Reactive are reactions.
Every Action has an Equal and opposite reaction, my explanation for the  Warden fits every definition of of the word Proactive and synonymous words with it, Reactive is not the antonym of Proactive.

I know what the words mean. I'm betting I know better than you.

Running for your life is not a proactive repsonse to a threat, its a self preservation technique.

Taking steps to ensure your self-preservation is a totally proactive action.

Hawke is not reacting proactively to the event that caused him to flee, He is Reactive, (Emotional Stress, Fear for His Family read the definition of Reactive) by definiton and by the law of motion I am objectively correct, this is undeniable. Nothing you say is valid in terms of reacting to the Blight proactively sorry, and evidently you dont understand definitions. 

[esper]

reaction: Something done, felt or thought in response to a situation and event.

It all depends on how long time Hawke has to prepare in Lothering. S/He knows that Lothering is doomed and then wants to create a sitation in which his family escape unharmed and thus take the necessary actions to that, s/he is proactive.

If he just arrives in Lothering, grabs his family and then runs for the hill then s/he is reactive.

The game is not clear about which it is so both head canons are possible. I do find the reaction one more plausible to have happened, though.

The warden, however, only have on choice. Duncan gets you into the warden, the react on his orders (event). Then when all goes to hell the warden reacts on that.

The Blight is happening doing the whole of da:o so the warden can only be reactive to the larger event. The are smaller subevents, though, where maybe, the warden gets to create or control and sitation before s/he stands in the middle of it.

[AlexanderCousland]

esper wrote...

I have a question, FreshIStay are you english speaking as you mother langue. Because our differences might stem from there. I went to look it up in oxford dictionary and the definition I got was this:

According to oxford dictionary proactive means: Creating and controlling a situation, rather than just responding to it after it has happened. I know because I looked it up before entering the discussion.

Now the warden cannot begin to stop the blight before it has happened, hence in the large conflict he is reactive.

But if your langue is like mine then you might not have a word for 'proactive'. I know in danish we only have an action and reaction, which sound like something you discussed with Platiniff and those two are indeed not antonyms as a reaction is still an action.

Proaction, however, is taking the steps to create of control a situation before the situation has happened. So it is not as much an antonym to reactions as it is an insight (or and idea) about what action one should take in order to control or create the incoming situation.

May I suggest you also look of Merriam-Webster, and Thesaurus definition' s of Proactive.

there you will discover that you do need to do something before an event occurs in order to react Proactively to the event.

Reactive does not mean Reaction. (look up definition adj merriam- webster

Proactive is a type of reaction. Reactive is a type of reaction.

Proactive reaction does not require that you do something before something happens, it just requires that you take action against an anicipated/future problem, and The Warden most certainly controlled the blight
(creating or controlling). 

[Dio Demon]

Really, this was meant to be a nice thread to show positive support for the Dragon Age Team and it's turned into a DA:O vs DA2 debate. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of other threads for you people to fight it out on.

By the way, thank you Dragon Age Team for creating two great games and inspiring me to write.

[AlexanderCousland]

esper wrote...

reaction: Something done, felt or thought in response to a situation and event.

It all depends on how long time Hawke has to prepare in Lothering. S/He knows that Lothering is doomed and then wants to create a sitation in which his family escape unharmed and thus take the necessary actions to that, s/he is proactive.

If he just arrives in Lothering, grabs his family and then runs for the hill then s/he is reactive.

The game is not clear about which it is so both head canons are possible. I do find the reaction one more plausible to have happened, though.

The warden, however, only have on choice. Duncan gets you into the warden, the react on his orders (event). Then when all goes to hell the warden reacts on that.

The Blight is happening doing the whole of da:o so the warden can only be reactive to the larger event. The are smaller subevents, though, where maybe, the warden gets to create or control and sitation before s/he stands in the middle of it.

Esper, Yes Hawke is proactivly protecting his family, HOWEVER, he is not reacting proactively to the event that caused him to flee, He is Reactive to the Blight.

And Yes, the Warden is reacting to the blight, he is reacting Proactively by interveneing between the horde and controlling the spread of the blight to other nations.

[esper]

FreshIstay wrote...

esper wrote...

I have a question, FreshIStay are you english speaking as you mother langue. Because our differences might stem from there. I went to look it up in oxford dictionary and the definition I got was this:

According to oxford dictionary proactive means: Creating and controlling a situation, rather than just responding to it after it has happened. I know because I looked it up before entering the discussion.

Now the warden cannot begin to stop the blight before it has happened, hence in the large conflict he is reactive.

But if your langue is like mine then you might not have a word for 'proactive'. I know in danish we only have an action and reaction, which sound like something you discussed with Platiniff and those two are indeed not antonyms as a reaction is still an action.

Proaction, however, is taking the steps to create of control a situation before the situation has happened. So it is not as much an antonym to reactions as it is an insight (or and idea) about what action one should take in order to control or create the incoming situation.

May I suggest you also look of Merriam-Webster, and Thesaurus definition' s of Proactive.

there you will discover that you do need to do something before an event occurs in order to react Proactively to the event.

Reactive does not mean Reaction. (look up definition adj merriam- webster

Proactive is a type of reaction. Reactive is a type of reaction.

Proactive reaction does not require that you do something before something happens, it just requires that you take action against an anicipated/future problem, and The Warden most certainly controlled the blight
(creating or controlling). 

Those two definitions are contradictions. They simply don't fit together. You cannot react on an event before it occurs, you can act on your knowlegde and insight, now if your want to argue, I can agree that you can have an reaction to your knowlegde and insight that the event will occur, but then that is a reaction to the event of gaining that knowlegde. (Even if can be a really late reaction).

Reactive: 1, a response to a stimiuli, 2, a response to a situation or an event,

The warden is reactive per definition and he definitly reacts.The Blight has occurred when he is get the option to act. In fact blight has started before the warden even joins the wardens. Heck it starts before the game begins.
Now if you want to talk about the gathering off an army, then it is also first something you can plan after the lost of an army has occured. So the event has happened which contradicts the first paragraph in your statement.

[esper]

FreshIstay wrote...

esper wrote...

reaction: Something done, felt or thought in response to a situation and event.

It all depends on how long time Hawke has to prepare in Lothering. S/He knows that Lothering is doomed and then wants to create a sitation in which his family escape unharmed and thus take the necessary actions to that, s/he is proactive.

If he just arrives in Lothering, grabs his family and then runs for the hill then s/he is reactive.

The game is not clear about which it is so both head canons are possible. I do find the reaction one more plausible to have happened, though.

The warden, however, only have on choice. Duncan gets you into the warden, the react on his orders (event). Then when all goes to hell the warden reacts on that.

The Blight is happening doing the whole of da:o so the warden can only be reactive to the larger event. The are smaller subevents, though, where maybe, the warden gets to create or control and sitation before s/he stands in the middle of it.

Esper, Yes Hawke is proactivly protecting his family, HOWEVER, he is not reacting proactively to the event that caused him to flee, He is Reactive to the Blight.

And Yes, the Warden is reacting to the blight, he is reacting Proactively by interveneing between the horde and controlling the spread of the blight to other nations.

Yep, the first we can agree on. (I am midly disturbed)

This second I am not so sure of though. At no point do we get to say anything other than we want to stop the blight. You don't have a choice you see, the game forces the motivation to 'Prevent Fereldan from being destroyed' on the warden. ' Which is an reaction to the 'Blight slowly conquering Fereldan'. Alistair, Flemeth, even Eamon all forces this motivation on you. As I see it the Warden is at the 'darkspawn arrived at the doorstep' scenario in da2 which doesn't give the Warden the same luxery to proactive take the step to  stop the spread the blight. Now if they just have left the warden<3Fereldan more vague so we could have place that motive in the wardens head, and it thus could be proactive steps for the good of Thedas. Unfortunately as it is, the warden<3Fereldan and thus is reacting to the conquering of the homeland, taking reactive steps. 

[Rob James]

FreshIstay wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

Because the expected occurrence is that The Blight would swallow Ferelden, The Warden intervene' s  in anticipation of that future problem. Read the definition of Proactive please.

Your smug condescencion does you no favours.

How is running away from the expected occurrence proactive?

How is it not? By the very parameters you set for defining proactivity, Hawke is absolutely proactive.

Hawke anticipates the problem: The destruction of Ferelden and subsequent death of his family.

Hawke intervenes: he takes his family and leaves the country.

Hawke is proactive.

Validly Reactive, out of emotional stress.

This sentence is gibberish.

When there' s a problem and you try to stop it before it gets worse that' s being Proactive,

Hawke did stop the Blight from getting worse. He saved himself and several other people who would've otherwise died.

When there is a problem and you run from it, that' s reactive.

Not by the definition you provided.

I really dont feeling like spelling this out anymore, Proactive and Reactive are reactions.
Every Action has an Equal and opposite reaction, my explanation for the  Warden fits every definition of of the word Proactive and synonymous words with it, Reactive is not the antonym of Proactive.

I know what the words mean. I'm betting I know better than you.

Running for your life is not a proactive repsonse to a threat, its a self preservation technique.

Taking steps to ensure your self-preservation is a totally proactive action.

Hawke is not reacting proactively to the event that caused him to flee, He is Reactive, (Emotional Stress, Fear for His Family read the definition of Reactive) by definiton and by the law of motion I am objectively correct, this is undeniable. Nothing you say is valid in terms of reacting to the Blight proactively sorry, and evidently you dont understand definitions. 

The Warden is not reacting proactively in stoping the blight he is Reactive he is under Emotional and pshyical stress ( haven been taken from the only world and home s/he ever know and put in a postions s/he may or may not be ready for) S/he is in fear for him self family friends and his home land (in fear he never see them again). It works the way your saying just about any way you want.


also i could be wrong but Sten belived your Warden was not activly dealing with the Blight enough. Wouldnt you say Sten did not see the Warden was not Proactive?

sorry again Thank you bioware love both games and play them both over and over

Modifié par Rob James, 17 janvier 2013 - 04:03 .

[Itkovian]

Crazy Eyed One wrote...

Really, this was meant to be a nice thread to show positive support for the Dragon Age Team and it's turned into a DA:O vs DA2 debate. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of other threads for you people to fight it out on.

By the way, thank you Dragon Age Team for creating two great games and inspiring me to write.

This is sadly on par for BSN... but that was an excellent OP. It's nice to see some positivity from time to time, even if it gets mired in negative responses.

That said, I agree with OP on most issues. The entire series is excellent, and DA2 did many things better than DAO (particularly the combat system improvements, NPCs, and storytelling techniques).

I still prefer DAO, but DA2 has its own unique feel and features that makes me look forward to getting to it on my newest playthrough (essentially my pre-DA3 playthrough).

And really, I'm not sure people understand what "story" means when they say DA2 has no story. Good stories don't need a Primary Goal and Great Evil That Must Be Stopped. DA2's story was Hawke's rise from nameless Fereldan Refugee to Champion of Kirkwall to one of the primary figures in the mage/templar war. That's the story, and it is a valid and quite well told one (especially his interactions with his companions as they evolve through the years).

There's plenty of books and movies whose story is simply following someone's troubles and tribulations as they go through life, those are no less valid. Shall we say Barry Lyndon had no story, for example?

Why the same shouldn't apply to RPGs is beyond me, and I found DA2's willingness to do that very same thing both refreshing and courageous.

Thank you.

[ggghhhxxxpuf]

I can't see anymore where this is going.
For what are you debating this? To prove who is more heroic with their actions? Which story is better?
The answer is: the Warden is more heroic and Da2 story is much more complex. Both heroes are great in their respective settings and if you like them or not is completely subjective.

Proaction, reaction, definitions and physics have nothing to do with this anymore. It's getting silly.

Also, in reference with the OP thread, I'll say that I've enjoyed both journeys, they allowed me to explore a quite diverse and fascinating fantasy world.
With one being an epic hero and the other being the tragic one, they let me explore the world and the sides that exist in it and, as I love tragic stories and heroes swept by the circumstances, DA2 allowed me to be one, and damn, it was nice.

[AlexanderCousland]

Rob James wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

Because the expected occurrence is that The Blight would swallow Ferelden, The Warden intervene' s  in anticipation of that future problem. Read the definition of Proactive please.

Your smug condescencion does you no favours.

How is running away from the expected occurrence proactive?

How is it not? By the very parameters you set for defining proactivity, Hawke is absolutely proactive.

Hawke anticipates the problem: The destruction of Ferelden and subsequent death of his family.

Hawke intervenes: he takes his family and leaves the country.

Hawke is proactive.

Validly Reactive, out of emotional stress.

This sentence is gibberish.

When there' s a problem and you try to stop it before it gets worse that' s being Proactive,

Hawke did stop the Blight from getting worse. He saved himself and several other people who would've otherwise died.

When there is a problem and you run from it, that' s reactive.

Not by the definition you provided.

I really dont feeling like spelling this out anymore, Proactive and Reactive are reactions.
Every Action has an Equal and opposite reaction, my explanation for the  Warden fits every definition of of the word Proactive and synonymous words with it, Reactive is not the antonym of Proactive.

I know what the words mean. I'm betting I know better than you.

Running for your life is not a proactive repsonse to a threat, its a self preservation technique.

Taking steps to ensure your self-preservation is a totally proactive action.

Hawke is not reacting proactively to the event that caused him to flee, He is Reactive, (Emotional Stress, Fear for His Family read the definition of Reactive) by definiton and by the law of motion I am objectively correct, this is undeniable. Nothing you say is valid in terms of reacting to the Blight proactively sorry, and evidently you dont understand definitions. 

The Warden is not reacting proactively in stoping the blight he is Reactive he is under Emotional and pshyical stress ( haven been taken from the only world and home s/he ever know and put in a postions s/he may or may not be ready for) S/he is in fear for him self family friends and his home land (in fear he never see them again). It works the way your saying just about any way you want.


also i could be wrong but Sten belived your Warden was not activly dealing with the Blight enough. Wouldnt you say Sten did not see the Warden was not Proactive?

sorry again Thank you bioware love both games and play them both over and over

It' s really quite simply, it really is. By nature of the events that take place, Blight occurs Warden intervene' s before it destroy' s Ferelden, That' s a proactive approach to stopping an aniticpated problem. I cant argue how your Warden feels, but I can argue what actually happend. A reactive reaction only occurs when you have knowledge of a problem and dont do anything to stop it until your forced to, reactive. So no it doesnt work anyway, I get the feeling people dont want to actually acknowledge the true definitions (by dictionary, thesaurus, visual thesaurus) of the words and apply them to the plot, not the personal character. 

[esper]

[quote]FreshIstay wrote...

[quote]Rob James wrote...

[quote]FreshIstay wrote...

[quote]Plaintiff wrote...

[quote]FreshIstay wrote...

Because the expected occurrence is that The Blight would swallow Ferelden, The Warden intervene' s  in anticipation of that future problem. Read the definition of Proactive please.[/quote]
Your smug condescencion does you no favours.

[quote]How is running away from the expected occurrence proactive?[/quote]
How is it not? By the very parameters you set for defining proactivity, Hawke is absolutely proactive.

Hawke anticipates the problem: The destruction of Ferelden and subsequent death of his family.

Hawke intervenes: he takes his family and leaves the country.

Hawke is proactive.

[quote]Validly Reactive, out of emotional stress.[/quote]
This sentence is gibberish.

[quote]When there' s a problem and you try to stop it before it gets worse that' s being Proactive,[/quote]
Hawke did stop the Blight from getting worse. He saved himself and several other people who would've otherwise died.

[quote]When there is a problem and you run from it, that' s reactive.[/quote]
Not by the definition you provided.

[quote]I really dont feeling like spelling this out anymore, Proactive and Reactive are reactions.
Every Action has an Equal and opposite reaction, my explanation for the  Warden fits every definition of of the word Proactive and synonymous words with it, Reactive is not the antonym of Proactive.[/quote]
I know what the words mean. I'm betting I know better than you.

[quote]Running for your life is not a proactive repsonse to a threat, its a self preservation technique.[/quote]
Taking steps to ensure your self-preservation is a totally proactive action.[/quote]

Hawke is not reacting proactively to the event that caused him to flee, He is Reactive, (Emotional Stress, Fear for His Family read the definition of Reactive) by definiton and by the law of motion I am objectively correct, this is undeniable. Nothing you say is valid in terms of reacting to the Blight proactively sorry, and evidently you dont understand definitions. 

[/quote]

The Warden is not reacting proactively in stoping the blight he is Reactive he is under Emotional and pshyical stress ( haven been taken from the only world and home s/he ever know and put in a postions s/he may or may not be ready for) S/he is in fear for him self family friends and his home land (in fear he never see them again). It works the way your saying just about any way you want.


also i could be wrong but Sten belived your Warden was not activly dealing with the Blight enough. Wouldnt you say Sten did not see the Warden was not Proactive?

sorry again Thank you bioware love both games and play them both over and over

[/quote]


It' s really quite simply, it really is. By nature of the events that take place, Blight occurs Warden intervene' s before it destroy' s Ferelden, That' s a proactive approach to stopping an aniticpated problem. I cant argue how your Warden feels, but I can argue what actually happend. A reactive reaction only occurs when you have knowledge of a problem and dont do anything to stop it until your forced to, reactive. So no it doesnt work anyway, I get the feeling people dont want to actually acknowledge the true definitions (by dictionary, thesaurus, visual thesaurus) of the words and apply them to the plot, not the personal character. 

[/quote]

Yes it is very simply. The warden react once the the Blight have started to destroy Fereldan and is lucky that his reaction is fast enough to prevent totalt destruction. A good portion of the south of Fereldan is destroyed, though.

You have a very different dictonary than the rest of us, and quite frankly either you are misunderstanding them or simply have a dictionary that none of us acknowlegde as valid.

[AlexanderCousland]

esper wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

esper wrote...

reaction: Something done, felt or thought in response to a situation and event.

It all depends on how long time Hawke has to prepare in Lothering. S/He knows that Lothering is doomed and then wants to create a sitation in which his family escape unharmed and thus take the necessary actions to that, s/he is proactive.

If he just arrives in Lothering, grabs his family and then runs for the hill then s/he is reactive.

The game is not clear about which it is so both head canons are possible. I do find the reaction one more plausible to have happened, though.

The warden, however, only have on choice. Duncan gets you into the warden, the react on his orders (event). Then when all goes to hell the warden reacts on that.

The Blight is happening doing the whole of da:o so the warden can only be reactive to the larger event. The are smaller subevents, though, where maybe, the warden gets to create or control and sitation before s/he stands in the middle of it.

Esper, Yes Hawke is proactivly protecting his family, HOWEVER, he is not reacting proactively to the event that caused him to flee, He is Reactive to the Blight.

And Yes, the Warden is reacting to the blight, he is reacting Proactively by interveneing between the horde and controlling the spread of the blight to other nations.

Yep, the first we can agree on. (I am midly disturbed)

This second I am not so sure of though. At no point do we get to say anything other than we want to stop the blight. You don't have a choice you see, the game forces the motivation to 'Prevent Fereldan from being destroyed' on the warden. ' Which is an reaction to the 'Blight slowly conquering Fereldan'. Alistair, Flemeth, even Eamon all forces this motivation on you. As I see it the Warden is at the 'darkspawn arrived at the doorstep' scenario in da2 which doesn't give the Warden the same luxery to proactive take the step to  stop the spread the blight. Now if they just have left the warden<3Fereldan more vague so we could have place that motive in the wardens head, and it thus could be proactive steps for the good of Thedas. Unfortunately as it is, the warden<3Fereldan and thus is reacting to the conquering of the homeland, taking reactive steps. 

As I explained above, your personal motivation' s however you "Feel" about something, doesnt change these definitions, Forced,Choice,Motivation < Subjective words that apply to your Headcannon. What is not subjective is what the Warden does, stop the blight before it destroy' s Ferelden.  apply the definition' s to the plot and not the character. 

[AlexanderCousland]

esper wrote...



Yes it is very simply. The warden react once the the Blight have started to destroy Fereldan and is lucky that his reaction is fast enough to prevent totalt destruction. A good portion of the south of Fereldan is destroyed, though.

You have a very different dictonary than the rest of us, and quite frankly either you are misunderstanding them or simply have a dictionary that none of us acknowlegde as valid.

For the last time, Reactive does not mean Reaction.

[esper]

FreshIstay wrote...

esper wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

esper wrote...

reaction: Something done, felt or thought in response to a situation and event.

It all depends on how long time Hawke has to prepare in Lothering. S/He knows that Lothering is doomed and then wants to create a sitation in which his family escape unharmed and thus take the necessary actions to that, s/he is proactive.

If he just arrives in Lothering, grabs his family and then runs for the hill then s/he is reactive.

The game is not clear about which it is so both head canons are possible. I do find the reaction one more plausible to have happened, though.

The warden, however, only have on choice. Duncan gets you into the warden, the react on his orders (event). Then when all goes to hell the warden reacts on that.

The Blight is happening doing the whole of da:o so the warden can only be reactive to the larger event. The are smaller subevents, though, where maybe, the warden gets to create or control and sitation before s/he stands in the middle of it.

Esper, Yes Hawke is proactivly protecting his family, HOWEVER, he is not reacting proactively to the event that caused him to flee, He is Reactive to the Blight.

And Yes, the Warden is reacting to the blight, he is reacting Proactively by interveneing between the horde and controlling the spread of the blight to other nations.

Yep, the first we can agree on. (I am midly disturbed)

This second I am not so sure of though. At no point do we get to say anything other than we want to stop the blight. You don't have a choice you see, the game forces the motivation to 'Prevent Fereldan from being destroyed' on the warden. ' Which is an reaction to the 'Blight slowly conquering Fereldan'. Alistair, Flemeth, even Eamon all forces this motivation on you. As I see it the Warden is at the 'darkspawn arrived at the doorstep' scenario in da2 which doesn't give the Warden the same luxery to proactive take the step to  stop the spread the blight. Now if they just have left the warden<3Fereldan more vague so we could have place that motive in the wardens head, and it thus could be proactive steps for the good of Thedas. Unfortunately as it is, the warden<3Fereldan and thus is reacting to the conquering of the homeland, taking reactive steps. 

As I explained above, your personal motivation' s however you "Feel" about something, doesnt change these definitions, Forced,Choice,Motivation < Subjective words that apply to your Headcannon. What is not subjective is what the Warden does, stop the blight before it destroy' s Ferelden.  apply the definition' s to the plot and not the character. 

But the plot cannot react, unless we are going really meta and the plot is an object and/or event or character in the plot. And even if you apply it to the plot. Da:o first Starts after the blight has begun. Perhaps if Duncan had done more or something vague pre-plot, but when you start with your characther the blight has begun. The plot cannot take any kind of action and is thus incapable of being proactive/reactive or even active.

The warden react, he is reactive  to the blight.

The warden cannot begin to take any action against the Blight before the start of it have allready happened. Fereldan's destruction have already begun when the warden gets to decide/do/think anything. What the warden does is to react quickly to destruction and minimize damage. If you take motivation out of it, you have no argument any longer for your side.