335 réponses à ce sujet

[Willowhugger]

And having a lot of uncertainties justifies many different attitudes towards gods, including the idea that they don't really exist (harder in case of the Old Gods but plausible for others) or aren't really gods. So why would David Gaider want to deny the players their preferred attitude and make it a point that a character who expresses very explicit disbelief in DAO actually isn't an unbeliever?

I'd probably wait for more clarification from DG before I made too many calls on that respect. I do think part of why I like DA:O is that religion isn't irrelevant to people's lives and is an important part of their motivations--however, they actually have to have faith rather than it being an accepted certainty.

[Magdalena11]

I don't understand why Morrigan's or any other character's or group's religious beliefs should have any impact on the way a PC should think.

Does the inquisitor only have the right to reject the Chantry, Creators, Old Gods or whatever higher power only if Morrigan agrees with him or her? Did the inquisitor base his or her religious beliefs on Morrigan's so that if they changed a bit from DAO to DAI it would destroy the foundations of his or her belief?

Is there a difference between belief and acknowledgement? Terry Pratchett uses the example in one of his books. To paraphrase: a witch is asked if she believes in gods and she denies it vehemently. Her friend reminds her that she's met a few. Her response is that believing in gods is like believing in the mailman. You know he comes by every day but that doesn't mean you have to believe in him.

Morrigan's views may have become slightly different over the time since DAO. I don't feel the same way about spirituality as I did when I was 30 and felt differently still at age 10. All the returning characters are going to be a little different than they were in the last game they appeared in.

Edit:  Remember that Morrigan's banter with Leliana is being used as an example of Morrigan's beliefs.  It is entirely possible that Morrigan was trying to provoke Leliana.  I think she was trying to goad Leliana into making another exposition of her quirky Andrasteism for her own amusement.

Modifié par Magdalena11, 22 janvier 2014 - 02:30 .

[CybAnt1]

In the D & D setting, it's impossible to be an atheist. Many people have met the gods. Some have fought them. And won! Their children are walking around the world -- see "Bhaalspawn". Cleric spells work & are granted by them - so they have power.

The only choice you have is which one to pick to serve (in some editions, that gives your cleric extra powers/spells for their devotion), and I guess if you're not a cleric or paladin, not to worship any ... but it's not for wondering about their existence.

[TurretSyndrome]

CybAnt1 wrote...

In the D & D setting, it's impossible to be an atheist. Many people have met the gods. Some have fought them. And won! Their children are walking around the world -- see "Bhaalspawn". Cleric spells work & are granted by them - so they have power.

The only choice you have is which one to pick to serve (in some editions, that gives your cleric extra powers/spells for their devotion), and I guess if you're not a cleric or paladin, not to worship any ... but it's not for wondering about their existence.

That depends on what you consider god as a person. In Dragon Age universe, while Dumat and others may be called "gods", all I think they are, are just celestial beings with immense power. I can acknowledge their existence while being an athiest, meaning that I deny the existence of a god who is omniscient, omnipotent and an omnipresent being who created the very fabric of the universe.

[Ieldra]

Magdalena11 wrote...
I don't understand why Morrigan's or any other character's or group's religious beliefs should have any impact on the way a PC should think.

It hasn't, but the statement about Morrigan not being an atheist was made as a follow-up to a statement that there won't be any atheist protagonists in future DA games.

Is there a difference between belief and acknowledgement? Terry Pratchett uses the example in one of his books. To paraphrase: a witch is asked if she believes in gods and she denies it vehemently. Her friend reminds her that she's met a few. Her response is that believing in gods is like believing in the mailman. You know he comes by every day but that doesn't mean you have to believe in him.

That's what I meant when I talked about the difference between acknowledging the Old Gods' existence and accepting them as deities with a significant impact on your own life. It is why I am asking for clarification what DG meant exactly with this statement. Technically, atheism denies a god's existence, which would be implausible for the Old Gods on Thedas, but not being an atheist is usually implied to mean more than "not denying a possible god's existence". On Thedas, where gods can have limited powers and still be called gods, this difference becomes actually important while in the real world it isn't so much. 

[CybAnt1]

That depends on what you consider god as a person. In Dragon Age universe, while Dumat and others may be called "gods", all I think they are, are just celestial beings with immense power. I can acknowledge their existence while being an athiest, meaning that I deny the existence of a god who is omniscient, omnipotent and an omnipresent being who created the very fabric of the universe.

I think the point I'm making is it seems like a better setting when people are worshipping things that may or may not exist and have some mystery to them, rather than predefined entities with stats. The only reason to worship D & D gods is for the bennies. You even know where you're going to wind up when dead, and you're past the point of the resurrection spell working - with them in their domain on their home plane. That's it. NO mystery. 

It makes (ingame) religion too prosaic and pedestrian. 



 

[Wulfram]

Ieldra2 wrote...


Edit2:
Mark Darrah said it was one of their goals for DAI to give the player more freedom. I *really* like that. I can't express how much I smiled when I heard it. Statement like Gaiders about how there won't be any atheist protagonists are liable to make me think it's just marketing talk.

Can I note the existance of this thread where Mr Gaider discussed the issue, that seems to be of more recent vintage than the tweet you were quoting

http://social.biowar...x/12890819&lf=8
If it would really make fans happy, I'll modify my statement to say we'll consider offering the option to express doubt-- when it's appropriate. Meaning, if the issue of faith is directly in question. Otherwise, like I said, it's not really one of the viewpoints we allow for (among the many that we do). And that's as far as I'll give on that point.

Fair enough?

[Magdalena11]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Magdalena11 wrote...
I don't understand why Morrigan's or any other character's or group's religious beliefs should have any impact on the way a PC should think.

It hasn't, but the statement about Morrigan not being an atheist was made as a follow-up to a statement that there won't be any atheist protagonists in future DA games.

Is there a difference between belief and acknowledgement? Terry Pratchett uses the example in one of his books. To paraphrase: a witch is asked if she believes in gods and she denies it vehemently. Her friend reminds her that she's met a few. Her response is that believing in gods is like believing in the mailman. You know he comes by every day but that doesn't mean you have to believe in him.

That's what I meant when I talked about the difference between acknowledging the Old Gods' existence and accepting them as deities with a significant impact on your own life. It is why I am asking for clarification what DG meant exactly with this statement. Technically, atheism denies a god's existence, which would be implausible for the Old Gods on Thedas, but not being an atheist is usually implied to mean more than "not denying a possible god's existence". On Thedas, where gods can have limited powers and still be called gods, this difference becomes actually important while in the real world it isn't so much. 

I haven't read the interview with DG so I didn't know what the statement that Morrigan is an atheist was relevant to.  If DG did say that the PC will not have atheism as an option then I stand corrected.  It seemed to me that there was always an option to refuse to participate in religious activities.

Something else that crossed my mind - Morrigan tells the PC that Flemeth is neither a demon nor an abomination, nor does Morrigan believe she is really human any more.  Could that mean that Flemeth herself has become a deity of sorts?  It would be really hard for her to be a true atheist if she thought her own mother had become a god.

[CybAnt1]

I think we can take it as a given that the Inquisitor believes in the Maker. The Inquisition is semi-independent of the Chantry, but from everything I've seen so far, it still has relationships with them and I would expect Inquisitors to more or less accept the Andrastian faith.

As to whether other characters expressing doubt about the Maker - or other higher powers - well, we've seen them do it before, and I imagine they will do it again.

[TurretSyndrome]

And the point that I'm trying to make is that regardless of the amount of mystery surrounding said god, one can be an atheist as long as his/her version of god(the omnivalent one who created the universe in my case) has no proof of existence.

[CybAnt1]

That's fine Turret, but there are even in our world religions that worship gods, small g, such as Hinduism, with Vishnu, Shiva, Brahman, and my favorites, Ganesha and Hanuman.

We still today have both monotheism and polytheism, with the polytheists certainly not thinking their gods are omnipotent, omniscient, or omnivalent. Indeed, in Hinduism, it's specifically stated they take human form among us (avatars).

Whatever. We're really arguing about nothing. Some people want to make this debate about the validity of real world beliefs or non belief. I'm just talking about how to write a better game setting for a fantasy game. That's it.

[Jorji Costava]

Sometimes, there's a tendency to conflate atheism with naturalism (which I will take to mean the belief that the only things that exist are the things that our best sciences tell us exist). This is especially common with the emergence of the "New Atheists" (Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens, etc.). So it's possible that what Gaider means with his tweet is that you can't be an atheist of this sort; you might be able to disbelieve the Maker, and you may not have to worship anyone or anything, but perhaps it won't be possible to be the Thedas-equivalent of a Dawkins-style naturalist.

My understanding is that prior to the emergence of evolutionary theory, deism (the belief that there is a god who created us and the universe, but doesn't involve itself with human affairs and has not revealed itself through any religious texts) was the primary outlet for religious skepticism in the West. Since I doubt that there's an equivalent to evolutionary theory available to the denizens of Thedas, it's likely that religious skeptics of the world will gravitate toward a view closer to deism than atheism.

[Ieldra]

MasterScribe wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Magdalena11 wrote...
I don't understand why Morrigan's or any other character's or group's religious beliefs should have any impact on the way a PC should think.

It hasn't, but the statement about Morrigan not being an atheist was made as a follow-up to a statement that there won't be any atheist protagonists in future DA games.

Is that really what Gaider said?

I don't have the original source, but I have two sources where he's quoted as having said there won't be any atheist player characters in Dragon Age from now on.

I think I found some clarification in this thread. He says they won't provide any options to express atheism [any more], but that doesn't mean the PC is forced to be devout. Probably they won't provide any options to talk about your personal beliefs with regard to gods, which sucks, but is of course preferable to being forced. 

He also says that it's generally extremely unlikely for a person of Thedas to not believe in any higher power at all, but that Morrigan may be a special case.

Also, this:

David Gaider wrote....
If it would really make fans happy, I'll modify my statement to say we'll consider offering the option to express doubt-- when it's appropriate. Meaning, if the issue of faith is directly in question

He was also apparently unaware of the HN origin's option to express disbelief in the Maker and of Morrigan's statements about higher powers. Nobody brought up Aveline's conversation where she says she doesn't find the rationale for the Maker's existence convincing but it's an added piece of evidence that it's not so unusual to doubt the Maker's existence even among people brought up as Andrasteans. 

I guess we can still be agnostics or flat earth atheists. 

LOL. I didn't know the type had a tvtrope entry.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 22 janvier 2014 - 02:58 .

[Magdalena11]

CybAnt1 wrote...

I think we can take it as a given that the Inquisitor believes in the Maker. The Inquisition is semi-independent of the Chantry, but from everything I've seen so far, it still has relationships with them and I would expect Inquisitors to more or less accept the Andrastian faith.

As to whether other characters expressing doubt about the Maker - or other higher powers - well, we've seen them do it before, and I imagine they will do it again.

I think we can take it as a given that the inquisitor believes in a deity or group of deities.  I wouldn't expect a Dalish elf to believe in the Maker, but the Creators.

Nearly everyone is culturally rooted in some belief system or another.  It defines the way we think about gods, morals, ideals, goals, etc., even if it is in rejecting them.  A person might reject the belief system their society offers but as long as they live they will always be a former whatever-ian.  If looked at from this angle, the only real atheists are people who are raised in atheistic societies.  If a Thedosian child was raised by non-believers away from anyone else I suppose it would be an atheist.  Morrigan does not fit into that category because while she was raised apart from others she still had to run from the Chantry and its templars.  Whether she agreed with its beliefs or not, the Chantry was a part of her life.

[Willowhugger]

CybAnt1 wrote...

I think we can take it as a given that the Inquisitor believes in the Maker. The Inquisition is semi-independent of the Chantry, but from everything I've seen so far, it still has relationships with them and I would expect Inquisitors to more or less accept the Andrastian faith.

As to whether other characters expressing doubt about the Maker - or other higher powers - well, we've seen them do it before, and I imagine they will do it again.

I'm going to assume the Inquisition has no relationship with the Chantry, actually.

[azarhal]

Willowhugger wrote...


Take the Dwarves, they don't believe in gods but believe in Ghosts. Ghosts which are literally real.

The Dwarves venerate the Stone, apparently they do not worship it, but they do see it as their creator and they work for her by removing the gangue. We have two reference, in game, of the Stone living under Orlais as well.

[LobselVith8]

Star fury wrote...

I don't think there were many atheists in Medieval times and Thedas is based on that period.

Atheists have existed for centuries, including during and prior that period in time; it's not a recent phenomenon.

[Willowhugger]

The Dwarves venerate the Stone, apparently they do not worship it, but they do see it as their creator and they work for her by removing the gangue. We have two reference, in game, of the Stone living under Orlais as well.

I took their reverence for the stone as literal than figurative.

[LobselVith8]

Star fury wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Besides, I don't care about "many". I care about not retconning Morrigan and not being forced to be religious with my protagonist.

We know nothing about religions in DAI, but you still think that an alarm must be raised about imaginary "retcon". I wish people had used this dreaded less and when it is justified. 

It's addressed because the player had no choice in defining what Hawke believed in, while The Warden could explicitly say he didn't think Andraste was a divine figure and he could say that he didn't believe in the Maker.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 22 janvier 2014 - 03:05 .

[CybAnt1]

I'm going to assume the Inquisition has no relationship with the Chantry, actually.

Organizationally, yes, it has independence. But ... look, it is supposed to be based on the first one ... and ... 

http://dragonage.wik...iki/Inquisition

[color=rgb(213, 212, 212)">The Inquisition was formed around -100 Ancient[3] ], cultists or heretics.[/color][4] A loose association of Andrastian hard-liners, the group combed the land in search of these threats and some say theirs was a reign of terror.

[snip]

[color=rgb(213, 212, 212)">In 1:20 Divine, the newly founded Chantry found common cause with the Inquisition and they signed the ].[/color][7][b][color=rgb(213, 212, 212)"> ], the Templar Order, and its senior members became known as the Seekers of Truth[/color]

[snip][end]

I know, I know, the 2nd Inquisition isn't the 1st Inquisition, but it borrows its name, so I wouldn't expect it to have nothing in common.

We know Qunari Inquisitors apparently won't follow the Qun. We have met surface dwarves and city elves that have abandoned the traditional beliefs of their people to convert to Andastrianism. It can happen. I suspect that will be the basis of dwarven and elven Inquisitors. 

Of course, my prediction could be as completely baseless as many of the others around here.  As always, we'll have to see. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 22 janvier 2014 - 03:06 .

[Ieldra]

Magdalena11 wrote...

CybAnt1 wrote...

I think we can take it as a given that the Inquisitor believes in the Maker. The Inquisition is semi-independent of the Chantry, but from everything I've seen so far, it still has relationships with them and I would expect Inquisitors to more or less accept the Andrastian faith.

As to whether other characters expressing doubt about the Maker - or other higher powers - well, we've seen them do it before, and I imagine they will do it again.

I think we can take it as a given that the inquisitor believes in a deity or group of deities.  I wouldn't expect a Dalish elf to believe in the Maker, but the Creators.

No, I don't think we can take it as a given. I'm certainly not going to deny the existence of the Old Gods, or deny the possibility that the elven gods might exist, but I will not regard any of them as higher powers. If they exist, they're powerful beings with agendas, nothing more.

Nearly everyone is culturally rooted in some belief system or another.  It defines the way we think about gods, morals, ideals, goals, etc., even if it is in rejecting them.  A person might reject the belief system their society offers but as long as they live they will always be a former whatever-ian.  If looked at from this angle, the only real atheists are people who are raised in atheistic societies.  If a Thedosian child was raised by non-believers away from anyone else I suppose it would be an atheist.  Morrigan does not fit into that category because while she was raised apart from others she still had to run from the Chantry and its templars.  Whether she agreed with its beliefs or not, the Chantry was a part of her life.

Ah, the joys of telling others what they really believe against the statements made by them. You do realize this is an attempt to claim sovereignity of interpretation over another's mind and as such highly offensive? I know rather well what I believe, thank you very much, and having been brought up in a religious society or family doesn't automatically make you religious. 

What you can't be is *ignorant* of the dominant religion of your society, and you will always be influenced by it to some degree. The result, however, may be anything from enmity over indifference to acceptance.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 22 janvier 2014 - 03:07 .

[TurretSyndrome]

CybAnt1 wrote...

That's fine Turret, but there are even in our world religions that worship gods, small g, such as Hinduism, with Vishnu, Shiva, Brahman, and my favorites, Ganesha and Hanuman.

We still today have both monotheism and polytheism, with the polytheists certainly not thinking their gods are omnipotent, omniscient, or omnivalent. Indeed, in Hinduism, it's specifically stated they take human form among us (avatars).

Whatever. We're really arguing about nothing. Some people want to make this debate about the validity of real world beliefs or non belief. I'm just talking about how to write a better game setting for a fantasy game. That's it.

Funny you should mention that. I'm an Indian, and also a Hindu. Hindu gods and godesses as you say, are both major and minor.  In Hindu mythology, according to what I was taught and the knowledge that I have on them, gods took human forms when they believed certain actions should not be done as gods but by humans, as it would become interfering with the mortal world. This was a reason as to why in all those stories, the hindu gods let the demons do as they please, for as long as they did, and had to take mortal human forms to vanquish them. Pretty heavy stuff.

And yeah I agree with you. I personally think it's pretty stupid that the writer forces a ground rule of "belief in the existence of a higher all-knowing entity" onto the player characters, while deliberately keeping the existence of that entity itself as mysterious.

[LobselVith8]

azarhal wrote...

Atheist is not based on worship, it's based on accepting the existence of deities of any kind (not just the omniscient one by the way). Someone could believe that certain deities exist without worshiping them.

This is the case of the Old Gods in Thedas, it doesn't matter if you in the "real world" do not think they are gods, everyone on the setting do and that is all that matters.

Incorrect. Some scholars think they are simply ancient dragons.