12889 réponses à ce sujet

[GVulture]

Awww yiss. That would be spectaculous.

I've seriously been waiting for a Keith David romance in a game for DECADES now. So mad that Saint's Row IV LIED TO ME ABOUT ROMANCING HIM.

[Han Shot First]

Mark Lewis Jones would be perfect for the Iron Bull.

 

For those unfamiliar with him, he was Shagga, son of Dolf on Game of Thrones.

 

"How would you like to die, Tyrion son of Tywin?"

 

Its hard to picture a more intimidating voice. 

[mordy_was_here]

I'm curious, do we have any idea who wrote him yet?

[Nefla]

I really hope he's romanceable, he seems like the manly man I've always wanted in a BioWare game but can never have (Sagacious Zu, Canderous Ordo, Sten, Zaeed...Wrex >.>) Also I want to romance him as a male elf mage

[Zack_Nero]

I can't give an opinion on him, because we know nothing about him. Is he Qunari, Tal-Vashoth, or neither? What is he, who is he?

[GVulture]

I'm curious, do we have any idea who wrote him yet?

Just because of Twitter... I wanna say... Patrick Weekes?

[Banxey]

I really hope he's romanceable, he seems like the manly man I've always wanted in a BioWare game but can never have (Sagacious Zu, Canderous Ordo, Sten, Zaeed...Wrex >.>) Also I want to romance him as a male elf mage

 

Me too, though I wont make my decision until I've met them all.

 

It would be funny if you were able to play out some weird Beauty and the Beast type romance with him. I'm not saying I want Disney, but I'm sure with the veil torn possessed crockery isn't technically out of the question.

[GVulture]

Me too, though I wont make my decision until I've met them all.

 

It would be funny if you were able to play out some weird Beauty and the Beast type romance with him. I'm not saying I want Disney, but I'm sure with the veil torn possessed crockery isn't technically out of the question.

Well. Mary Kirby is usually responsible for writing the awesome-yet-unromancable types. If my guess holds true and Patrick does Iron Bull... He worked on Jack, Tali, Kasumi and Mordin in Mass Effect.

[Banxey]

Well. Mary Kirby is usually responsible for writing the awesome-yet-unromancable types. If my guess holds true and Patrick does Iron Bull... He worked on Jack, Tali, Kasumi and Mordin in Mass Effect.

 

I hope so. I like Patrick's work and characters (I have also read his book). 

[mordy_was_here]

I really hope he's romanceable, he seems like the manly man I've always wanted in a BioWare game but can never have (Sagacious Zu, Canderous Ordo, Sten, Zaeed...Wrex >.>) Also I want to romance him as a male elf mage

 

Nef, if I could I would like this x10. If it ends up being true that Patrick if writing Iron Bull, I'll do a little dance of joy. His ME characters were some of my favorites.

[Blank-Slate-Blues]

I really hope he's romanceable, he seems like the manly man I've always wanted in a BioWare game but can never have (Sagacious Zu, Canderous Ordo, Sten, Zaeed...Wrex >.>) Also I want to romance him as a male elf mage

 

That's the dream.

[Former_Fiend]

Earlier I went on a little rant in the companions thread about why I don't want Iron Bull to be a rogue; it was something of a rehash/elaboration of a similar rant I went on earlier in this thread.

 

I'd like to add to it here.

 

I think a lot of people are looking at Iron Bull and hoping he subverts or deconstructs the idea of the big, burly, boisterous badass. The thing is, that's a character type that I don't think needs any more deconstruction or subversion. It's gotten plenty of both over the past decades. Even within the Dragon Age games, we haven't seen it played remotely straight.

 

Sten was a stoic, religious fish out of water. Oghren was a vicious deconstruction of the archetype. Fenris was a clever subversion in his own right.

 

What this character type needs isn't subverting, it's reconstructing. Iron Bull needs to be gruff, boisterous, hard drinking, loves fighting kind of guy. He needs to be the guy who isn't going to sneak around, but charge head long into the thick of it. But he should also be intelligent and cunning, as well as charismatic. The guy's the leader of a mercenary group; it needs to be clear why his mean follow him and there needs to be a better reason than he's the toughest out of all of them, even though he should be.

[GVulture]

Earlier I went on a little rant in the companions thread about why I don't want Iron Bull to be a rogue; it was something of a rehash/elaboration of a similar rant I went on earlier in this thread.

 

I'd like to add to it here.

 

I think a lot of people are looking at Iron Bull and hoping he subverts or deconstructs the idea of the big, burly, boisterous badass. The thing is, that's a character type that I don't think needs any more deconstruction or subversion. It's gotten plenty of both over the past decades. Even within the Dragon Age games, we haven't seen it played remotely straight.

 

Sten was a stoic, religious fish out of water. Oghren was a vicious deconstruction of the archetype. Fenris was a clever subversion in his own right.

 

What this character type needs isn't subverting, it's reconstructing. Iron Bull needs to be gruff, boisterous, hard drinking, loves fighting kind of guy. He needs to be the guy who isn't going to sneak around, but charge head long into the thick of it. But he should also be intelligent and cunning, as well as charismatic. The guy's the leader of a mercenary group; it needs to be clear why his mean follow him and there needs to be a better reason than he's the toughest out of all of them, even though he should be.

His character description reminds me of Black Whirlwind from Jade Empire. That said, I don't see why he couldn't be all that you want a bag of chips and be a rogue.

[Former_Fiend]

Rogues sneak around, they ambush, they backstab, they duck, they dodge, they prioritize dexterity and agility over strength.

 

Iron Bull doesn't seem the type to sneak. He seems like the type who would rather cleave your face in two than stab you in the back. He seems like the type that would shrug off a hit rather than duck out of the way. And having a character with that build prioritize dexterity over strength is ridiculous.

 

I just think that if you're going to have a character who looks like a warrior, acts like a warrior, quacks like a warrior, you should make him a warrior. Otherwise, what's the point?

[Eveangaline]

Well now I want him to be a mage who tries to look like a warrior so no one notices he's a mage.

[Nefla]

Doesn't matter what his class is, carve me off a slab of that plz? Yes I'm shallow.

[Hellion Rex]

Doesn't matter what his class is, carve me off a slab of that plz? Yes I'm shallow.

He does look rather yummy.

[Master Warder Z_]

He does look rather yummy.

 

He's no Baltheir or Fenris but he works

[mordy_was_here]

Doesn't matter what his class is, carve me off a slab of that plz? Yes I'm shallow.

 

[Aoba]

Doesn't matter what his class is, carve me off a slab of that plz? Yes I'm shallow.

 

Hell to the yeah! My femQunari Inquisitor ain't gonna be too happy if she can't have a piece of the Bull. She might just set fire to all of Thedas if he rejects her advances. Can't say I'd blame her, tbh.

[JeffZero]

Welp, Wolf's Thedas is screwed, most like.

[Banxey]

Earlier I went on a little rant in the companions thread about why I don't want Iron Bull to be a rogue; it was something of a rehash/elaboration of a similar rant I went on earlier in this thread.

 

...

 

Why are people saying he's a rogue, is it because he duel wields? My view is that big qunari tanks don't need a shield, they are the shield. But I agree with you. I'd prefer he be a warrior. I just can't see someone that big being that hard to miss when they are trying to sneak up for a backstab. I also don't like the notion that those who possess a roguish nature have to literally be rogues.

[Brass_Buckles]

Why are people saying he's a rogue, is it because he duel wields? My view is that big qunari tanks don't need a shield, they are the shield. But I agree with you. I'd prefer he be a warrior. I just can't see someone that big being that hard to miss when they are trying to sneak up for a backstab. I also don't like the notion that those who possess a roguish nature have to literally be rogues.

 

They may be forgetting that in DA:O, warriors could also dual-wield.  Actually warriors and rogues had pretty much all the same base combat trees, if I remember right.  Only their actual specialties were different.  You could even stat a warrior like a rogue, and make a "dex tank" who could still dish out the hits but nothing would ever hit that warrior, once you got dexterity up to about 40 or so.

[mordy_was_here]

A lot of people seem to want him to be a rogue because that would mean the character they want is likely to get a spot in the party with a 3/3/3 split. At least, that's what I'm taking away from a lot of the posts on this subject. Could be wrong, probably am. There's also the possibility that those two weapons, which look more like swords than daggers, to me, are just part of his armor -- as in, he won't use them at all.

[Banxey]

A lot of people seem to want him to be a rogue because that would mean the character they want is likely to get a spot in the party with a 3/3/3 split. At least, that's what I'm taking away from a lot of the posts on this subject. Could be wrong, probably am. There's also the possibility that those two weapons, which look more like swords than daggers, to me, are just part of his armor -- as in, he won't use them at all.

 

Sorry if I read that wrong, but are you saying people want Bull to be a rogue because they want Cullen?