219 réponses à ce sujet

[KainD]

Not about the ritual but:

brushyourteeth wrote...
“From my perspective, making a strong female character is about having her have her own agenda,” 
“The most important thing for me when I wrote [Origins] was that at the end even if Morrigan loved the player, she had this thing that she believed in, that was so important that she would do it regardless of the player.”

Having romance above other agendas makes a character weak? 
I guess this means I won't get any characters to romance in the future game, since I like strong characters, and I like to keep romance on a pedistal at the same time. 

[Taleroth]

KainD wrote...

Not about the ritual but:

brushyourteeth wrote...
“From my perspective, making a strong female character is about having her have her own agenda,” 
“The most important thing for me when I wrote [Origins] was that at the end even if Morrigan loved the player, she had this thing that she believed in, that was so important that she would do it regardless of the player.”

Having romance above other agendas makes a character weak? 
I guess this means I won't get any characters to romance in the future game, since I like strong characters, and I like to keep romance on a pedistal at the same time. 

I agree with Gaider's reasoning. I just don't agree with the conclusion.

"Do it regardless of the player" need not mean "without" the player. It took Witch Hunt to finally acknowledge that distinction.

The first reaction of a number of players was "okay, she has something she needs to do... why can't we help?"

Modifié par Taleroth, 12 août 2013 - 06:59 .

[brushyourteeth]

KainD wrote...

Not about the ritual but:

brushyourteeth wrote...
“From my perspective, making a strong female character is about having her have her own agenda,” 
“The most important thing for me when I wrote [Origins] was that at the end even if Morrigan loved the player, she had this thing that she believed in, that was so important that she would do it regardless of the player.”

Having romance above other agendas makes a character weak? 
I guess this means I won't get any characters to romance in the future game, since I like strong characters, and I like to keep romance on a pedistal at the same time. 

Well, to make this post clearer, those weren't my words. Those were David Gaider's.

But yes, people should have things that are more important to them than romantic love. A "love" that's more important than anything else you're living for is actually what we call "obsession."

If you expect Morrigan to give up on all her hopes, goals, and dreams because you say so, that's not love.

If Morrigan pursues her hopes, goals, and dreams, even if you disagree with them, that is strength.

If Morrigan backstabs you in some way to achieve those hopes, goals, and dreams, she is both strong and, in a sense, unloving.

It is what it is.

[Sylvianus]

KainD wrote...

Not about the ritual but:

brushyourteeth wrote...
“From my perspective, making a strong female character is about having her have her own agenda,” 
“The most important thing for me when I wrote [Origins] was that at the end even if Morrigan loved the player, she had this thing that she believed in, that was so important that she would do it regardless of the player.”

Having romance above other agendas makes a character weak? 
I guess this means I won't get any characters to romance in the future game, since I like strong characters, and I like to keep romance on a pedistal at the same time. 

Well nothing is absolute as well, but Morrigan appeared really strong with her own agenda above love. I was certain she would change her mind at the end but no. xD

My first reaction at the end : B*tch !

after : You are so awesome !

Modifié par Sylvianus, 12 août 2013 - 07:04 .

[dragondreamer]

Anders comes to mind... He was also deadset on his agenda, regardless of what his feelings for Hawke were. But it's hard to judge Morrigan's agenda without knowing exactly what it is.

[Sylvianus]

Well, Anders seemed more obsessed than concerned by his own agenda to me. Like a fanatic terrorist. That changes everything for me.

But, I admit I'm not maybe totally objective about Anders.

[brushyourteeth]

dragondreamer wrote...

Anders comes to mind... He was also deadset on his agenda, regardless of what his feelings for Hawke were. But it's hard to judge Morrigan's agenda without knowing exactly what it is.

Good point.


I'm trying to imagine the look on Oghren's face if our Warden had told him to stop drinking.

... and now I'm having fun imagining the fan rage that would have occurred when he showed up later in DA:A drunk as a skunk anyway. "But mah player agency... but mah choices!!!" 

[Dave of Canada]

KainD wrote...

Not about the ritual but:

brushyourteeth wrote...
“From my perspective, making a strong female character is about having her have her own agenda,” 
“The most important thing for me when I wrote [Origins] was that at the end even if Morrigan loved the player, she had this thing that she believed in, that was so important that she would do it regardless of the player.”

Having romance above other agendas makes a character weak? 
I guess this means I won't get any characters to romance in the future game, since I like strong characters, and I like to keep romance on a pedistal at the same time. 

How dare a character be independent.

[KainD]

Taleroth wrote...

The first reaction of a number of players was "okay, she has something she needs to do... why can't we help?"

I didn't want to help her, because she even considered doing it without the PC. 

brushyourteeth wrote...

But yes, people should have things that are more important to them than romantic love. A "love" that's more important than anything else you're living for is actually what we call "obsession."

If you expect Morrigan to give up on all her hopes, goals, and dreams because you say so, that's not love.

If Morrigan pursues her hopes, goals, and dreams, even if you disagree with them, that is strength.

If Morrigan backstabs you in some way to achieve those hopes, goals, and dreams, she is both strong and, in a sense, unloving.

It is what it is.

It's not obsession it is a goal, hope and a dream in life - to have someone by your side always, regardless of anything you do. There is strength in persuing that as well. 

A proper romance for me would be if PC was much more important to Morrigan than the ritual, and in turn Morrigan would be much more important to the PC than the blight. 

Now that priorities have been set, Morrigan can help the player with the blight and the player can help Morrigan with her ritual. 

Sylvianus wrote...

Well nothing is absolute as well, but Morrigan appeared really strong with her own agenda above love. I was certain she would change her mind at the end but no. xD 

My first reaction at the end : B*tch !

after : You are so awesome ! 

[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie]

My first and final reaction was just: I just wasted time. lol

Modifié par KainD, 12 août 2013 - 07:13 .

[KainD]

Dave of Canada wrote...

How dare a character be independent.

No, by all means go ahead and be independant. But specifically in a romance there is no place for independence, atleast for me. 

Edit: I have a feeling I will be missunderstood, so I will elaborate a little further. I want the character to be independant in their choice and I want them to choose the romance above all else, I want that to be their priority, but I don't want to force it on them. 

Modifié par KainD, 12 août 2013 - 07:18 .

[CronoDragoon]

KainDwrote...
Having romance above other agendas makes a character weak?

It can, sure.

I guess this means I won't get any characters to romance in the future game, since I like strong characters, and I like to keep romance on a pedistal at the same time. 

If you and the character's agendas coincide, this won't be a problem. See: Witch Hunt.

[brushyourteeth]

KainD wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

How dare a character be independent.

No, by all means go ahead and be independant. But specifically in a romance there is no place for independence, atleast for me. 

Edit: I have a feeling I will be missunderstood, so I will elaborate a little further. I want the character to be independant in their choice and I want them to choose the romance above all else, I want that to be their priority, but I don't want to force it on them. 

That's super weird, but you're allowed to want it.

[Sylvianus]

Love is something you do not control most of time. Even strong and independent characters can succumb and become... weak for someone. Doesn't mean the character is weak overall.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 12 août 2013 - 07:25 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Anybody have thoughts?

...


...


...scrap the Save Import system altogether?

[o Ventus]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Anybody have thoughts?

...


...


...scrap the Save Import system altogether?

Any good ideas?

[KainD]

CronoDragoon wrote...

KainDwrote...
Having romance above other agendas makes a character weak?

It can, sure.

How? 

[CronoDragoon]

KainD wrote...

How? 

If, for example, you do something you believe to be wrong out of love for someone, that is a form of weakness.

[KainD]

CronoDragoon wrote...

KainD wrote...

How? 

If, for example, you do something you believe to be wrong out of love for someone, that is a form of weakness.

But that's an override. 

For example - you believe that killing is wrong. 
Then you get assaulted, and you have a choice to kill or be killed, and you kill someone out of self defense, because otherwise you would be killed instead. Most people might view that as acceptable, even though killing is not. 

Same with romance - the fact that you are doing it for the person you love ( which is more important ), makes the wrong right in this particular case. 

Of course you can believe that a strong person is the one that hold to his beliefs no matter what, without exceptions and dies in the assault because they believe that killing is always wrong and don't fight back. 

[What a Succulent Ass]

KainD wrote...

Same with romance - the fact that you are doing it for the person you love ( which is more important ), makes the wrong right in this particular case. 

...So you honestly think "because my love told me to" is a justification for murder?

[Cainhurst Crow]

-edit: wrong thread-

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 12 août 2013 - 07:43 .

[KainD]

Random Jerkface wrote...

...So you honestly think "because my love told me to" is a justification for murder?

If that is your priority in life I don't see why not. 

Logic chain:

Killing in self defense is ok because your life is more important to you than the life of the one that is assaulting you. 
Some people would rather die than live without their loved one, so their loved one is more important to them than their life. 
Something that is equal or higher in importance than life makes the killing justifiable. 

This is very raw... I might worded it out poorly, I hust hope you get the idea. But it is kinda supposed to be important for your loved one again, something that severly goes against their well being. 

[What a Succulent Ass]

KainD wrote...

Logic chain:

...My priority in life right now is economic stability. Shall I kill someone for their money and be morally justified?

[Beerfish]

o Ventus wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Anybody have thoughts?

...


...


...scrap the Save Import system altogether?

Any good ideas?

Best way is to do what some other games have done.  Make an intro that deals with the major issues that are affected by previous games and let the player choose how they handled them.  No import bugs, no worries about saves from different systems.  It could even allow people who regret certain actions change them for their playthorugh instead of having to replay the whole previous game.

[Little Princess Peach]

If the rit is cannon would that mean my dead warden never really died o.O?