455 réponses à ce sujet

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

The Xand wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

You got a religious text claiming him as a reality. That does not prove his existance. The Maker MAY be real, but as he stands now he is only an idea, since his actual existance cannot be proven.

We have to assume that there's some kernel of truth to that religious text and that it exists to some extent because it's from a fictional game full of intentional design. Likely it's a demon. Or some kind of a gun. Called Chekhov.

Actually, we don't. They might well be sending a message by making his existence ambiguous and having those who claim to serve him be a mixture of good and bad people. (Besides, they pulled this twist already in a Neverwinter Nights expansion.)

[Lotion Soronarr]

The Xand wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Jarring and out of place?
Really?

You entire "logic" (and I use the term loosely) is that X is boring (to you), thus it doesn't fit in the DA universe?
Since when is that any kind of criterion whatsoever?

What exactly does "Person X finds this interesting" have to do with "fitting in an fictional unvierse"?

Because a distant and aloof character that you don't ever see and doesn't ever do anything is such a stunning personality. We should give the Maker and Oscar.

And?
If that is His role (to a be a catalyst for thing, but not actually proven to do anything), so be it?
Again - WHY IS THAT OUT OF PLACE?


What you given me isn't an answer.

We have to assume that there's some kernel of truth to that
religious text and that it exists to some extent because it's from a
fictional game full of intentional design. Likely it's a demon. Or some
kind of a gun. Called Chekhov.

OR maybe he's just a background element with no greater role than that.
Do you really believe that every single thing a writer write is some kind of foreshadowing and that everything must have some some big consequence or something?

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 04 novembre 2013 - 02:46 .

[Ieldra]

mx_keep13 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
They already are alien. The Old Gods can hardly be qualified as evil, in its objective form, since we have had no exposure to them. But they were certainly sinister.

All right, maybe I should've said I don't want them to be revealed as evil, and I want it to appear plausible to be interested in them without appearing completely insane (or becoming insane, at that).

The old gods must've been pretty pragmatic gods with the whole blood magic and sacrifices

Blood magic as such isn't evil, and how it was used was in the hands of humans. Also, it's not clear if it actually was Dumat who taught Archon Thalsian blood magic. That's a myth of the Old Gods' religion. Other sources make it much older, in fact the oldest source of magic.

[Reznore57]

No example of Gods with agenda in the setting.
The only case might be Flemeth , but her God or non God status is still up in the air.
The Old Gods were Dragons , clever yes , but not on a human level.
We see Corypheus , he is tainted ,he was also locked like his ancient gods.
Far as I can tell the dude was able to properly communicate and seems to have his own plan.

Old Gods , they wake and eat everyone around.Only giving very basics orders to Darkspawn.They are mainly predators.Not evil , it's just their nature.
During The first Blight , Dumat was still worshipped , when he rises as an Archdemon , he could have called his priests for help , he didn't.He probably ate them.

So all those humans hearing whispering , most of them directed at ending the Tevinter Empirium?
Probably not " gods ", The elves knew how to go beyond the fade , most of them were Dreamers ...All points at mortals mastering magic causing terrible things , and then trying to contain their own mistake.

Magic can elevate someone at a Godlike status , that's just the truth about the setting for me.
It's all about containing /controlling/abusing etc this power , and how different cultures deal with having the power of gods in their hands.Some turn their back on it , dwarves (though they deal with lyrium and golem creature^^), qunari.Some tries to contain and define rules , The Chantry , some just roll with it ,Elf ,Tevinter.
There is no clear answer anyway , magic seems to be vital in Thedas.And it's a highly chaotic thing.

[The Xand]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

OR maybe he's just a background element with no greater role than that.
Do you really believe that every single thing a writer write is some kind of foreshadowing and that everything must have some some big consequence or something?

Like how the Blight was a background element? The Maker and it's mystery is rammed down our throats at every turn we make, so it's very, very obvious foreshadowing. A prime case of Chekhov's gun.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Actually, we don't. They
might well be sending a message by making his existence ambiguous and
having those who claim to serve him be a mixture of good and bad people.
(Besides, they pulled this twist already in a Neverwinter Nights
expansion.)

Well if they've already done it it's likely they'll do it again, no? Big twist; the Maker was a Dreamer, and human. Or a demon. Or just some powerful spirit. Or never even existed and the Black City is man made. Any of those theories are better than how things stand now.

Modifié par The Xand, 04 novembre 2013 - 03:27 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Xand wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

You got a religious text claiming him as a reality. That does not prove his existance. The Maker MAY be real, but as he stands now he is only an idea, since his actual existance cannot be proven.

We have to assume that there's some kernel of truth to that religious text and that it exists to some extent because it's from a fictional game full of intentional design. Likely it's a demon. Or some kind of a gun. Called Chekhov.

And WHY do we have to assume that? I don't ahve to assume any such thing about the bible either. I can see it all as allegory, and that it is just stories meant to guide the morality of Man. I don't have to assume that there is any actual truth to it.

[The Xand]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Xand wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

You got a religious text claiming him as a reality. That does not prove his existance. The Maker MAY be real, but as he stands now he is only an idea, since his actual existance cannot be proven.

We have to assume that there's some kernel of truth to that religious text and that it exists to some extent because it's from a fictional game full of intentional design. Likely it's a demon. Or some kind of a gun. Called Chekhov.

And WHY do we have to assume that? I don't ahve to assume any such thing about the bible either. I can see it all as allegory, and that it is just stories meant to guide the morality of Man. I don't have to assume that there is any actual truth to it.

Because the Bible isn't central to the plot of a fictional narrative?

The Maker is already the primary antagonist of Dragon Age since he directly and physically created the Blights.

Modifié par The Xand, 04 novembre 2013 - 03:41 .

[Welsh Inferno]

The Xand wrote...

Because the Bible isn't central to the plot of a fictional narrative?

The Maker is already the primary antagonist of Dragon Age since he directly and physically created the Blights.

I must have missed where that was confirmed.

[The Xand]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

The Xand wrote...

Because the Bible isn't central to the plot of a fictional narrative?

The Maker is already the primary antagonist of Dragon Age since he directly and physically created the Blights.

I must have missed where that was confirmed.

They must have thrown it into the intro for no reason then.

No mysteries to solve there right?

Modifié par The Xand, 04 novembre 2013 - 03:54 .

[The Flying Grey Warden]

The Xand wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Xand wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

You got a religious text claiming him as a reality. That does not prove his existance. The Maker MAY be real, but as he stands now he is only an idea, since his actual existance cannot be proven.

We have to assume that there's some kernel of truth to that religious text and that it exists to some extent because it's from a fictional game full of intentional design. Likely it's a demon. Or some kind of a gun. Called Chekhov.

And WHY do we have to assume that? I don't ahve to assume any such thing about the bible either. I can see it all as allegory, and that it is just stories meant to guide the morality of Man. I don't have to assume that there is any actual truth to it.

Because the Bible isn't central to the plot of a fictional narrative?

The Maker is already the primary antagonist of Dragon Age since he directly and physically created the Blights.

Central to the plot? Oh please,  it's little more then a backstory footnote. That's like trying to claim those elf mirrors are central to the plot because it was in two games. Or the struggle of the dusters.

It's there to add another element to the story, nothing else. And primary antagonist?  Does your stupid self promotion of your evidenceless pet theory know no bounds?

[The Flying Grey Warden]

The Xand wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...

The Xand wrote...

Because the Bible isn't central to the plot of a fictional narrative?

The Maker is already the primary antagonist of Dragon Age since he directly and physically created the Blights.

I must have missed where that was confirmed.

They must have thrown it into the intro for no reason then.

No mysteries to solve there right?

So you linked to the Iintro that focuse little to nothing on the maker and more on the darkspawn. Along with how in game evidence brigns Into question the role of the maker or possibly any deity in turning the magisters into darkspawn in the legacy dlc.

[The Xand]

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...

The Xand wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Xand wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

You got a religious text claiming him as a reality. That does not prove his existance. The Maker MAY be real, but as he stands now he is only an idea, since his actual existance cannot be proven.

We have to assume that there's some kernel of truth to that religious text and that it exists to some extent because it's from a fictional game full of intentional design. Likely it's a demon. Or some kind of a gun. Called Chekhov.

And WHY do we have to assume that? I don't ahve to assume any such thing about the bible either. I can see it all as allegory, and that it is just stories meant to guide the morality of Man. I don't have to assume that there is any actual truth to it.

Because the Bible isn't central to the plot of a fictional narrative?

The Maker is already the primary antagonist of Dragon Age since he directly and physically created the Blights.

Central to the plot? Oh please,  it's little more then a backstory footnote. That's like trying to claim those elf mirrors are central to the plot because it was in two games. Or the struggle of the dusters.

It's there to add another element to the story, nothing else. And primary antagonist?  Does your stupid self promotion of your evidenceless pet theory know no bounds?

I'm just going to leave this here.

The whole plot of Dragon Age: Origins revolves around stemming the Blight, and the Blight was caused by...the Maker. That's one of the central themes of Dragon Age yo.

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...


So you linked to the
Iintro that focuse little to nothing on the maker and more on the
darkspawn. Along with how in game evidence brigns Into question the role
of the maker or possibly any deity in turning the magisters into
darkspawn in the legacy dlc.

Areligious people have this funny tendency of wanting to know where things came from instead of just stopping at "god created it" and then asking no more questions.

Funny you should mention the Legacy DLC because that also proves my point. There's a larger mystery at work and all is not what it seems. You'll see.

Modifié par The Xand, 04 novembre 2013 - 03:59 .

[Welsh Inferno]

The Xand wrote...

I'm just going to leave this here.

The whole plot of Dragon Age: Origins revolves around stemming the Blight, and the Blight was caused by...the Maker. That's one of the central themes of Dragon Age yo.

No. It is what the most ardent followers of the Chantry believe. That does not make it fact yo.

Modifié par Welsh Inferno, 04 novembre 2013 - 04:02 .

[The Flying Grey Warden]

So you still claim the maker is evil, despite no evidence there is even is maker, or evidence he was involved with the darkspswn, and even evidence andraste was just a mage manipulating people or possibly a crazy person whose ashes and followers happened to picked a massive lyrium deposit to stay on.

I don't see what your point is really, nor why the old gods aren't the ones responsible or the main bads. They're the ones leading the blights, and who caused them if the legacy dlc is right about dumat. They exist empirically and have a strong power in the fade, so yeah, no reason it has nothing to do with the maker and everything to do with the old gods.

[The Xand]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

The Xand wrote...

I'm just going to leave this here.

The whole plot of Dragon Age: Origins revolves around stemming the Blight, and the Blight was caused by...the Maker. That's one of the central themes of Dragon Age yo.

No. It is what the most ardent followers of the Chantry believe. That does not make it fact yo.

The games wouldn't have built him up as the primary antagonist if there wasn't some greater underlying mystery. We call that foreshadowing. Or even Chekhov's gun.

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...

So you still claim the
maker is evil, despite no evidence there is even is maker, or evidence
he was involved with the darkspswn, and even evidence andraste was just a
mage manipulating people or possibly a crazy person whose ashes and
followers happened to picked a massive lyrium deposit to stay on.

I
don't see what your point is really, nor why the old gods aren't the
ones responsible or the main bads. They're the ones leading the blights,
and who caused them if the legacy dlc is right about dumat. They exist
empirically and have a strong power in the fade, so yeah, no reason it
has nothing to do with the maker and everything to do with the old
gods.

Now you're getting somewhere. You're beginning to see the potential for darker revelations. You fluffy little grasshopper you.

Modifié par The Xand, 04 novembre 2013 - 04:11 .

[Ieldra]

I see no evidence whatsoever for the Maker to be foreshadowed as having any role in the plot. DAO's intro is backstory in form of a religious myth, in order to give the player a reference framework for what happens in the story, and since we don't know the real story of the darkspawn at that point (and still don't now, in spite of Legacy), the myth must serve. The darkspawn are a real threat, and the Chantry has incorporated or created the myth as a part of your typical religion's attempt to explain the world.

At the moment of the intro, it's perfectly clear that this is a half-truth at best, and that the Maker is a typical creator god not part of observable reality. That the darksspawn's origin story isn't 100% imagination, that we only come to know with Legacy - where the Maker most notably isn't mentioned at all as being part of it.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 04 novembre 2013 - 04:27 .

[In Exile]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I see no evidence whatsoever for the Maker to be foreshadowed as having any role in the plot. DAO's intro is backstory in form of a religious myth, in order to give the player a reference framework for what happens in the story, and since we don't know the real story of the darkspawn at that point (and still don't now, in spite of Legacy), the myth must serve. The darkspawn are a real threat, and the Chantry has incorporated or created the myth as a part of your typical religion's attempt to explain the world.

But at some point - if the plot touches on the origins of the darkspawn - it will have to touch on whether the Chantry narrative is true (or not). And that will indirectly touch on this idea of a Maker. Take what Corypheus says - if the city "was supposed to be golden", then that calls into question a great deal of (current) Andrastian dogma.

So in the sense of being an actual character the Maker might not have a role in the plot, but that's only because the actual role is a particular narrative about human myth making (e.g. like you suggest in the portion I underlined). 

[The Xand]

In Exile wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

I see no evidence whatsoever for the Maker to be foreshadowed as having any role in the plot. DAO's intro is backstory in form of a religious myth, in order to give the player a reference framework for what happens in the story, and since we don't know the real story of the darkspawn at that point (and still don't now, in spite of Legacy), the myth must serve. The darkspawn are a real threat, and the Chantry has incorporated or created the myth as a part of your typical religion's attempt to explain the world.

But at some point - if the plot touches on the origins of the darkspawn - it will have to touch on whether the Chantry narrative is true (or not). And that will indirectly touch on this idea of a Maker. Take what Corypheus says - if the city "was supposed to be golden", then that calls into question a great deal of (current) Andrastian dogma.

So in the sense of being an actual character the Maker might not have a role in the plot, but that's only because the actual role is a particular narrative about human myth making (e.g. like you suggest in the portion I underlined). 

You know, Corypheus is still alive so hopefully he can elaborate a little more when he's more cohesive.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Xand wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...

The Xand wrote...

I'm just going to leave this here.

The whole plot of Dragon Age: Origins revolves around stemming the Blight, and the Blight was caused by...the Maker. That's one of the central themes of Dragon Age yo.

No. It is what the most ardent followers of the Chantry believe. That does not make it fact yo.

The games wouldn't have built him up as the primary antagonist if there wasn't some greater underlying mystery. We call that foreshadowing. Or even Chekhov's gun.

The games haven't build him up at all..... They have actually brought it into question wether he is real or not. There is more in the games and expanded universe, that actually hints towards the maker's non-existance, than hints towards his existance. At the end of the day, it is still one big mystery what caused the Blight, and wether or not the Maker exists. I hold no doubt that you would LOVE for the Maker to be an antagonist, but that doesn't really make your theory hold any water....

The Xand wrote...

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...

So you still claim the
maker is evil, despite no evidence there is even is maker, or evidence
he was involved with the darkspswn, and even evidence andraste was just a
mage manipulating people or possibly a crazy person whose ashes and
followers happened to picked a massive lyrium deposit to stay on.

I
don't see what your point is really, nor why the old gods aren't the
ones responsible or the main bads. They're the ones leading the blights,
and who caused them if the legacy dlc is right about dumat. They exist
empirically and have a strong power in the fade, so yeah, no reason it
has nothing to do with the maker and everything to do with the old
gods.

Now you're getting somewhere. You're beginning to see the potential for darker revelations. You fluffy little grasshopper you.

There are always a potential for dark reveals. That doesn't mean they are going for them. They could also reveal, that Darkspawn are actually a force of good, trying to kill the evil of Thedas, so that all can be reborn into happiness. A dark reveal is not necessarily what a story need. Certainly not one of the magnitude you desire.

[Ieldra]

In Exile wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

I see no evidence whatsoever for the Maker to be foreshadowed as having any role in the plot. DAO's intro is backstory in form of a religious myth, in order to give the player a reference framework for what happens in the story, and since we don't know the real story of the darkspawn at that point (and still don't now, in spite of Legacy), the myth must serve. The darkspawn are a real threat, and the Chantry has incorporated or created the myth as a part of your typical religion's attempt to explain the world.

But at some point - if the plot touches on the origins of the darkspawn - it will have to touch on whether the Chantry narrative is true (or not). And that will indirectly touch on this idea of a Maker. Take what Corypheus says - if the city "was supposed to be golden", then that calls into question a great deal of (current) Andrastian dogma.

So in the sense of being an actual character the Maker might not have a role in the plot, but that's only because the actual role is a particular narrative about human myth making (e.g. like you suggest in the portion I underlined). 

Indeed, and I think that the role is that is pretty obvious right there at the start of DAO, and nothing since has hinted it may be more. Also, I'd bet any sum of money that we won't get that hint, since the literal interpretation of the myth being true, i.e. the Maker is a benevolent deity and cast the magisters out, that would canonize the moral dimension of the tale along with it, and DA isn't that kind of setting. On the other hand, making the Maker a malevolent entity would thematically invalidate that moral dimension and reveal the Chantry's teachings as a delusion, and again DA isn't that kind of setting. So yes, I believe we'll be getting more about the origin of the darkspawn, but if complete, there will be a perfectly reasonable explanation in naturalistic terms (or what counts for that on Thedas, including the realm of magic and spirits into the natural) while the story will remain open to having a moral dimension added to it. When all is over, the Chantry won't be able to confirm the truth of its myth, but neither will the truth in naturalistic terms invalidate the Chantry's perspective.

[The Xand]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The games haven't build him up at all..... They have actually brought it into question wether he is real or not. There is more in the games and expanded universe, that actually hints towards the maker's non-existance, than hints towards his existance. At the end of the day, it is still one big mystery what caused the Blight, and wether or not the Maker exists. I hold no doubt that you would LOVE for the Maker to be an antagonist, but that doesn't really make your theory hold any water....

Of course they built him up, with quite a grand amount of foreshadowing. The Blight, the Old Gods, the Tevinter mages, the Maker and the Black City they are all interconnected, and the Maker's role is right at the very centre of that mystery. It can't be left unsolved, because that would be poor storytelling of the very lowest order.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

There are always a potential for dark reveals. That doesn't mean they are going for them. They could also reveal, that Darkspawn are actually a force of good, trying to kill the evil of Thedas, so that all can be reborn into happiness. A dark reveal is not necessarily what a story need. Certainly not one of the magnitude you desire.

It's exactly what this story needs, to give it Lovecraftian levels of satisfaction.

Ieldra2 wrote...
On the other hand, making the Maker a
malevolent entity would thematically invalidate that moral dimension and
reveal the Chantry's teachings as a delusion, and again DA isn't that
kind of setting.

What Dragon Age have you been playing? They've been setting the Chantry up for a mighty fall since the Origins intro and hinted throughout the whole series that the Chantry teachings are probably not be what they seem.

Ieldra2 wrote...
So yes, I believe we'll be getting more
about the origin of the darkspawn, but if complete, there will be a
perfectly reasonable explanation in naturalistic terms (or what counts
for that on Thedas, including the realm of magic and spirits into the
natural) while the story will remain open to having a moral dimension
added to it. When all is over, the Chantry won't be able to confirm the
truth of its myth, but neither will the truth in naturalistic terms
invalidate the Chantry's perspective.

I predict the exact opposite. The Chantry have been misled. That doesn't invalidate the Fade or anything else in the lore, just that the Chantry is wrong about the Black City and the Maker that they worship. It's entirely feasible the world was created by some other grand entity.

Modifié par The Xand, 04 novembre 2013 - 05:12 .

[Han Shot First]

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...

I'm going to take a wild guess and say the reason is people want this is,

1. They want to have their protagonist transcend reality and go into complete power trip fantasy mode, in which even a god is just a simple enemy they can defeat at their leisure, making them supreme to all things.

2. "I had a crappy childhood with some religious focus my legal caregivers tried to shove on me, so now in an attempt to show them I'm no longer part of their religion and hate it, without doing anything illegal, I want to express my visceral hate onto fictitious deities similar to our real world counterparts."

3. For da Koolz, think about it? It'll have lasers, and platforming, and you can climb on the mater and gouge out his eyes. So metal! Just like that other game where you go and kill monsters and gods.

4. I want to go above and beyond my duties as an internet atheist, and not just not believe in god, but kill god so everyone must bow down and embrace my religion as truth.

Pretty much this, though I suspect #1 accounts for the majority of people who want this.

Mark me down in the 'no' column.

[The Xand]

Han Shot First wrote...

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...

I'm going to take a wild guess and say the reason is people want this is,

1. They want to have their protagonist transcend reality and go into complete power trip fantasy mode, in which even a god is just a simple enemy they can defeat at their leisure, making them supreme to all things.

2. "I had a crappy childhood with some religious focus my legal caregivers tried to shove on me, so now in an attempt to show them I'm no longer part of their religion and hate it, without doing anything illegal, I want to express my visceral hate onto fictitious deities similar to our real world counterparts."

3. For da Koolz, think about it? It'll have lasers, and platforming, and you can climb on the mater and gouge out his eyes. So metal! Just like that other game where you go and kill monsters and gods.

4. I want to go above and beyond my duties as an internet atheist, and not just not believe in god, but kill god so everyone must bow down and embrace my religion as truth.

Pretty much this, though I suspect #1 accounts for the majority of people who want this.

Mark me down in the 'no' column.

And my guess why the religious don't care about getting answers about the Maker? Because they don't want to see even a loose interpretation of their god disproved.

It's rather telling that they can watch the Dragon Age intro and not ask any more questions about the darkspawn and the Maker beyond what they're told. They even take the Chantry's version of events at face value!

[Han Shot First]

I'm not sure that argument would stand up to scrutiny. After all if a person is truly devout, would they care if a fictional god was proven to be false within that fictional universe? No one is going to see the Maker as Jesus or Yahweh or Allah or Buddha or Zoroaster, and all of the monotheistic faiths have rules against worshipping other gods. If the Maker wasn't part of a work of fiction but the object of worship for a historical cult, it would be seen as a 'false god' to those people.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 04 novembre 2013 - 05:54 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

The Xand wrote...
Like how the Blight was a background element? The Maker and it's mystery is rammed down our throats at every turn we make, so it's very, very obvious foreshadowing. A prime case of Chekhov's gun.

Nope.
Maybe you should check your terms.

How many hunders or books had mysteries or "plot points" that never went anywhere and there weren't twists? How many settings have an absent god that you never confront?

No Xand, there is nothing "obvious".
Quite the opposite, since we already know from DG that you will never fight the Maker or be given a clear answer on his existence.

Well if they've already done it it's likely they'll do it again, no? Big twist; the Maker was a Dreamer, and human. Or a demon. Or just some powerful spirit. Or never even existed and the Black City is man made. Any of those theories are better than how things stand now.

Your oppinion. Other people disagree.