225 réponses à ce sujet

[tybert7]

Dave of Canada wrote...

MR_PN wrote...

my shotgun is capable of shooting a child.  it is also capable of shooting a rapist. that doesn't mean it has shot either. 

What's the point of having it?

Using the mind control example, you could mind control a sniper trying to take out an innocent, or a demon trying to flay an innocent.  It's a weapon that is wrong to use on people in a vacuum, but what is worse than using that vs something like blasting their head off?

[Vortex13]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I'm hoping we'll have less mages and templar going insane, less Holocaust analogies and more both sides having legitimate grievances.

This.

More morally grey choices. Less "Im being repressed, now I'm a demon." or "I like locking people in towers and taking away their personalities."

[LobselVith8]

tybert7 wrote...

For those who don't recall my meaning, basically every mage in DA2 was an abomination time bomb waiting to explode, companions included.  Even the most measured characters went all abom-jihad when their backs were against the wall.

I recall the insane and stupid mage antagonists in Dragon Age II. I don't have an interest in being railroaded into killing one-dimensional mages who make absolutely no sense or helping the templars this time around. I hope the narrative provides us with three-dimensional characters on both sides of the argument, and allows us to side with either one without being forced to work for the side we morally disagree with.

tybert7 wrote...

I hope there are mages with stronger wills than that in the sequel, but I am not sure what to expect after seeing how fragile they made mages out to be in the last game.

We have one developer admit that he felt players sided with mages by default, which is why we had a sea of insane and stupid mages in Kirkwall. I doubt that the negative reaction to this approach went unnoticed.

tybert7 wrote...

DA2 Mage:  Looks like I got a splinter....

GGRRRAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH  Demon explodes from mages body and starts disintegrating infants... 

Please don't remind me of how awful that was (and lore breaking). I still remember the abominations being summoned like they were creatures from the Fade. Let's hope for better the next time around. Hopefully, we also get three-dimensional blood mages as well.

[Rawgrim]

MR_PN wrote...

In Exile wrote...

KallianaTabris wrote...
 it misses the main point, which is that blood magic is not inherently evil. 

Just like torture isn't evil, it's just a tool? 

There are certain things that blood magic is capable of that are, arguably, inherently evil (such as mind control). 

my shotgun is capable of shooting a child.  it is also capable of shooting a rapist. that doesn't mean it has shot either. 

Picking up a shotgun doesn`t leave you wide open for demonic posession though.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Dave of Canada wrote...

MR_PN wrote...

my shotgun is capable of shooting a child.  it is also capable of shooting a rapist. that doesn't mean it has shot either. 

What's the point of having it?

On the off chance there's a rapist.

Rawgrim wrote...
Picking up a shotgun doesn`t leave you wide open for demonic posession though.

Nor does it make you as dangerous if you aren't posessed, really. A large part of this is because you can usually see a shotgun on the person, and they're relatively easy to remove from someone.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 30 mai 2013 - 02:14 .

[thats1evildude]

KallianaTabris wrote...

thats1evildude wrote...

Yes, DA3 should have more sane, non-villainous mages like Jowan, Connor, Uldred, Zathrian, Avernus, Caladrius, the Baroness or the unnamed blood mages in the Circle Tower, the Brecilian Forest or Denerim.

Avernus, Merrill, Jowan and Morrigan are not villainous (alothough some may be said to be slightly crazy). The sarcasm doesn't apply; it misses the main point, which is that blood magic is not inherently evil. it's a tool to power a mage's mana. Just because blood magic can accomplish potentally evil and powerful things does not make all blood mages deranged villains.

I don't recall mentioning Morrigan or Merrill, though I'll note the former does enthusiastically endorse nearly every evil decision in the game and the latter readily acknowledged the possibility she would become an abomination as a result of her actions.

As for Jowan, he turned to blood magic out of jealousy for the Mage Warden, lied to his girlfriend about it (ruining her life in the process) and then agreed to poison Arl Eamon, unwittingly kicking off a demonic invasion that resulted in the deaths of nearly everyone in Redcliffe. CLEARLY he was a Paragon of good sense.

And Avernus, well, I guess he was different than Jowan in that he actually did deliberately summon demons, though he lost control and nearly kicked off a full-scale demonic invasion. Oh, and he used his fellow Wardens as guinea pigs for experiments that never accomplished anything. But he did manage to keep the demons constrained to the Keep, so I guess that squares him for all the murders and whatnot.

Furthermore, I also don't recall making any point about blood magic being inherently evil or turning people evil. I was responding to the OP's point about most mages in DA2 being villainous or crazy.

But that's all a side tangent. My main argument is that people should remember this is an Action RPG. It cannot be an Action RPG without any "action." Yes, you will encounter bad people who can use magic, along with plenty bad people who happen to be warriors and rogues. (I notice nobody ever complains about those.) If they weren't bad, insane, misguided or mind-controlled, then why would they be involved in the affairs of adventurers?

And mages are better opponents than most, since they can bring a far wider variety of tactics to bear against the PC, including actual supernatural forces. Why do you think the Big Bad in the vast majority of fantasy stories is some kind of a wizard or magic-user? Even Meredith, without the lyrium idol, amounts to a chick to a metal suit — more skilled than most warriors, maybe, but still not a particularly inspiring boss fight.

Perhaps DA2 went too far in having a ratio of 4 or 5 evil or antagonistic mages to every good mage. DA3 should shoot for what DAO had, which was roughly a 3:1 ratio. Much better!

Modifié par thats1evildude, 30 mai 2013 - 02:36 .

[In Exile]

KallianaTabris wrote...
Yep, that's not what I said. Blood can be used in place of lyrium. I am not talking about mind domination. You, just like the citizens of Thedas, are so quick to jump to the negative results and potentials of blood magic rather than just seeing it for what it is in it's raw form. No need to throw in extreme irrelevant examples to draw parallels from. 

You said blood magic. Blood magic isn't a single thing - it's a whole class of magical spells that ranges from the morally questionable to the morally neutral. 

The point of the analogy is to make people ask themselves whether they think certain thinks have inherent moral qualities. For example, you can think that mind control is both immoral and justified. 

[LobselVith8]

tybert7 wrote...

Using the mind control example, you could mind control a sniper trying to take out an innocent, or a demon trying to flay an innocent.  It's a weapon that is wrong to use on people in a vacuum, but what is worse than using that vs something like blasting their head off? 

The applications for how blood magic can be used is precisely why I never saw it as inherently evil. It's a tool that can be used for good or bad. We know Merrill used it to cleanse a shard of the darkspawn taint while Finn used it to help locate the Eluvian in the Dragonbone Wastes. My last two protagonists were blood mages; if I get Inquisition, then I'm likely going to play as a blood mage.

And what would appeal to me is seeing sane, three-dimensional mages in the storyline, whether or not they use blood magic.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

In Exile wrote...

KallianaTabris wrote...
 it misses the main point, which is that blood magic is not inherently evil. 

Just like torture isn't evil, it's just a tool? 

There are certain things that blood magic is capable of that are, arguably, inherently evil (such as mind control). 

Blood magic and torture aren't the same thing. Yes, they work well together as of World Of Thedas, but blood magic itself is not inherently evil. As for mind control, it can sometimes be useful. If you want to take an armed criminal alive, its easier to do that with mind control than by disarming him or blasting him with an attack spell and hoping he lives. (A stunning spell might also work, as long as he's not standing on a hard surface when he hits the ground.)

In Exile wrote...
The point of the analogy is to make people ask themselves whether they think certain thinks have inherent moral qualities. For example, you can think that mind control is both immoral and justified. 

Okay, I think I see your point, but my moral leanings are towards the common good more than anything else. Mind controlling someone to steal from them or get your ship docked for free? Bad. Mind controlling a kobold so that he releases his hostage and leaves without further incident, or a criminal so that he surrenders to the proper authorities and I don't have to hurt him or risk being hurt? Cool.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 30 mai 2013 - 02:24 .

[BlueMagitek]

I'm glad we all agree that indoctrination is not a bad thing in and of itself.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Not if it brings more benefit than the indoctrinated loses. Though if you mean that ME mind control by "indoctrination," I think the benefit to society at large would need to be rather large before I agreed that it could justify the means.

[BlueMagitek]

I was referring to the ME indoctrination, yes.

Think about it; if you want to sooth a large amount of a raging populace at once, indoctrinate them. Suddenly, no more rioting. Just happy, obedient citizenry.

[PlasmaCheese]

sandalisthemaker wrote...

I believe that there are lore reasons for this.
Something about the veil being especially thin in the area around Kirkwall, due to all of the suffering/sacrifices of slaves since the time when Kirkwall was occupied by Tevinter. Also, Corypheus' presence had a strange negative effect on the area.
Yes, I do hope that mages are less likely to become abominations in DA3. I don't mind the rampant use of blood magic so much, though. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

This. I just finished Legacy like an hour ago. A GW letter said he felt Corypheus's presence is what made Kirkwall's people so...crazy and willing to turn to Blood Magic.. I hope the Mages in DA3 aren't so weak minded, though. ._.

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

sandalisthemaker wrote...

I believe that there are lore reasons for this.
Something about the veil being especially thin in the area around Kirkwall, due to all of the suffering/sacrifices of slaves since the time when Kirkwall was occupied by Tevinter. Also, Corypheus' presence had a strange negative effect on the area.
Yes, I do hope that mages are less likely to become abominations in DA3. I don't mind the rampant use of blood magic so much, though. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

Huh, I never actually knew that. I thought it was just something in the water.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

BlueMagitek wrote...

I was referring to the ME indoctrination, yes.

Think about it; if you want to sooth a large amount of a raging populace at once, indoctrinate them. Suddenly, no more rioting. Just happy, obedient citizenry.

It takes too long (from what I understand), costs those indoctrinated too much, and if you do it to everyone then who's left to enjoy the results?

[kinderschlager]

KallianaTabris wrote...

In Exile wrote...

KallianaTabris wrote...
 it misses the main point, which is that blood magic is not inherently evil. 

Just like torture isn't evil, it's just a tool? 

There are certain things that blood magic is capable of that are, arguably, inherently evil (such as mind control). 

Yep, that's not what I said. Blood can be used in place of lyrium. I am not talking about mind domination. You, just like the citizens of Thedas, are so quick to jump to the negative results and potentials of blood magic rather than just seeing it for what it is in it's raw form. No need to throw in extreme irrelevant examples to draw parallels from. 

as a blood mage that saved everyone from the ravages of a blight, i quite agree

[kinderschlager]

Vortex13 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

I'm hoping we'll have less mages and templar going insane, less Holocaust analogies and more both sides having legitimate grievances.

This.

More morally grey choices. Less "Im being repressed, now I'm a demon." or "I like locking people in towers and taking away their personalities."

we need a tyrion lanister like character in this game

[kinderschlager]

LobselVith8 wrote...

tybert7 wrote...

For those who don't recall my meaning, basically every mage in DA2 was an abomination time bomb waiting to explode, companions included.  Even the most measured characters went all abom-jihad when their backs were against the wall.

I recall the insane and stupid mage antagonists in Dragon Age II. I don't have an interest in being railroaded into killing one-dimensional mages who make absolutely no sense or helping the templars this time around. I hope the narrative provides us with three-dimensional characters on both sides of the argument, and allows us to side with either one without being forced to work for the side we morally disagree with.

tybert7 wrote...

I hope there are mages with stronger wills than that in the sequel, but I am not sure what to expect after seeing how fragile they made mages out to be in the last game.

We have one developer admit that he felt players sided with mages by default, which is why we had a sea of insane and stupid mages in Kirkwall. I doubt that the negative reaction to this approach went unnoticed.

tybert7 wrote...

DA2 Mage:  Looks like I got a splinter....

GGRRRAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH  Demon explodes from mages body and starts disintegrating infants... 

Please don't remind me of how awful that was (and lore breaking). I still remember the abominations being summoned like they were creatures from the Fade. Let's hope for better the next time around. Hopefully, we also get three-dimensional blood mages as well.

that painful stupid to witness

[Mr.House]

thats1evildude wrote...

Yes, DA3 should have more sane, non-villainous mages like Jowan, Connor, Uldred, Zathrian, Avernus, Caladrius, the Baroness or the unnamed blood mages in the Circle Tower, the Brecilian Forest or Denerim.

WHAT!? She was kidnapping children and using their blood to make her powerful and consorting with demons so she could control people. How is that not evil or villainous. Also Uldred not being evil? Did you not pay attention to the mage quest? So many mages you listed where in fact evil and villainous. The only one that is not in that list is Avernus and maybe Connor, maybe.

Modifié par Mr.House, 30 mai 2013 - 03:21 .

[KiwiQuiche]

Didn't they devs admit they went overboard with loony mages in DA2 and they'll be more careful about it in DAI?

I hope they are, since it just made me get fed up with everyone, mage, templars, randoms, going off their rockers and wish Hawke could just go "Fcuk off and die" to everyone and leave.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

kinderschlager wrote...

Vortex13 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

I'm hoping we'll have less mages and templar going insane, less Holocaust analogies and more both sides having legitimate grievances.

This.

More morally grey choices. Less "Im being repressed, now I'm a demon." or "I like locking people in towers and taking away their personalities."

we need a tyrion lanister like character in this game

Companion or NPC? (Or were you hoping to play as one? Because I think that'd be awesome.)

[kinderschlager]

LobselVith8 wrote...

tybert7 wrote...

Using the mind control example, you could mind control a sniper trying to take out an innocent, or a demon trying to flay an innocent.  It's a weapon that is wrong to use on people in a vacuum, but what is worse than using that vs something like blasting their head off? 

The applications for how blood magic can be used is precisely why I never saw it as inherently evil. It's a tool that can be used for good or bad. We know Merrill used it to cleanse a shard of the darkspawn taint while Finn used it to help locate the Eluvian in the Dragonbone Wastes. My last two protagonists were blood mages; if I get Inquisition, then I'm likely going to play as a blood mage.

And what would appeal to me is seeing sane, three-dimensional mages in the storyline, whether or not they use blood magic.

always had at least one blood mage character, would hate to see them ALL get cast as the badguy AGAIN

[Mr.House]

Filament wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

thats1evildude wrote...

Yes, DA3 should have more sane, non-villainous mages like Jowan, Connor, Uldred, Zathrian, Avernus, Caladrius, the Baroness or the unnamed blood mages in the Circle Tower, the Brecilian Forest or Denerim.

WHAT!? She was kidnapping children and using their blood to make her powerful and consorting with demons so she could control people. How is that not evil or villainous.

lol the point is that they're all villainous, though throwing Jowan and Connor in there may be a little confusing.

How is Avernus villainous?