80 réponses à ce sujet

[ShadowLordXII]

If we are up against someone whose an obstacle to another enemy just because of emotional/familial reasons, I'd hope that the character is at least honest about it and at least doesn't do it at the detriment of hundreds/thousands of lives.

 

I say this because having a character act in a way that's clearly stupid/wrong on multiple levels simply for personal reasons undercuts whatever sympathy that we're supposed to have for that character.

 

Here's a few major examples from past games to best illustrate my point:

 

Isolde in Redcliffe is single-handedly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of villagers and the potential deaths of her husband and son because she didn't want to tell her husband that Connor was a mage or specifically that her family has a history of birthing magic-inclined individuals. True, she couldn't have known that Jowan was sent by Loghain to poison Eamon or that Connor would be contacted by a demon to save Eamon's life. But that doesn't change how many lives could have been saved if Isolde had trusted her husband with the truth.

 

It's supposed to be a situation where a mother is just trying to protect her child. But any sympathy for the situation is starkly undercut by all of the lives lost because of Isolde's stupidity (particularly if Connor himself ends up dying).

 

Anora's insistence that Loghain be spared of judgement for his actions weakens her bid for queen especially with the evidence and dirt that the Warden can bring out during the Landsmeet. Game Writers have stated that Anora is justified in betraying the Warden to save her father. I'm going to respectfully disagree. But only because she's essentially supporting a status quo that's going to eventually bring Ferelden to ruin and because there is no logical basis after everything that she's seen and learned about Loghain.

 

Emotionally, it's a little identifiable. But this is the ruler of a country that we're talking about, a ruler who shouldn't let personal feelings and emotional bias interfere with her duty as a ruler. Some will argue that Anora is human and therefore, it's natural to defend family. But all of the other hundreds of thousands of Fereldens are people too with their own families. Is she really willing to put all of them at risk to support her father and yet still believes that she's doing what's best for Ferelden?

 

This paradox confuses me and it also undercuts any trust or capability that Anora supposedly has which makes any player whose betrayed by her more likely to kick her off her throne and give it Alistair rather he's hardened or not.

 

Then there was Marethari. Marethari was so determined to stir Merrill away from a path that she believed to be harmful that she kept her clan near hostile territory and even alienated her people from Merrill even though Merrill wasn't doing anything to hurt them. Then she goes to the mountain summit and lets a demon possess her without telling anyone because she wanted to "protect" Merrill.

 

This situation's pretty idiotic considering the many demons that Merrill has already killed alongside Hawke and even moreso when the clan blames Merrill for Marethari's death and either banishes her or tries to kill her resulting in the death of the entire clan. It also undercuts the supposed danger that Merrill was in because Merrill had worked on repairing the eluvian for years and nothing had happened to her.

 

The point is if you want to make a character act completely based on personal emotion and still want them to be sympathetic, don't have them take a level in idiot or they'll end up being less sympathetic especially when other people pay with their lives for their idiocy. Being human is not an excuse for being selfish and/or stupid.

[KainD]

I say this because having a character act in a way that's clearly stupid/wrong on multiple levels simply for personal reasons undercuts whatever sympathy that we're supposed to have for that character.

 

Not in the slightest. You just have different priorities than these characters so you cannot relate. I personally prioritize the well being of people who are close to me over any number of people that aren't. 

[KaiserShep]

Anora's insistence that Loghain be spared of judgement for his actions weakens her bid for queen especially with the evidence and dirt that the Warden can bring out during the Landsmeet. Game Writers have stated that Anora is justified in betraying the Warden to save her father. I'm going to respectfully disagree. But only because she's essentially supporting a status quo that's going to eventually bring Ferelden to ruin and because there is no logical basis after everything that she's seen and learned about Loghain.

 

Emotionally, it's a little identifiable. But this is the ruler of a country that we're talking about, a ruler who shouldn't let personal feelings and emotional bias interfere with her duty as a ruler. Some will argue that Anora is human and therefore, it's natural to defend family. But all of the other hundreds of thousands of Fereldens are people too with their own families. Is she really willing to put all of them at risk to support her father and yet still believes that she's doing what's best for Ferelden?

 

This paradox confuses me and it also undercuts any trust or capability that Anora supposedly has which makes any player whose betrayed by her more likely to kick her off her throne and give it Alistair rather he's hardened or not.

 

 

 

To be fair, blame for this can also be put on Riordan's feet for even presenting the case at the conclusion of the Landsmeet, and really, it does make some sense. In all likelihood the Wardens will be doomed to fight darkspawn even after the archdemon is taken care of, and the Wardens do, after all, take in criminals of all sorts. In that sense they're pretty much Dragon Age's equivalent of the Night's Watch in Game of Thrones. Loghain would technically not get off Scott free, and he'd be put to good use.

 

Of course, this changes quite a bit if you let Alistair duel him instead.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The protection of family is ALWAYS justifiable. You can then argue wether or not the way these individuals attempted to protect their lvoed ones were the most prudent ways, but you cannot say that any of their actions were unjustifiable.

[Mistic]

The point is if you want to make a character act completely based on personal emotion and still want them to be sympathetic, don't have them take a level in idiot or they'll end up being less sympathetic especially when other people pay with their lives for their idiocy. Being human is not an excuse for being selfish and/or stupid.

 

Although I agree the idiot ball was heavy in some places, in most of them it's incredibly justified. Emotional reasons override rational ones every day in every corner of the world, even in death or life scenarios, so why shouldn't it happen in Thedas?

 

It's easy for the character, an outsider, and even easier for the player, a human being who is aware those characters are just a bunch of pixels, to judge a situation in a more rational way (and even that doesn't stop passionate discussions such as the Mage-Templar debate).

 

Isolde is a noblewoman worrying about her son. Had Loghain not sent an assassin, things would have turned out diferently. Anora is in a delicate position. Think about it: if she chooses the wrong option, she can end up imprisoned or killed. She in turn could accuse the Wardens of being too emotional about Loghain's "betrayal". As for Marethari, yes, idiot ball was in effect.

[Xilizhra]

The protection of family is ALWAYS justifiable. You can then argue wether or not the way these individuals attempted to protect their lvoed ones were the most prudent ways, but you cannot say that any of their actions were unjustifiable.

Not always. Most blatantly shown in Magistrate's Orders, with Kelder.

[EmissaryofLies]

Agreed in general OP.

 

Sometimes family is not worth it. Sometimes family is the worst thing that can happen to a person and even a community/nation.

 

Idiotic characters that overlook glaring flaws 'cus family is insulting to the narrative and the person pursuing it. It's like reading Cain and Abel over and over again if done sloppily.

[wcholcombe]

It depends on the person/character and their ability to see the big picture.

 

Isolde actually is entirely believable to me in that her whole world is probably centered on Connor.  I feel fairly certain that Eamon does all of the political stuff and Isolde just concentrates on the child raising.  Connor is literally her world and expecting her to be rational when it comes to him isn't realistic.

 

Anora is a little more surprising as she obviously has a grasp of the big picture-demonstrated when she challenges her father on his decisions. But alas he is still her father, she doesn't necessarily want to see him killed if he can be spared.

[renfrees]

Blood is not everything, as is cannot justify everything.

[pallascedar]

Some of these are just silly. It's easy to lay blame at Isolde's feet, but it isn't that simple. Loghain/Howe sent the Assassin that set all this in motion, Jowan is the jerk that tried to kill an influential leader to save his own skin. All of these men hold more blame than her, and their motivations were far less noble.

I don't get what you're saying about Anora. Anora believes she is the rightful Queen and she holds on to that power. If a Warden convinces her that he'll help make her Queen, she betrays her own father. She knows that what he's fine is wrong but she's not gonna ally with a Warden who intends to dispose her.

Her desire to spare her father isn't unreasonable either. No matter what happens he loses his lands, title and political power. Frankly the only reason to kill him is some abstract sense of justice that doesn't matter in the real world, or Alistair's personal vendetta. Anora and Riordan make the better arguments.

I'll give you that Marethari was a bit eggheaded, but there's more that gotta on than we see. But Merrill is working with dangerous demons, the joins that could possess her and lie in wait for a while, the kind that could wipe out a clan, further dies Marwthari know for sure that the mirror is fully cleansed? I doubt the clan would need Marethari tp tell them much more than "Merrill is messing with the mirror that killed Tamlen." to get the Dalish to fear Merrill. I do think it was unnecessary to have the clan attack Merrill: why would they hurt the person their keeper sacrificed herself to save? But pretty much ask of Act 3 suffered from rushed writing, so I don't read too far into this.

[wcholcombe]

Blood is not everything, as is cannot justify everything.

Your speaking logically.  When referring to family, logic is usually the last thing involved in the thought process.

[EmissaryofLies]

I beg you. Please don't continue with the Merrill comparison. Only bad things can follow.

 

You've been warned.

[dragonflight288]

Blood is thicker than water, it's true, but not always. It's really hard for an Aeducan Warden to be completely rational about the good of Orzammar when it comes to choosing between Harrowmont and Bhelen. 

[renfrees]

Your speaking logically.  When referring to family, logic is usually the last thing involved in the thought process.

I'm speaking as a person, who jailed own's brother, twice. Because he deserved it, despite being the only sibling i had. I know what i'm talking about.

[EmissaryofLies]

Your speaking logically.  When referring to family, logic is usually the last thing involved in the thought process.

 

Good point. And more than likely the strongest argument against working with family in any sort of official capacity.

 

I can understand Isolde. Anora? Kind of, sorta. Loghain at that point is responsible for heinous and disgusting crimes 'for the greater good' at the very least he deserved to have his head cut off. Alistair was one hundred percent righteous in his anger. One of the few times I ever fully agreed with the character.

[wcholcombe]

I'm speaking as a person, who jailed own's brother, twice. Because he deserved it, despite being the only sibling i had. I know what i'm talking about.

I said usually. Congratulations for you being able to do what needed to be done. Not everyone has that strength of character.

 

In fact, most people don't.  Heck we make excuses for celebrities much less our own relatives behaviors.

[dragonflight288]

....I don't get what you're saying about Anora. Anora believes she is the rightful Queen and she holds on to that power. If a Warden convinces her that he'll help make her Queen, she betrays her own father. She knows that what he's fine is wrong but she's not gonna ally with a Warden who intends to dispose her...

 

In all aspects, she IS the rightful queen. She married the legitimate heir, was already on the throne before the civil war even started, and Loghain never denies that she is the ruler. The very existence of Alistair is a threat to that legitimacy however.

 

A case can easily be made that she is right to betray the Warden just as it can be made that the Warden and Eamon are right to try and put Alistair on the throne.

[wcholcombe]

Good point. And more than likely the strongest argument against working with family in any sort of official capacity.

 

I can understand Isolde. Anora? Kind of, sorta. Loghain at that point is responsible for heinous and disgusting crimes 'for the greater good' at the very least he deserved to have his head cut off. Alistair was one hundred percent righteous in his anger. One of the few times I ever fully agreed with the character.

Nah I disagreed with Allistaire on that regard. Loghain was of much more use serving the wardens then with his head on a pike.

[dragonflight288]

Nah I disagreed with Allistaire on that regard. Loghain was of much more use serving the wardens then with his head on a pike.

 

After my playthrough where I let Loghain live, talked with him, listened to him banter with my companions, and took him to Ostagar with Wynne, I have to agree. 

[Master Warder Z_]

Not always. Most blatantly shown in Magistrate's Orders, with Kelder.

 

Holy **** I agree with Xill...I think this is one of the seals for Armageddon right here...

[wcholcombe]

After my playthrough where I let Loghain live, talked with him, listened to him banter with my companions, and took him to Ostagar with Wynne, I have to agree. 

dang, the three times I have played return to Ostagar, I have never actually taken Loghain.  That could be interesting.

[pallascedar]

I can understand Isolde. Anora? Kind of, sorta. Loghain at that point is responsible for heinous and disgusting crimes 'for the greater good' at the very least he deserved to have his head cut off. Alistair was one hundred percent righteous in his anger. One of the few times I ever fully agreed with the character.

Of course Alistair is right for his anger. He should be angry and his desire for Vengeance is understandable. But that didn't make it the better decision, Loghain would make a good Warden, and the world needs Wardens. Anyways, most of Loghain' s worse atrocities were committed by Howe, of course he was complicit, but still.

I rarely spare Loghain, but I acknowledge that this decision is an emotional one.

[Master Warder Z_]

After my playthrough where I let Loghain live, talked with him, listened to him banter with my companions, and took him to Ostagar with Wynne, I have to agree. 

 

He is/was a good man, He was just forged in war.

 

People who live in peace cannot comprehend the mindset that comes into play when you are looking at every one and everything as a possible threat, a future enemy, an attempt at subterfuge to weaken your position.

 

And he was put into a Feudalistic setting, that just makes the plots and intrigues all the more devious and expounded upon.

 

Overall i judge him not overly harshly, he was given a task that in his position was near impossible to complete.

[wcholcombe]

Of course Alistair is right for his anger. He should be angry and his desire for Vengeance is understandable. But that didn't make it the better decision, Loghain would make a good Warden, and the world needs Wardens. Anyways, most of Loghain' s worse atrocities were committed by Howe, of course he was complicit, but still.

I rarely spare Loghain, but I acknowledge that this decision is an emotional one.

The real question from your post is this, should we have been allowed to make Howe a warden....And how many of us would have done it?  duh duh duh

[Master Warder Z_]

dang, the three times I have played return to Ostagar, I have never actually taken Loghain.  That could be interesting.

 

He basically condemns Calian for his correspondence with Celene of Orlais He isn't pleased by his former son in law let me tell you.