330 réponses à ce sujet

[batlin]

In Exile wrote...

I'm just going to end that train of nonsense since your argument basically boils down to "The Warden sucks because he just follows orders and fireball = auto win"

The fact is that the Warden accepts tasks for the purpose of getting a task in return. Therefore, the Warden is not an errand boy.

Meanwhile, Hawke takes no action to solve problems until he absolutely has to. He's worse than an errand boy, he's a lazy clod that sits around for years at a time while problems in Kirkwall get worse and worse. What a great champion.

As for the Fireball spell, do you not know how math works? Let's look at the calculations you posted again:

Initial fire damage: (100.0 + Spellpower) * 0.3.
Fire damage over time: (100.0 + Spellpower) * 0.3. Over Duration: 5.0s.

You see that part I bolded? that's the part you neglected to factor in. With a spellpower of 70, the initial damage of a fireball is 170 x 0.3, which is 51. Over the next 5 seconds, you would do another 51 damage. With three fireballs (total casting time including cooldowns: 23 seconds) you would do a total of 306 damage to each in a group of enemies, assuming none of them have fire resistance and all remain clumped in one group for over 20 seconds.

Whoop-de-f***ing-doo, my rogue with 70 cunning could dish out WAY more damage than that, and in less time. I think you've been playing DA:O the hard way this entire time.

My favorite spell? Animate Dead. Oh, you have a fireball? Yeah, I just raised two enemy mages who each have fireball. Good luck.

And one more thing, I find it hilarious how you poo-poo my three examples of tactical situations in DA:O claiming I cherry-picked them, and then you only provide one example of a "tactical" combat in DA2 (The solution is to use ranged attacks against the mage. What a strategic combat.)

Modifié par batlin, 13 janvier 2013 - 06:49 .

[AlexanderCousland]

FreshIstay wrote...




Proactive  (ADJ) : Creating OR Controlling a situation by causing something to happen rather than responding to it after. 

• hmmm. yea. 

I suggest that you read that definition again.

The Warden didnt create the situation, but he controlled it. He stopped the Archdemon from destroying Fereldan and thus prevented the Blight from spreading to other countries, He was taking the necessary steps to stop a threat, Proactive.  Hawke however was reactive to everything that happend to him, he didnt prevent ANYTHING, reactive, a glorified Janitor/Counselor. 

The fact that the Warden got his quests from someone has no bearing on that definition of Proactive, and Flemeth certainly didnt dictate how I chose to complete origins, it wasnt as if she said "Go here, and there second, now do this Warden." You can complete any Treaty Quest in any order you chose. 

addiction21 wrote...

How amusing it is how you choose to apply that definition.

Lets just forget that the Warden is pressed ganged into service, told to go get the treaties, ordered to light the torch, saved by Flemeth, then stands around while Flemeth Morrigan and Alistar come up with the plan. Oh right and then Morrigan and Alistar decide that the only option is to do the treaties instead of anything else.

Now where in your definition does it mention preventing anything but if being able to chose what order to do quests means you are proactive then both Hawke and the Warden share that.

Are you slow?

The Fact that the Warden is recruited, and Morrigan and Alistair ASK YOU what your intended course of action is, has no bearing on the definition of Proactive.  

CONTROLLING a situation is clearly defined, and thats exactly what the Warden did, he didnt create the sitation but he controlled it, He prevented the spread of the Blight, a global problem that was stopped in 1 country, due to the efforts of the Warden who worked to stop it, THAT  Was his Goal his call of duty, all relationships and Titles aquired therin are secondary to the Goal.

WHAT WAS HAWKE' S DUTY???? Now unless you can prove to me Hawke was Proactive instead of Reactive,  were done. 

[addiction21]

Hawke did not create the problem the Blight forced on him but took extensive steps to not only gain access to Kirkwall but to also get the Expedition of the ground and to regain his families noble status in Kirkwall.

But half-time is over and starting out with the not so subtle stab at my intelligence. I really don't feel like going with this anymore.

Modifié par addiction21, 13 janvier 2013 - 08:01 .

[RepHope]

DAO had me replaying 15 different wardens. I replayed Da2 once just to try FemHawke to see the difference. Wasn't much different than Male.
I loved all of DAO companions. DA2 fenris and carver were whiny p@$&ys, Isabella while they tried make her more than just "sex sex SEX" they failed. There's like only 3 times where u see something deeper otherwise its sex jokes. I liked Merril she reminded me of Liara not exactly naive but still optimistic. Varric was cool and I liked how they didn't make him just a stereotypical dwarf and I enjoyed his humor. Aveline was a barbaric he-man but I did admire her honor and sense of duty. Anders was a hypocrite basically opposite Fenris very emo but I could tolerate him. Sebastian and Bethany were ok.
Really the only truly awesome thing about DA2 was the qunari. I love those guys

[In Exile]

[quote]batlin wrote...
I'm just going to end that train of nonsense since your argument basically boils down to "The Warden sucks because he just follows orders and fireball = auto win" [/quote]

Oh, so you're not going to get back to all of those lies you've been telling? Like about the difficulty? Remind me again how nightmare in DA2 is only about more HP, and remind me after that how it differs from DA:O?

[quote]The fact is that the Warden accepts tasks for the purpose of getting a task in return.  [/quote]

Let's get back to your lies about orders, shall we?  Once more, for posterity:

"Following their orders..."
"The Warden meanwhile follows no one's orders."

That felt good. Now that we've drawn attention to more of your lying, let's parse your poorly written statement.

"Getting a task in return" doesn't make you less of an errand boy. I'm sure what you mean is that the Warden gets a commitment for military support in return, which is doesn't make you less of an errand runner.

Let's go back to some other things you ran away from, shall we:

[quote]You do work toward stopping Loghain. Ever since he betrays you, that is the primary goal of DA:O. [/quote]

The archdemon would like to have a word with you on that one.

Yeah, that one was a good one. I liked how you weren't dishonest at all.

[quote]Therefore, the Warden is not an errand boy. [/quote]

The Warden runs errands. They're very important errands. But they're still errands.

[quote]Meanwhile, Hawke takes no action to solve problems until he absolutely has to.[/quote]

I remember how the Warden sought out Duncan, and immediately conscripted himself into the Wardens to kill the darkspawn before the archdemon was even awakend.

Wait, that's not what happened...

[quote]He's worse than an errand boy, he's a lazy clod that sits around for years at a time while problems in Kirkwall get worse and worse. What a great champion. [/quote]

Let's play this game again, because you're running away from things with your pejoratives and your lies.

What did you say again? Oh, yes:
[quote]It's odd though that you refuse to
criticize DA2 for more greivous issues than the Warden not being a
high-ranking leader. Hawke has no official
status, Hawke's party often takes actions completely against his
wishes, and worst of all he does nothing to solve problems until they
hit the fan. [/quote]
Once again:

(A) Hawke has no official position.
( Hawke has no official obligation.
© Hawke is personally responsible for resolving the Qunari threat to Kirkwall.

Hawke is absolutely a self-interest opportunist in DA:O. At best, Hawke is a family oriented person who does good largely for the sake of adventure because (s)he has a functioning moral compass.

I'm not sure what points you think you're scoring. Hawke is reactive. And so is the Warden.

[quote]With three fireballs (total casting time including cooldowns: 23 seconds) you would do a total of 306 damage to each in a group of enemies, assuming none of them have fire resistance and all remain clumped in one group for over 20 seconds. [/quote]

You mean, every single encounter. You can clean out the mooks with other spells. Once the knockdown hits them, they're dead before they get up.

[qupte]Whoop-de-f***ing-doo, my rogue with 70 cunning could dish out WAY more damage than that, and in less time. I think you've been playing DA:O the hard way this entire time. [/quote]

Wait, you mean that your rogue with 70 cunning can auto-attack his way to destroying every encounter, without tactics? Wow! That's brilliant! I'm so glad we agree that DA:O was a joke, and that there wasn't any substantive difficultly.

[quote]My favorite spell? Animate Dead. Oh, you have a fireball? Yeah, I just raised two enemy mages who each have fireball. Good luck. [/quote]

Wonderful. Mana clash. Game over. Mages are worthless in DA:O.

[quote]And one more thing, I find it hilarious how you poo-poo my three examples of tactical situations in DA:O claiming I cherry-picked them, and then you only provide one example of a "tactical" combat in DA2 (The solution is to use ranged attacks against the mage. What a strategic combat.)[/quote]

You're not very bright. I was mocking you. I picked a screenshot at random on the internet, and then lied about how tactical the encounter is. I'm not pretending DA2 is some tactical masterpiece. You're the one that's doing that for DA:O.

[ggghhhxxxpuf]

The warden and Hawke are the same with only ONE difference, the warden had a DUTY as a warden, Hawke did not, this is true.

But in term of "proactivity" and all those thing you people are arguing about, the two of them are quite equal; the warden has to put up with many things, Arl Eamon and Orzammar being the most clear ones, and Hawke has to deal with a spineless Vicount who wants everything solved but is unable/unwilling to do so, so Hawke has to deal with these probles as the Vicount's strong hand.
You as a player are told what to do, the way you decide how to resolve it it's your own (your character's) doing, but have to do it anyway in both cases.

I've recently played both games on nightmare, so I think I can say something about combat too.
I found nightmare in DA2 way more difficult (and fun) than nightmare in DAO, I'll explain:

First, in DAO there is FF in melee characters, but I only discovered it when viewing the character stats on my DW rogue on the "friendly fire dealt" stat; in DA2 the first time I used Mighty blow I killed half of my party, and don't count the times I nearly got killed by the same movement when other members used it, so I had to carefully set tactics and micromanage everything, same case with the mages and rogues, a lot to do and terribly fun, DAO is more stale in this, you only have to worry about the tactics of your mages.

Second, all the fights are difficult on DA2, even more if you don't have the right party, in DAO I could bring anyone +rogue because, when I could make 99 high potions, I was in no danger.

Third, the fights proposed, the one in the blood mages house, the one in Kal-Hirol and the bandits, are strategic, you have to look at the enviroment and make decisions; once you resolve it, act on it and clear the enemies, but the fight is over in a minute, (and yeah, fireball resolves everything).
In DA2, and because of the wave system, the fights are WAY longer with longer cooldowns, so maybe is less “enviromentaly” estrategic, but the fight is strategical in itself. How you manage your cooldowns in potions, spells and habilities to ENDURE the fight, IS strategy, a different kind, but strategy nonetheless.

As for traps, in BOTH games having a rogue in your party, for traps and chests, is a must.
In both games there are traps scathered around the field. I remember in DAO the wolf encounter and the darkspawn ambush encounter too, when the party had to stay still while the rogue disarmed everything. In DA2 there is less “trap encounters” and the traps are few too but, when these encounters happened (second act, Aveline's quest in the Wounded coast or Anders's in the third act), I had the rogue do a check up on the battlefield first to clear the traps, just like I did on DAO.
So the only thing that changed was the amount of traps,the time that took to disarm them and the disarming animation.

[In Exile]

FreshIstay wrote...
WHAT WAS HAWKE' S DUTY???? Now unless you can prove to me Hawke was Proactive instead of Reactive,  were done

Let's do this in reverse, since your rant is pointless (what does duty have to do with anything)? Here is what I said:

Bioware's never made a game where the protagonist is proactive, but at  least in DA2 there's a justification for why Hawke needn't be proactive; in DA:O more important people than the PC make decisions all the time.

Not only did I not argue that Hawke was proactive, I specifically praised DA2 for offering a reason why Hawke is stuck being reactive. 

CONTROLLING a situation is clearly defined, and thats exactly what the Warden did, he didnt create the sitation but he controlled it, He prevented the spread of the Blight, a global problem that was stopped in 1 country, due to the efforts of the Warden who worked to stop it, THAT  Was his Goal his call of duty, all relationships and Titles aquired therin are secondary to the Goal.

I didn't want to get trapped in this, but I have to say: are you kidding me!?

This entire argument turns on one point: that the Warden might pick the dialogue option that brings up the treaties to Alistair at Lothering (after Flemeth makes the point that the Wardens are important for their symbolism alone, and is the one that tells you that you have to rally Ferelden). That's what this "proactive" argument turns on.

However much rhetoric you use about the Blight doesn't turn the Warden into a proactive character, since you only address each problem when you get a command from someone above you (see below).

So what does the Warden do at that point, besides murder a lot of things really well? Show up at the door of five differnet places, with a piece of paper, and says "pretty please, help me". 

There's one time the Warden is in control: with the elves. There, the Warden can negotiate with Witherfang and push the werewolves to exterminate the elves. The other time, though it's far more minor, is Redcliffe - there, you can leave the village behind. That's controlling the situation. When you follow Teagan's commands, that's the opposite of controlling it.

• Loghan: Remind me how it was proactive to wait for Eamon to wake up, then follow his plan with no deviation to put Alistair on the throne? Your only other choice is to follow Anora's plan and have her put on the throne. Can a Cousland Warden throw his own hat into the ring to be King? Of course not. Because that would be too proactive.
• Orzammar: Same thing. Obey Bhelen, or obey Harrowmont. Can you tell them both to go stuff themselves and just go after Branka with Oghren, and then name whoever you want King? No. You're following orders.
• Sacred Ashes: Can you tell Teagan he's insane, and that he has to take action against Loghain immediately? Nope. Can you try to find some other antidote? Nope. 

Modifié par In Exile, 13 janvier 2013 - 08:22 .

[LobselVith8]

I liked that The Warden could be proactive; he could suggest that the treaties could be used to deal with Loghain, his options in how to handle the dichotomy with Lord Harrowmont and Prince Bhelen, how he could outmaneuver Eamon with the politics of who would govern Ferelden as the new ruler, and having an irrevocable impact on the societies he visited.

I enjoyed the freedom in choosing where my Surana Warden came from, his preference for a specific Fraternity of the Enchanters, his opinions in determining how he felt about the Alienage, having the freedom to shape how he viewed the Chantry of Andraste and the Chantry controlled Circle, whether he was religiously Andrastian or atheist, how he saw Andraste, and a plethora of other choices.

Hawke, on the other hand, felt like he was simply reacting to things. And sometimes he didn't do anything, even when he could have done something. When Petrice admitted she wanted to kill innocent people to incite a religious war with the Qunari, Hawke did nothing. When Hawke found an incriminating letter in Quentin's lair, he did nothing about it. While Meredith spent three years becoming the de facto ruler of Ferelden, Hawke did nothing about it. When Corypheus possesses a Grey Warden, Hawke did nothing about it. When Tallis takes a list of Qunari spies, Hawke does nothing to stop her. It was irritating.

While Merrill was trying to save the People by studying revolutionary technology, while Aveline was being Gordon to Kirkwall's Gotham, while Fenris (an escaped slave from the Imperium) found his sister in Tevinter and sent her a letter, while Anders was trying to overthrow the templars, and while Isabela was trying to get a ship to replace the one she lost, it seemed like Hawke was doing nothing. I liked the companions in Dragon Age II, especially Merrill. Hawke seemed, in my opinion, to be inept and lazy.

[ggghhhxxxpuf]

@LobselVith8
Yes, the Warden had a duty with the Wardens and Ferelden, and Hawke had no "official" duty as a part of any organization, only with his family in act 1, with the Vicount in act 2 and with the side he choses in act 3.

With the qunari Hawke could feel sympathy towards them or go against them and favor Petrice, he could be pro circle or anti templar, he can openly favor a side, he could ignore religion or ask for blessings, he could mock the dalish or respect them, he could state what he wanted to do in the future and was asked his opinion or how he felt on other personal subjects.

He didn't have to be opinionated on anything else because he wasn't required to, and even though he cannot do many things because is not his place to do them, everyone reacts to his preferences and he even gets tasks based on them.

There is a big difference between Hawke and the Warden, the Warden story occurs in a much shorter time span and requires a huge colaboration of diferent groups to achieve a goal, Hawke was just living his life in a convoluted city. It was a personal story with no BIG BAD, just a series of events Hawke was made part of, therefore the "Hawke does nothing" reaction.

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I liked that The Warden could be proactive; he could suggest that the treaties could be used to deal with Loghain, his options in how to handle the dichotomy with Lord Harrowmont and Prince Bhelen, how he could outmaneuver Eamon with the politics of who would govern Ferelden as the new ruler, and having an irrevocable impact on the societies he visited. 

Given that I just addressed this, all I'm going to say is no matter how much you repeat the same misleading statements, you won't make them true. Should I bring up your misleading statements (read: lies) about how Hawke was forced to be an Andrastian again? 

Modifié par In Exile, 13 janvier 2013 - 09:19 .

[LobselVith8]

In Exile wrote...

Given that I just addressed this, all I'm going to say is no matter how much you repeat the same misleading statements, you won't make them true.

Having the option to suggest the treaties, being able to have the agency to manipulate both dwarven politicians into thinking you're assisting them over the other, and being able to go against Eamon's possible power play by not putting a personality unhardened Alistair on the throne are proactive moments for the player. You're not simply reacting.

In Exile wrote...

Should I bring up your misleading statements (read: lies) about how Hawke was forced to be an Andrastian again?

You mean only being able to express a religiously Andrastian viewpoint when his mother died, telling Creators worshipped Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides his path, and his other dialogue invoking the Maker don't mean Hawke is religiously Andrastian? I respectfully disagree.

In the Merrill scene where she comforts Hawke, the protagonist is only allowed to express a religiously Andrastian point of view, where he says his mother is with the Maker. The other two dialogue options don't permit him to give an alternative point of view; he simply berates Merrill. Furthermore, Wulfram and I already discussed the two alternative dialogue options in the Merrill scene in the "I think the option to be an atheist should return" thread, which doesn't change the fact that Hawke isn't permitted to express an alternative point of view in that particular scene. As I told Wulfram then:

LobselVith8 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Yes, we could have done with a friendlier non-religious answer.

Considering there are only three options, I think it would have made sense for them to be varied - rather than having two options essentially have Hawke verbally attack Merrill for trying to comfort him at this time.

Wulfram wrote...

I really can't see any other interpretation.

Yet we aren't choosing to determine what our protagonist believes in - it's not like New Vegas or Skyrim where we chose dialogue options that establish certain aspects of our protagonist, including his beliefs. There is no alternative to Hawke voicing an Andrastian religious view. And there is no indication that being irate with Merrill means that Hawke isn't Andrastian, it simply means he isn't voicing an Andrastian perspective - which he does in combat and in other conversations, including some of his dialogue with Sebastian and Grand Cleric Elthina.

Why the developers think that giving us a fixed protagonist with a fixed religious view is better than giving us choices in the matter is beyond me.

Also, this is a thread Sir JK participated in, as you can see here.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 14 janvier 2013 - 06:12 .

[addiction21]

FreshIstay wrote...

Snip

I will try it again with just how I view either character.

Both are not wholly either. The Warden is forced to be reactive to the entire situation. As I pointed out being forced into service and as I view it others dictating how he/she must solve the situation. There are instances where the Warden can be proactive. How to go about dealing with Orrzimar, the Anvil of The Void or Conner for examples.

Just like with Hawke he is not wholly one or the other. The example I previously cited would be proactive but yes the Quanari and Mage/Templar thing in act 3. But Hawke is not the Champion in act 2 yet just a noble. What is his duty to do anything about it (since its a problem he has possibly had no issue with) until the Viscount asks him to get involved?
The very opening of Act 3 puts you in a crossroads between the Templars and mages. If you have supported either thru out the game why not support them then? Yes I know there are large gaps in time but if we are not allowed to have any input into what Hawke was doing at that time I believe its better that it was left open. You know for those that like to headcannon.
BioWare can leave it open like they did, they could of provided checkboxes or something of the like for us to fill out, or decide for us. I personally prefer it was left open for me instead of it being decided.

My whole issue is the "Warden is proactive in all ways and Hawke is not there for DA2 is bad"  Never in my very long time of being on these, the old BIoWare forums, and the internet in general have I seen this. Plenty of " I would like more proactivity in my characters" but not the X is bad and is bad design because I declare there is zero proactivity.

P.S.
Not liking something does to equate to it being objectively bad.

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Having the option to suggest the treaties,

Having the option to suggest an alliance with Patrice

being able to have the agency to manipulate both dwarven politicians into thinking you're assisting them over the other

Being able to choose whether to follow Grace and kill Thrask, turn Grace in, cleverly invent your own solution of lying to the templars...

and being able to go against Eamon's possible power play by not putting a personality unhardened Alistair on the throne are proactive moments for the player.

... And being able to go against Marethari's plan to (effectively) turn Feynriel into a tranquil by selling him to an abomination...

You're not simply reacting.

You're not simply reacting.

Sometimes - rarely - the Warden and Hawke get to have an original thought and cheap the person who gave them an order. But in both cases, the primary plot is entirely outside of their hands and all they can do is follow orders.

You mean only being able to express a religiously Andrastian viewpoint when his mother died,

Let's play that scene again, shall we, Mr. "I lie about what happens in-game to win debates?" Oh, let's:

Here is the dialogue:

Merril: Leandra is in a better place right now.
Hawke: [paraphrase option - You're right.]
Hawke [spoken line - She's with the Maker].

This
is absurd. Merril makes the most religious reference possible - that
Leandra is in the afterlife. And you have the option agreeing that
Leandra is in the afterlife.

Now let's quote what you say:

There's no alternative to Hawke being religiously Andrastian, only
two rude lines to someone who is trying to comfort him, and you also
ignore the other examples mentioned in this thread.

Let's quote what other people (Sir JK ) said about your views:

I'm sorry Lobsel, but now you're being intellectually dishonest.
Your statement is that Hawke has no option but to be Andrastian. Yet
the very scene that your argument hinges on has a total of 7 combinations, only 2 leads to Hawke referencing the maker.

Yes, you're certainly not lying at all.

telling Creators worshipped Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides his path

I said godspeed once. Crap! I just realized this means I'm not an atheist. I suppose it's time for me to get baptized.

and his other dialogue invoking the Maker don't mean Hawke is religiously Andrastian? I respectfully disagree.

No, you're just making things up.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Having the option to suggest the treaties, [/quote]

Having the option to suggest an alliance with Patrice [/quote]

You mean Petrice? Hawke has the option to side with Petrice; to agree with her plan to incite a religious war with the Qunari. Hawke is basically a follower who is going along with Petrice's plan. That doesn't make him proactive, but reactive, as I previously said. What does Hawke do when he learns about Petrice's plans to incite a religious war in Act I? He does nothing. What does Hawke do about Cullen and another templar taking Bethany away to the Circle, where he knows mages are being abused and made tranquil illegally? He does nothing. What does Hawke do about the incriminating note he discovers in Quentin's lair, that reveals his mother's murderer had an accomplice who helped him in his research? He does nothing. What does Hawke do when Meredith is seizing power over Kirkwall illegally? He does nothing.

And you seriously ask why I think Hawke is a reactive character?

You can go along with what Petrice is already doing as long as you're aggressive and you can do what you were already asked to do by saving Feynriel. Those two examples don't make me like the partially fixed character of Hawke. The Warden, in contrast, can outmaneuver dwarven politicians at their own game when the protagonist is in Orzammar. The Warden can be proactive about what the villagers of Redcliffe need to do in order to survive the next onslaught. The Warden can be proactive about the fate of the Dalish and the cursed werewolves. The Warden can be proactive about how to handle the politicial situation over the throne of Ferelden, even to the point where the Cousland Warden can become the King-Consort, or become Chancellor to a personality unhardened King Alistair (thereby serving as the real power behind the throne).

The Warden has an irrevocable impact on several societies. Hawke, in contrast, simply follows people who are doing things in their own lives, while he wears a silk shirt at home and waits around for people to give him an order. If I want to stop Petrice, I can't, and I'm given no plausible reason why I can't. She admits she wants to murder innocent people to start a religious war, and Hawke does nothing about it except provide one of three flavors of dialogue. It makes him come accross as inept to me.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

being able to have the agency to manipulate both dwarven politicians into thinking you're assisting them over the other [/quote]

Being able to choose whether to follow Grace and kill Thrask, turn Grace in, cleverly invent your own solution of lying to the templars... [/quote]

You mean Hawke agreeing to help Grace remain free of the templars, which the Starkhaven mages already set out to do when they fled the Circle of Starkhaven a while ago? Hawke is basically a follower once again. And how does Hawke lying to the templars about where the mages are make Hawke a proactive character? Hawke can lie. Many people do it all the time. That doesn't mean Hawke is proactive; it simply means Hawke is intelligent enough to fabricate something as long as he has a sarcastic personality.

As for the situation with Grace and Thrask, that plot is railroaded into Grace seeking revenge, no matter what Hawke does. Having Grace seek revenge against the man who helped her escape from the templars is simply asinine. It makes me feel like my choices don't matter when they lead to the same conclusion, whether I'm pro-mage or pro-templar. It's one of the examples of why players asked for significant choices in the future. You can read Mike Laidlaw's "Thank You!" thread to see this was an issue for many players.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

and being able to go against Eamon's possible power play by not putting a personality unhardened Alistair on the throne are proactive moments for the player. [/quote]

... And being able to go against Marethari's plan to (effectively) turn Feynriel into a tranquil by selling him to an abomination... [/quote]

Hawke disagrees with Marethari about her suggestion to make Feynriel into a tranquil mage. I don't see how saying "no" makes Hawke proactive.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You're not simply reacting. [/quote]

You're not simply reacting.

Sometimes - rarely - the Warden and Hawke get to have an original thought and cheap the person who gave them an order. But in both cases, the primary plot is entirely outside of their hands and all they can do is follow orders. [/quote]

The Hero of Ferelden makes deals to secure armies to combat the Blight and the Archdemon. He can become the Arl of Amaranthine, and make decisions regarding how his arling is governed. He can decide the fate of the people who are brought before him in court, he can decide where to put his army, and he can be proactive about the nobles who threaten his power. 

Hawke, in contrast, follows orders for several years, and makes a mess of things time and time again by being an inept person. When Corypheus possesses a Grey Warden, Hawke doesn't do anything. When Tallis manages to get the Qunari list, Hawke doesn't do anything. Time and again, Hawke mimicks furniture. I find his passivity to be annoying when I expected so much more from the person who was supposed to be able to shape and change Kirkwall with his actions.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean only being able to express a religiously Andrastian viewpoint when his mother died, [/quote]

Let's play that scene again, shall we, Mr. "I lie about what happens in-game to win debates?" [/quote]

I said that I addressed the other two dialogue lines from the Merrill scene where she can comfort Hawke (if the two of them are romantically involved). As I told Wulfram this months ago, in the "I think the option to be an atheist should return" thread:

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Wulfram wrote...

Yes, we could have done with a friendlier non-religious answer.[/quote]

Considering there are only three options, I think it would have made sense for them to be varied - rather than having two options essentially have Hawke verbally attack Merrill for trying to comfort him at this time.

[quote]Wulfram wrote...

I really can't see any other interpretation.[/quote]

Yet we aren't choosing to determine what our protagonist believes in - it's not like New Vegas or Skyrim where we chose dialogue options that establish certain aspects of our protagonist, including his beliefs. There is no alternative to Hawke voicing an Andrastian religious view. And there is no indication that being irate with Merrill means that Hawke isn't Andrastian, it simply means he isn't voicing an Andrastian perspective - which he does in combat and in other conversations, including some of his dialogue with Sebastian and Grand Cleric Elthina.

Why the developers think that giving us a fixed protagonist with a fixed religious view is better than giving us choices in the matter is beyond me.[/quote]

As I said previously, the problem remains that Hawke isn't given the opportunity to express an alternative point of view. The other two dialogue lines simply have Hawke berate Merrill; the player isn't given the option to express that he doesn't believe in the Maker, for example.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

Let's quote what other people (Sir JK ) said about your views:

[quote]I'm sorry Lobsel, but now you're being intellectually dishonest.
Your statement is that Hawke has no option but to be Andrastian. Yet the very scene that your argument hinges on has a total of 7 combinations, only 2 leads to Hawke referencing the maker. [/quote]

Yes, you're certainly not lying at all. [/quote]

You realize Sir JK participated in the same thread where I addressed the other two dialogue lines in the Merrill scene, as you can see here.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

telling Creators worshipped Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides his path [/quote]

I said godspeed once. Crap! I just realized this means I'm not an atheist. I suppose it's time for me to get baptized. [/quote]

So saying "I hope (a specific god from a specific religion) guides your path" is the same as "Godsped"? I respectfully disagree.


[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

and his other dialogue invoking the Maker don't mean Hawke is religiously Andrastian? I respectfully disagree. [/quote]

No, you're just making things up.[/quote]

If Hawke is only permitted to provide one single point of view - that of someone who is religiously Andrastian - then I'm not making anything up.

You and I have discussed the issue of atheism for months. You've participated in the atheist threads where I specifically stated that Hawke wasn't given any alternative point of view to being religiously Andrastian, In Exile, so I find it incredibly disingenuous of you to pretend that you had no idea what I was talking about. Perhaps you should learn to conduct yourself as an adult, and stop trying to start flame wars by baiting people with disingenuous arguments that you know aren't true.

The problem remains that Hawke is only allowed to have one point of view. Is Hawke allowed another point of view to atheist when he says his mother is with the Maker? No. He tells Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides him. How is that remotely the same as "godspeed"? Saying "I hope God watches your path" isn't the same as godsped. It's intellectually dishonest of you to claim that this is the case.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 14 janvier 2013 - 07:34 .

[In Exile]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
You can go along with what Petrice is already doing as long as you're aggressive [/quote]

I recall us talking about proactivity... but that would be absurd, because obviously we're talking about whatever point has you being right.

[quote]and you can do what you were already asked to do by saving Feynriel. [/quote]

Is this a joke? You're asked by Eamon to speak at the Landsmeet and you cheat him, but this is somehow different?

[quote]Those two examples don't make me like the partially fixed character of Hawke.[/quote]

Good on you. Remind me again where we were discussing this?

[quote]If I want to stop Petrice, I can't, and I'm given no plausible reason why I can't. She admits she wants to murder innocent people to start a religious war, and Hawke does nothing about it except provide one of three flavors of dialogue. It makes him come accross as inept to me. [/quote]

Good for you. The Warden (and Alistair) comes off as an idiot to me for not doing what Duncan would have: abandoning Ferelden to the Blight to make haste for Orlais. 

I think the Cousland Warden comes off as an idiot for not executing Alistair and Anora both and arguing that the Landsmeet should have him (or her) King (Queen).

I think the dwarf noble is an idiot for not using the Crown to declare himself King of Orzammar and having Bhelen executed.

Oh! I have an even better example. Why am I roped into Teagan's completly bonkers plan to find the ashes of Andraste?

All of these make the Warden come off as a patsy to me. But, hey, I kept that opinion to myself, because (silly me) I thought we weren't debating subjective opinions but who was proactive or reactive.

[quote]As for the situation with Grace and Thrask, that plot is railroaded into Grace seeking revenge, no matter what Hawke does. [/quote]

Remember when I said you say misleading things to win arguments on the internet? Let me remind you what this debate is about: whether the Warden was proactive.

Remind me again how Bioware's railroading here is relevant? And since we're playing this game: why am I railroaded into the Andraste's ashes quest, again? At least Bioware in DA2 forced a character who isn't my PC to do something. In DA:O they just forced my atheist mage to go on a quest for Andraste's magical ashes.

[quote]In Exile, so I find it incredibly disingenuous of you to pretend that you had no idea what I was talking about.[/quote]

I do know exactly what you're talking about. I called you a liar from the second you posted in this thread, remember?

[quote]Perhaps you should learn to conduct yourself as an adult, and stop trying to start flame wars by baiting people with disingenuous arguments that you know aren't true.[/quote]

Two points: (i) it's implied in the word disingenuous that I know it isn't true (pet peeve); (ii) if you want to stop lying about what happens in-game, I'll stop calling you out on it. But otherwise, consider me a constant fact-checker in the background.

As Upsettingshorts likes to say: you're entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.

[quote]Is Hawke allowed another point of view to atheist when he says his mother is with the Maker? No.[/quote]

Is Hawke forced to say that his mother is in the afterlife? No.

Is the Human Noble or Human Mage allowed to worship the Creators? No.

[quote]He tells Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides him. How is that remotely the same as "godspeed"? [/quote]

Well, given that one is a real thing in our world that means (by definition):

Middle English god speid, from the phrase God spede you (God prosper you)

So it seems quite a lot like "I hope God watches your path". We've just neutered the phrase, culturally.

[quote]Saying "I hope God watches your path" isn't the same as godsped.[/quote]

Actually, it was. Now it isn't, because the meaning has shifted. But we have no idea what that line means in DA2, other than your ignorance.

[quote]It's intellectually dishonest of you to claim that this is the case.[/quote]

Hey! You used that word. Let me paste something again (thanks again, Sir JK, for being an impartial third party):

[quote]I'm sorry Lobsel, but now you're being intellectually dishonest.
Your statement is that Hawke has no option but to be Andrastian. Yet
the very scene that your argument hinges on has a total of 7 combinations, only 2 leads to Hawke referencing the maker. [/quote]

Are you sure you know what it means?

Modifié par In Exile, 13 janvier 2013 - 10:32 .

[Tootles FTW]

Very nice to read from someone who enjoyed DA2; I often get really disheartened reading all the negativity towards it on the forums. I agree with your sentiment and can't wait for DA:I!

[mmarty]

I think a few folk in here need to find a dark room and lie down.

[Kajagoogoo3]

 Great letter, I must admit, I too enjoyed both Origins and 2 and I'm looking forward to getting a chance to play Inquisition. Hopefullly it will be out soon.

[LobselVith8]

In Exile,

I take it calling me a "liar", despite participating in the atheist threads where I made my opinion loud and clear, is supposed to cause me to stoop to your level of mud slinging? You're welcome to engage me like an adult, and have an actual discussion with me, but I don't see the point if all you're going to do is name-call me as though you're in grade school.

My participation in the atheist threads was about my desire to see the return of the protagonist being allowed to express an atheist point of view; to say he didn't believe in the Maker. This is permitted in Origins with the Cousland and Surana Warden. I've made my opinion known in the atheist threads, and you participated in them as well.

Pointing out that the Cousland Warden can't worship the Creators doesn't change my point about my preference to see the options that were available in Origins return, especially when my Surana Warden could tell Justice that he didn't believe in the Maker, and could make it clear to Leliana that he didn't think Andraste was divine, but simply an ordinary woman.

And no, Hawke saying that he hopes the Maker guides him isn't the same as "Godsped".

Other people have also expressed that they disliked how Hawke could only be religiously Andrastian, but I take it you disagree with them as well. Again, I would love to see the kind of freedom that I had in Origins return.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You can go along with what Petrice is already doing as long as you're aggressive [/quote]

I recall us talking about proactivity... but that would be absurd, because obviously we're talking about whatever point has you being right. [/quote]

I addressed why I found Hawke to be reactive instead of proactive. Hawke didn't do anything about Petrice when he found out she wanted to start a religious war, he didn't do anything to protect his sister from the two templars who came to take her away, he didn't do anything to locate Quentin's benefactor when he found the note in Quentin's lair, and he didn't do anything about the dictatorship that Meredith imposed on Kirkwall when she illegally seized power for three years.
Maybe you would have noticed if you weren't busy lying about me because you don't actually have a valid argument to support your opinion of the matter?

As for your other comments, I recall making a post about how I, personally, found The Warden to be proactive, and that I felt Hawke was reactive and didn't do things in situations where I felt that he should have done something, and how I disliked Hawke as a consequence, but that I liked his companions. You responded to my post, of your own accord.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

and you can do what you were already asked to do by saving Feynriel. [/quote]
Is this a joke? You're asked by Eamon to speak at the Landsmeet and you cheat him, but this is somehow different? [/quote]

As for the Eamon / Feynriel example, I personally find it different to outmaneuver a politician than I do to refuse to make Feynriel tranquil. You're welcome to disagree. Again, your entitled to your own opinions about Dragon Age II. To each his own.

However, why you chose to retort with this example confuses me. Saying "no" is certainly different than becoming the new King, or the power behind the throne as Chancellor.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Those two examples don't make me like the partially fixed character of Hawke. [/quote]

Good on you. Remind me again where we were discussing this? [/quote]

A plethora of issues. Why I dislike Hawke, which was part of my original post, and why I find him to be reactive instead of passive.

Again, I specifically know I provided my own opinion in this thread, nothing more. If you like Hawke, that has no bearing on the fact that I dislike the character. Hawke comes across as inept and lazy to me. I have much more respect for his companions, who are actually doing something with their lives, while Hawke seems to consistently do nothing but hack and slash. I find Hawke to be very boring, and preferred my Warden.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

If I want to stop Petrice, I can't, and I'm given no plausible reason why I can't. She admits she wants to murder innocent people to start a religious war, and Hawke does nothing about it except provide one of three flavors of dialogue. It makes him come accross as inept to me. [/quote]

Good for you. The Warden (and Alistair) comes off as an idiot to me for not doing what Duncan would have: abandoning Ferelden to the Blight to make haste for Orlais. 

I think the Cousland Warden comes off as an idiot for not executing Alistair and Anora both and arguing that the Landsmeet should have him (or her) King (Queen). 

I think the dwarf noble is an idiot for not using the Crown to declare himself King of Orzammar and having Bhelen executed. 

Oh! I have an even better example. Why am I roped into Teagan's completly bonkers plan to find the ashes of Andraste?

All of these make the Warden come off as a patsy to me. But, hey, I kept that opinion to myself, because (silly me) I thought we weren't debating subjective opinions but who was proactive or reactive. [/quote]

You're welcome to think The Warden and Alistair are idiots, but I don't share your opinion. I particularly liked my Surana Warden. The Warden could be proactive about the Blight in many ways, and that continued if he rose to the rank of Warden-Commander. In contrast, Hawke is certainly reactive in terms of what we see in the narrative, as I explained time and time again.

You're welcome to disagree, of course. You and I have disagreed about pretty much everything for years now.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

As for the situation with Grace and Thrask, that plot is railroaded into Grace seeking revenge, no matter what Hawke does. [/quote]

Remember when I said you say misleading things to win arguments on the internet? Let me remind you what this debate is about: whether the Warden was proactive. 

Remind me again how Bioware's railroading here is relevant? And since we're playing this game: why am I railroaded into the Andraste's ashes quest, again? At least Bioware in DA2 forced a character who isn't my PC to do something. In DA:O they just forced my atheist mage to go on a quest for Andraste's magical ashes. [/quote]

I have links that address how you were misrepresenting my argument. I have a link that shows that Sir JK was present at the thread where I addressed the other two dialogue lines in the scene with Merrill comforting Hawke. 
What exactly is your real argument then, when the evidence contradicts your claim? That I should have phrased my words better? I recall you apologizing because you didn't phrase your words better and saying that wasn't the point you were trying to make. For someone who can "refine" what he previously said, you seem eager to call others a "liar" when you "misunderstand" what their point is.

I've made my point in the atheist threads previously:

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote] TheJediSaint wrote... 

Well, there's certainly a good chance that at least one Witch of the Wilds making an apperance. But I think Gaider's presence on this thread has more to due with him being annoyed that certain posters are twisting what he said in order to advance an agenda. [/quote]

That's petty. It's not an agenda to think that Dragon Age III should give the player (at least) the same level of freedom and control Origins did for the protagonist. The Warden can be atheist, and Morrigan voices that she believes in neither the Maker or a higher power. It's not an agenda when posters address Morrigan's actual dialogue. [/quote]

Emphasis mine. Also, I've addressed my point many times before, as you can see.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

In Exile, so I find it incredibly disingenuous of you to pretend that you had no idea what I was talking about. [/quote]

I do know exactly what you're talking about. I called you a liar from the second you posted in this thread, remember? [/quote]

Yes, you called me a liar, but I have many links that prove I'm not lying.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Perhaps you should learn to conduct yourself as an adult, and stop trying to start flame wars by baiting people with disingenuous arguments that you know aren't true. [/quote]

Two points: (i) it's implied in the word disingenuous that I know it isn't true (pet peeve); (ii) if you want to stop lying about what happens in-game, I'll stop calling you out on it. But otherwise, consider me a constant fact-checker in the background.

As Upsettingshorts likes to say: you're entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.[/quote]

You're referencing Upsettingshorts? The guy who laughed at the players who asked for the option for atheism to be included in future Dragon Age games? Who tried to start a flame war with me in the same thread a few pages later? Am I supposed to take anything Upsettingshorts says seriously?

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Is Hawke allowed another point of view to atheist when he says his mother is with the Maker? No. [/quote]

Is Hawke forced to say that his mother is in the afterlife? No.

Is the Human Noble or Human Mage allowed to worship the Creators? No. [/quote]

Do the other two alternative lines of dialogue allow Hawke to express a different point of view? No. Is Hawke only permitted to express a religiously Andrastian point of view in that particular scene with Merrill? Yes. That's the crux of the problem.

Furthermore, you seem to continue ignoring the fact that people have requested the return of an option that was available in Origins: for the protagonist to express disbelief in the Maker. As Gaider conceded in Xil's thread a few months ago (you can read the entire entry at the link):

[quote]David Gaider wrote...

Yes, there was indeed the occasional dialogue option to express it-- something you guys obviously remember better than we do (writing something over six years will definitely do that, let me tell you). I don't know if we would consider that "supported" as I defined above, but you're correct that it definitely pops up. Probably because, at the time, such an option seemed appropriate, and I wouldn't have a problem with that even now. [/quote]

As you can see, many people have asked for the option to return, because Hawke is religiously Andrastian in Dragon Age II. Is Hawke permitted to provide an alternative point of view? No. What's the only point of view he can provide in that particular scene? That his mother is with the Maker. That's the problem that I have with that particular scene, and I expressed it to Wulfram months ago when his retort was the other two dialogue lines in the scene (you can read our exchange of dialogue above, or in the "I think the option to be an atheist should return" thread). It's as simple as that, In Exile. I honestly don't see what your problem is.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

He tells Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides him. How is that remotely the same as "godspeed"? [/quote]

Well, given that one is a real thing in our world that means (by definition): 

Middle English god speid, from the phrase God spede you (God prosper you)

So it seems quite a lot like "I hope God watches your path". We've just neutered the phrase, culturally. [/quote]

Saying that you hope a specific god watches out for someone isn't the same as "Godsped" by any measure.
[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Saying "I hope God watches your path" isn't the same as godsped. [/quote]

Actually, it was. Now it isn't, because the meaning has shifted. But we have no idea what that line means in DA2, other than your ignorance. [/quote]

I don't think it's ignorance to correct you on your many mistakes, In Exile.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

It's intellectually dishonest of you to claim that this is the case. [/quote]

Hey! You used that word. Let me paste something again (thanks again, Sir JK, for being an impartial third party):

[quote]I'm sorry Lobsel, but now you're being intellectually dishonest.
Your statement is that Hawke has no option but to be Andrastian. Yet the very scene that your argument hinges on has a total of 7 combinations, only 2 leads to Hawke referencing the maker. [/quote]

Are you sure you know what it means? [/quote]

You mean that quote from the person who participated in the thread where I addressed that my problem was that Hawke isn't allowed an alternative point of view, as anyone is welcome to see here?

Modifié par LobselVith8, 14 janvier 2013 - 08:59 .

[vandalDX]

DA2 was phenomenal, and I felt like all of the minor dislikes I had for
Origins were taken care of. I now had a wonderfully voiced protagonist that
made things come alive and action-packed combat that was now fast and exciting.
The personal story of Hawke is powerful, and I love it dearly. Before DA2, I
had never cried at a videogame, but Leandra’s death did it. I was heartbroken.
I had tried with all my might to save her, and failed. It was powerful. I love
the Qunari in DA2. Their certainty and reassurance in having a purpose in life
is powerful, not to mention, they look awesome. When Hawke asks “Ketojan” why
he would choose to die, his response of “I am not choosing to die. I am
choosing to live by the Qun,” is a line that will always stick with me. I loved
Anders and Justice in Awakenings, and they were easily my favorite characters
in the expansion. So then when I saw what they had become in DA2, it hurt. I
was angry at Anders for not being better. I was angry that my friends had been
changed and I couldn’t help them. And then when Anders blows up the Chantry? I
spent a solid ten minutes yelling at him in anger. I wanted them to be better.
I wanted my friends back, but their own failings had destroyed them, and now I
was put in an almost impossible position. To this day, every time I think of
Anders and Justice, or am doing a playthrough, I struggle with the choice of
whether or not to kill them. I feel like it is Just for them to die for their
actions, but I want to believe that I can somehow, some day, make them better,
and so I often spare them and show them grace, hoping against reason that I can
fix things.

I never cared about the recycled maps (in honesty, it was kind of nice.
I knew where to look for treasure). I love having a voiced protagonist. I love
have emotional indicators by the dialogues I choose. I loved the Black Emporium
because I liked aging my Hawke each act to feel like time had passed. DA:O and
Awakenings were fantastic, wonderful games. DA2 was even better. I was truly
shocked with all the negativity that got thrown DA2’s way. My wife and I both
have the Kirkwall symbol tattooed on our forearms, and just the other day, I
had a customer at our workplace tell me after seeing the tattoo that Origins
was better. Sigh... The tattoos symbolize a way of living for us, through the
thought of, “Always do what’s right, even if it won’t make a difference.” Hawke
may not have been able to change some things that happened, but that only
increases the importance of trying to make the right choice. Whether it changes
something or not, right is right. Whether Hawke sides with the Templars or with
the Mages, you fight Orsino and Meredith, but your choice still matters. Your
choice still stands for something. Whether a leader of a faction makes a good
choice or not does not excuse or remove the importance of you making the right
choice.

Reading this makes me very, very excited.  I bought Dragon Age 2 the day it came out, but because of conflicts in my life at the time, the need to purchase a new Xbox and the loss of my Origins saves, and then, the advent of the Greatest Game of All Time in Mass Effect 3, I have yet to complete my story as the Champion of Kirkwall.  I've heard a lot of grumbling and general dissatisfaction for Dragon Age 2, but have tried to give BioWare the benefit of the doubt and kept it on my gaming "to-do" list.  I look forward to finishing the final DLC for Mass Efffect 3, landing my Best of the Best title in MP, and then, when it's time for a break from the Mass Effect universe, heading back to Ferelden to replay, and build on, what I'm sure will be another great story from BioWare.  Thanks for sharing.

[upsettingshorts]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Other people have also expressed that they disliked how Hawke could only be religiously Andrastian, but I take it you disagree with them as well.

By "other people" you mean the same half dozen people who start, prop up, populate, and dominate every single discussion on the subject and have non-stop for over a year?  Those other people?  

Yeah, I'm real convinced by those guys.

Also, it's not childish to call a liar a liar when they are one. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 13 janvier 2013 - 11:06 .

[In Exile]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
I take it calling me a "liar", despite participating in the atheist threads where I made my opinion loud and clear, [/quote]

Making a lie loud and clear doesn't make it any less false.

[quote]is supposed to cause me to stoop to your level of mud slinging? [/quote]

No. It's supposed to make you stop doing it.

[quote]I don't see the point if all you're going to do is name-call me as though you're in grade school.[/quote]

Personally, I don't see the point in discussing something when you actively make up facts, or characterize then in such a way as to be intentionally misleading. 

Wait - scratch that. I take a moral stance on someone being misleading - it's wrong. And so I will point out where someone is intentionally misleading others. You'll find me doing it a lot less if you stop intentionally misleading.

[quote]My participation in the atheist threads was about my desire to see the return of the protagonist being allowed to express an atheist point of view; to say he didn't believe in the Maker. [/quote]

And there's nothing wrong with that position - I actually support that! But where I have an issue is when you go in the opposite direction, and argue that the game forced you to believe in the Maker.

[quote]This is permitted in Origins with the Cousland and Surana Warden.[/quote]

You're right - DA2 failed in providing these same options.

[quote]Pointing out that the Cousland Warden can't worship the Creators doesn't change my point about my preference[/quote]

But it does address your complaint that (a) you had Hawke pick a relgious dialogue option in a religous context and ( Hawke express an Andrastian view. This part is the same as DA:O. The Cousland protagnist can be an open atheist - but if you choose to be religious as a Cousland, it must be as an Andrastian.

[quote]And no, Hawke saying that he hopes the Maker guides him isn't the same as "Godsped".[/quote]

Putting your fingers in your ears and repeatedly saying "no" when faced with the historical definition of the term doesn't mean anything other than arguing that you're entitled to your own facts.

[quote]Other people have also expressed that they disliked how Hawke could only be religiously Andrastian, but I take it you disagree with them as well. [/quote]

See Shorts for this one. Props, buddy.

[quote]As for your other comments, I recall making a post about how I, personally, found The Warden to be proactive, and that I felt Hawke was reactive[/quote]

Yes. And I pointed out how Hawke was, by your own standard, reactive. And you then (a) talked about totally unrelated matters; and ( dodged the points I raised.

[quote]As for the Eamon / Feynriel example, I personally find it different to outmaneuver a politician than I do to refuse to make Feynriel tranquil. [/quote]

Whether or not you find it different doesn't mean anything. What matters is whether it is proactive.

[quote]You're welcome to disagree. Again, your entitled to your own opinions about Dragon Age II. To each his own. [/quote]

You're not entitled to your own facts.

[quote]If you like Hawke, that has no bearing on the fact that I dislike the character.[/quote]

I'm aware.

[quote]Hawke comes across as inept and lazy to me.[/quote]

Hawke is good at one thing: killing. The same (and only) thing the Warden is good at. Maybe they're both good at talking and being persuasive - but that's about it.

[quote]I have much more respect for his companions, who are actually doing something with their lives, while Hawke seems to consistently do nothing but hack and slash. I find Hawke to be very boring, and preferred my Warden.[/quote]

You mean the Warden who does nothing other than be very good at murder, and whose key achieveing is hacking and slashng the archdemon to death? That Warden?

Remind me how you beat Loghain - ah, yes: (i) hacking and slashing your way to Eamon; (ii) hacking and slashing your way to Haven; (iii) hacking and slashing your way to the ashes; (iv ) hacking and slashing your way through Howe; (v) hacking and slashing your way through Ser Cautherin; and (vi) hacking and slashing your way through Loghain.

The funniest thing here? It's impossible to beat Loghain without dueling him, regardless of all the other stuff at the Landsmeet.

[LobselVith8]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Other people have also expressed that they disliked how Hawke could only be religiously Andrastian, but I take it you disagree with them as well.

By "other people" you mean the same half dozen people who start, prop up, populate, and dominate every single discussion on the subject and have non-stop for over a year?  Those other people?  

Yeah, I'm real convinced by those guys.

Also, it's not childish to call a liar a liar when they are one. 

Upsettingshorts,

You mean the people you consistently disagree with? And who you have animosity towards for not sharing your opinion? Yes, those people.

I'm not surprised.

And being factually inaccurate tends to make the "liar" label loses it's punch when his participation in other atheist threads addresses that he's already viewed what I was talking about in reference to the Merrill scene.

I shouldn't be surprised. I remember how you laughed when someone made fun of players who were asking for the option to express atheism in the atheist thread. I recall you jumping at the chance to vilify me months ago in the atheist thread.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 14 janvier 2013 - 07:41 .

[upsettingshorts]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Upsettingshorts,

You mean the people you consistently disagree with? And who you have animosity towards for not sharing your opinion? Yes, those people.

I'm not surprised.

All I'm saying is asserting, "The people who agree with me continue to agree with me" isn't really going to convince anyone that any of you are right. 

And it doesn't.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 13 janvier 2013 - 11:22 .

[TheJediSaint]

Arguing with Lobsel is pointless until he learns that facts are not limited to things he agrees with.