301 réponses à ce sujet

[Shevy]

No, worst RPG protagonist I ever had to play. Most useless, naive player character, except for killing half the population of Kirkwall.

It's great to play an "can't solve everything" hero, but it's how these failures are presented. Hawke is only an errand-boy for the higher ups and just plain stupid. After the serial killer quest and the "report about Anders' behaviour" to one of the Templars and nothing happened I let the game rot for a while, cause I didn't want to play as such a useless toy.

Yeah, I became Champion of Kirkwall but I still don't have anything to say, thanks.

In the end it were game design flaws and false advertising "single most important person" that pushed Hawke in his role, but so he ended up to be the first protagonist I don't give a f... about. And I think that's worse than hating your role-played PC.

And then, the worst of all: MotA ending. A man who killed thousands of people, but don't even try to get the list from a small, weak elf. How can one relate to such a walking failure?
 

Modifié par Shevy_001, 04 février 2014 - 12:33 .

[superdeathdealer14]

I don't think Hawke was a bad character but I myself never really took a shine to Hawke.

[CybAnt1]

Become Viscount.

For all of about 5.5 seconds, after which you either left the throne, or I'm sorry, "mysteriously disappear" from it. 

OK. I'm exaggerating. It was about 7.2 seconds. You barely had time to make sure the crown fit. 

[CybAnt1]

superdeathdealer14 wrote...

I don't think Hawke was a bad character but I myself never really took a shine to Hawke.

I think I could have taken a better shine to him if he had more than 3 emotions. And worse yet, had one eventually become dominant over his existence and way of speaking, thus transforming for the rest of the game into angry-hawke, charming-hawke, or joker-hawke. 

Have I become a broken record on this, yet? 

[Zombie_Alexis]

Hawke isn't a tragic hero. At least not in the classical sense. Hawke falls more into the Failure Hero trope.

[CybAnt1]

I think by Aristotle's definition, he is. Of course, that's not to say Aristotle's definition is universally agreed upon, in fact modern tragedians have tried to deconstruct his view.

[superdeathdealer14]

CybAnt1 wrote...
I think I could have taken a better shine to him if he had more than 3 emotions. And worse yet, had one eventually become dominant over his existence and way of speaking, thus transforming for the rest of the game into angry-hawke, charming-hawke, or joker-hawke. 
Have I become a broken record on this, yet? 

No really please continue.

[Sundance31us]

Loghain is a better tragic hero than Hawk IMO.

[Trolldrool]

JulianWellpit wrote...

I would say that the most tragic hero in the setting up to date is Loghain.He transformed from almost nothing into a hero,an eliberator and he sacrificed his happiness in the process.Later in life he fell from grace and became a shadow of his former self, thus becoming something worse than a poacher...he almost became a traitor and almost destroyed the country he sacrificied his life and happiness for. I might also add than in some peoples lore, he ends up executed without a trial in front of men and women he commanded and that respected him, people that might have not lived if it wasn't for him and that in the end hated and/or pitied him.

I think he is a better candidate to the "Biggest Tragic Hero Ever ( in Thedas )" title.

My thoughts exactly.

I honestly don't see Hawke as a tragic hero and it's a difficult thing to do with any playable protagonist because people make their own interpretations of them. My Hawke always in some way or another seemed to be a homicidal, bloodthirsty maniac that paints the streets of Kirkwall red with blood in his quest to elevate his killing spree to genocidal levels.

It seems to me that depending on personality choices, Hawke always seemed noble enough during gameplay, but looking back at my playthroughs, I get the impression that the character I've played is either a well intentional mage that throws so many fireballs around that I imagine game mechanics or Varric's storytelling is the only reason he didn't set entire districts on fire. And sometimes, this kindness is in fact so passive that it ends up getting people murdered anyway. Like rather than closing down a mine that is obviously costing more human lives than it should be worth, chooses to keep it open because it adds to his or her families wealth (which according to Varric, the Deep Roads treasure already did in abundance.)

Or a lighthearted warrior that doesn't take anything serious, especially not death, especially not when it involves other people and proceeds to tear asunder any bandit or cutpurse who, judging by the conditions of Kirkwall's streets, have probably turned to crime because it's more profitable to feed their too many children than honest work (But that is pure speculation, so there's an obvious flaw in my reasoning). If anyone should be in fear for their loved one's lives, Hawke can always be counted on to have a really offensive and inappropriate joke at hand.

And finally a dark and aggressive murderer who manipulates his companions at every turn, takes any opportunity to kill that he gets and revels in the screams of those weaker than her/him. He resorts to extortion and blackmail and threats of physical disfigurement to ger his way, including taking the entire profit for himself and leaving children to starve, only saves civilians if he happens to hate them less than he hates the people he's saving them from and when given the opportunity will gladly (If this hawke is able to feel joy at all) raise the price for saving their lives.

Again, this is because everyone form their own interpretation of the characters they play and mine is probably not the most correct one, but it's still mine and I can't just wish it away. I feel much more sorry for the NPCs that are affected by Hawke's actions. It's like he's ta'veren and everyone around him, unnamed civilians and relatives alike, are unknowingly and unwillingly pulled down the maelstrom of fatetwisting left in his wake whenever he draws breath.

[LinksOcarina]

Hawke is not a tragic hero, his flaws were not a part of his rise and he never had a fall.

Hawke is, however, not superman, which makes him a lot more human and incapable of changing the tide of fate. I respect BioWare for going in that direction, even if it lead to some pretty awkward moments in Dragon Age II.

[KaiserShep]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Hawke is not a tragic hero, his flaws were not a part of his rise and he never had a fall.

Hawke is, however, not superman, which makes him a lot more human and incapable of changing the tide of fate. I respect BioWare for going in that direction, even if it lead to some pretty awkward moments in Dragon Age II.

I actually enjoyed Hawke's character for this. I like to characterize my Hawke for being in this primarily for the money (demanded payment from Fenris in the beginning, the Vicount, etc.), since Kirkwall was just a last option to escape the Blight anyway. All that Champion stuff was for the birds, but killing riffraff for more money seems like a good enough deal.

[leaguer of one]

CybAnt1 wrote...

Become Viscount.

For all of about 5.5 seconds, after which you either left the throne, or I'm sorry, "mysteriously disappear" from it. 

OK. I'm exaggerating. It was about 7.2 seconds. You barely had time to make sure the crown fit. 

That 5.5 seconds our time was 2 year thedus time.  Not really tragic.

[mallot75]

Can't argue that life (the plot) dealt her a bad hand, however it really depends on if you think it's tragic. It changes from person to person.

[HiroVoid]

Hawke embraced fate like Flemeth's words in the trailer before DAII released and it was decided her fate was to be pulled into crap after crap until she eventually had to go on the run to do....whatever.

[Celtic Latino]

AutumnWitch wrote...

Think about this. (I will refer to Hawke as "she" as I played her as female, so don't get offended please)

She did not save her sister.

She did not salvage the relationship with her brother.

She did not save her mother.

She most likely brought war to The Free Marches due to TWO her actions.

1. Killing the Arishok.

2. Killing (and stealing from) a high ranking Orlesian noble. (Duke Prosper)

Giving the means to Flemeth (a notorious apostate) to save herself from destruction by taking part of Flemeth's soul to the Dalish.

Helping a rogue Mage/Grey Warden blow up a Chantry building killing a Grand Cleric Elthina which leads to a HUGE war betweem Mages / Templars / Chantry.

Providing the means of a decorated Templar Knight Commander (Merrideth) to get her hands on a special lyruim idol that eventually made her insane and led to her death.

Perhaps releasing an ancient original Tevinter Magister (Corypheus) upon Thedas who might be responsible for the tear in the veil and all the chaos there of.

Perhaps her venture into the deep roads led the world to discovering Red Lyrium thus the problems that caused within the Templar order.

And tragically all of this occurred because she thought she was doing the right thing. Even when trying to do the right thing, she might be indirectly responsible for the needless death of thousands. Can you imagine the guilt she is carrying? And what is so tragic, if put in the same situation, would anyone do anything different? She must feel like the personification of Sisyphus.

No wonder Cassandra was looking for her.

Let's hope our Inquisitor fairs better with her/his decisions eh?

Some good points. Hawke is most certainly a victim of circumstance for sure, but I'll provide my opinion for each. 

01. If you're talking about the first sibling death, yeah that's purely a matter of the cinematics. However, there's always the chance of playing a warrior or rogue and Bethany will indeed be 'saved' (or alive really). Carver on the other hand... 

02. Much of that is Carver's doing as far as his resentment towards Hawke goes. However, he DOES have a relationship with Hawke regardless. If you're on full rivalry, he'll stand by his brother/sister, even if he is a Templar. And as a Grey Warden, he still feels compelled to provide aid. Just because they don't see eye to eye doesn't mean there isn't some level of caring deep down. Fortunately, Bethany's relationship with Hawke is much, much closer and better, so Hawke can potentially have a sibling to have a good relationship with. 

03. The Arishok was looking for war far before going to the Free Marches. Its the Qunari way to force others to submit to the Qun one way or another. He knew the political advantages of the Viscount's son hanging around Assad. He knew far more than he let on. He just simply put Hawke in the 'right' direction. In this case Hawke was a victim of circumstance yet again. 

04. Flemeth's doing is still Flemeth's doing. She could easily have used someone else as the carrier. And Hawke had no idea what the ritual entailed. If anyone, Merrill is to blame for reciting the ritual as is the Dalish for creating it in the first place. Marethari also knew a great deal herself. Any of those three are far more to blame than Hawke. Plus its just as likely Hawke knows little to nothing about Flemeth other than her power (that he/she needed). Morrigan wasn't around to tell them otherwise. 

05. Not even Anders would tell Hawke what he was up to. And Anders blew up the Chantry. You can sell a sword to someone, but its the person wielding it that makes the cut. Very much so for Anders. 

06. Bartrand gave the idol to Meredith, not Hawke. Again, you can discover poison, but if someone else decides to make it, sell it, and force others to drink it its on them. 

The thing about Hawke is Hawke is not aware of what's going on. He/she has what others say to go by and is merely a messenger to the whole ordeal. Its likely he/she will be blamed regardless, so I do agree Hawke in a sense is a tragic hero, or at least a very fallible one with little to no control aside from his/her reaction and maybe a decision here and there. But that's what makes Hawke more compelling. That he/she isn't an avatar-god that makes every single decision. 

[AshenShug4r]

seeing Hawke called her feels wrong.

[Anvos]

HiroVoid wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Phoenixalex wrote...

I am still pressed over Leandra Hawkes death, why were we not given a choice to save her.
It's so obvious like the previous poster said that it was for drama.

I am probably the only one who's going to say this, but I think the idea was for the "hero/ine" that is Hawke (i.e. us) to rethink the idea of Mage freedom, especially when guys like Quentin and Anders are allowed to run free and end up causing Havoc, Spirit-powered abomination or not.

Actually, Mary Kirby outright said the Quentin plotline was supposed to give the players a reason to feel personally wronged by a mage in a post probably a year or more ago.

Problem you run into is the plot arch for the serial killer requires Hawke, the Guard, and Templars repeatidly being wacked over the head by the idiot stick.  Not to mention how Hawke in the end uses the fail logic of "my mother has potentially been abducted by a serial killer, lets go home to wait until night to try an follow the trail".

Also just as importantly is the fact

The only difference between a mage Quentin and a normal Quentin is mage Quentin is actually able to make his ungodly creation walk around.  A crazy serial killer is still a crazy serial killer regardless of if he is a mage or not.


As for the topic, no Hawke isn't a tragic hero, even though I suspect they might have intended him/her to somewhat be.

Modifié par Anvos, 05 février 2014 - 10:04 .

[Dulas]

No matter how hard you try Hero of Ferelden never fails to end the Blight. Ferelden is always saved. The only difference to Hawke's story's outcome is that you always get a happy ending in Origins. Just saying.

[KaiserShep]

AshenShug4r wrote...

seeing Hawke called her feels wrong.

This is kind of why I like to use this pronoun for Shepard as well.

[HiroVoid]

Dulas wrote...

No matter how hard you try Hero of Ferelden never fails to end the Blight. Ferelden is always saved. The only difference to Hawke's story's outcome is that you always get a happy ending in Origins. Just saying.

Pfft.  My Hurlock Vanguard completely wrecked Ferelden.

But as far as variables though, Dragon Age Origins actually has a pretty good bit.  What reinforcements you can call in the final battle, who can give the final blow, if the final blow is given, who's ruling Ferelden, and what characters are backing you up in the fight with the archdemon such as Eamon, Werewolf spirit, etc.

[superdeathdealer14]

Dulas wrote...

No matter how hard you try Hero of Ferelden never fails to end the Blight. Ferelden is always saved. The only difference to Hawke's story's outcome is that you always get a happy ending in Origins. Just saying.

I don't remember Origins always having a 'happy ending' as I don't really choosing a US ending to be that happy or even choosing the DR can be seen as a bad ending.

[KaiserShep]

There's not much to go on to see the dark ritual ending as inherently bad. Far as anyone can tell, Morrigan's lovechild is no more a threat to Thedas than the darkspawn swarm that still scurries underground, or the remaining old gods that compel them to dig them out.

[superdeathdealer14]

KaiserShep wrote...

There's not much to go on to see the dark ritual ending as inherently bad. Far as anyone can tell, Morrigan's lovechild is no more a threat to Thedas than the darkspawn swarm that still scurries underground, or the remaining old gods that compel them to dig them out.

Oh I know that hell I'm pro dark ritual (killing an Archdemon and living through the battle isn't that bad if I get sex from it) but some among the BSN distrust the ritual and Morrigan and may portray the ritual as 'bad'

[KaiserShep]

At the very least, she owns up to it in the end, and even tells you that this was Flemeth's plan from the start. Heck I'd go along out of sheer curiosity.

[Lebanese Dude]

In my opinion, Hawke was one of the more believable characters in fiction. His shortcomings were integrated into the story to make him seem more believable.

People keep saying that "he should have seen things coming" and not sucked at everything.

Well first of all it's really easy to project our own personal experiences into a game and assume our protagonist would know everything we knew. We also have a more broad perspective than the character, albeit less vivid.

It's also very easy to metagame and end up believing that the story could have been better if the character knew what we knew all along.