138964 réponses à ce sujet

[LolaLei]

A scene I would never reach, as nothing could ever make me side with the templars.


I... would turn control of Cullen's story arc over to another writer, in all likelihood. And then try to get Sera or possibly Vivienne. But if that wasn't an option... I'd have him heavily involved with the Red Templar plot and let him see what's implied to be the bizarre death of Kirkwall via the spread of red lyrium, and have him try to squelch his indecision about mages temporarily to dedicate himself to the defeat of his corrupted brethren. And then possibly see why such corruption could have spread so easily in the first place.

To be honest, him working with the Inquisition and contributing to the defeat of any extremist templars and the emancipation within reason of mages would count for a great deal for me. On specifics, I'm not yet sure.

That's something I've actually been wanting to see from his story arc! I've been hoping that since he's going to be important the whole quashing the red Templars (and rebel Templars, if they are separate factions) would be something he'd be striving towards.

Ok, one more question: have you ever watched any of Cullen's scenes from the pro-Templar side of the game on YouTube? Or have you taken a stand against watching them due to your feelings about the Templars in general?

[Xilizhra]

True Cass is never seen participating in an annulment, but neither is she out freeing mages, which you have argued in the past to be the right thing to do. You've also argued that Cullen going along with his orders instead of standing up for mages is also what he should have done. Cass hasn't done this either. You've argued in the past that Cullen simply serving the Chantry, the institution that oppresses mages, makes Cullen deserving of death. Cass also serves that institution and isn't out risking her neck for mage (that I'm aware of). As I see her personality; I'd find believable for her to think the mages in Broken Circle could be possessed and demand their execution, just to be safe because many more innocents could die if they turned out to be abominations. So if I were to switch the two, I'd find them to be pretty much the same character.

 

For you, disliking Cullen may have nothing to do with his fans but it seems to be the case for some. When I ask for reasons why someone doesn't like Cullen, I do get "fanservice" as a justification. So it's not silly to me.

 

I'll also state here, that I agree that Cullen asking for the mages' deaths in DAO was overboard. I ALSO understand why he felt as he did. I'm glad the decision wasn't left to him because I found killing those who are innocent just in case some were not to be going too far. But I don't feel Cullen was in his right mind, having just watched many people he knew mage and templar alike being killed, or possessed and himself tortured. It wasn't premeditated malice on his part.

 

He does defy Meredith in DA2, though I know you view it as an act of cowardice. I saw it as, what use would it be? If he challenged Hawke and died, Kirkwall would still need guidance what with all the leaders dead and the circle needed to be put back to order. Had he perished, a worse templar could have taken the lead and then what? So I saw his actions as he was following orders but still disagreeing with them and arguing for leniency. His actions have never struck me as being of willful desire to hurt anyone but a sense of duty he feels is required. And if others of his organization abuse their responsibilities, he has his hands tied about doing anything to stop it until he has proof.

 

For me, his and Cass's stories are the same, except for her experience being accused of murder and his being caught up in events. I see neither of them as being evil people. And to me they both serve the Chantry which is what I feel is the evil. Or at least some of the big wigs running it.

To clarify some of this: serving the Chantry doesn't inherently make you deserving of death, but if you're fighting for an oppressive cause, I will have no hesitation in killing you in combat. Cassandra's jurisdiction doesn't touch on mages directly, so while she might not be doing the right thing as such, she's not doing anything actively wrong either (at least, not that we've seen onscreen).

 

I don't necessarily see Cullen's defiance of Meredith there as cowardly; the problem was not with that in particular, but going along with the Annulment to begin with. And "sense of duty" is one of the greatest motivators for wringing atrocities out of people who might be decent otherwise.

[Xilizhra]

That's something I've actually been wanting to see from his story arc! I've been hoping that since he's going to be important the whole quashing the red Templars (and rebel Templars, if they are separate factions) would be something he'd be striving towards.

Ok, one more question: have you ever watched any of Cullen's scenes from the pro-Templar side of the game on YouTube? Or have you taken a stand against watching them due to your feelings about the Templars in general?

I haven't, mostly because I have no desire to see any such Hawke in action.

[Hellion Rex]

*snip*

Wait, you thought I was serious?

[Xilizhra]

Wait, you thought I was serious?

I suspect you are now the one with who is being fucked with.

[wiccame]

The fact that this is where he draws the line infuriates me, because it's based on a legal technicality that doesn't carry nearly as much weight as the mass murder currently in progress.

I see where you're coming from, there. But as I have said before....he has been under direct orders from his superior, and until he had absolute proof that what they were doing was not in the name of what the order was standing for, then he really was not in a position to act. Considering the sheer volume of corrupt mages in Kirkwall it would have taken a lot to convince him otherwise. And only when Meredith flipped out and did a 180 demanding hawke be killed then he knew it wasnt for justice that she was doing it for, but out of pure crazy. And thats when he had every right to overthrow her.

[Lillian]

Wait, you thought I was serious?

No, just thought that would be appropriately sarcastic/confusing.

[Xilizhra]

I see where you're coming from, there. But as I have said before....he has been under direct orders from his superior, and until he had absolute proof that what they were doing was not in the name of what the order was standing for, then he really was not in a position to act. Considering the sheer volume of corrupt mages in Kirkwall it would have taken a lot to convince him otherwise. And only when Meredith flipped out and did a 180 demanding hawke be killed then he knew it wasnt for justice that she was doing it for, but out of pure crazy. And thats when he had every right to overthrow her.

Hawke hadn't been in an official position to act on anything for seven years, and yet look at how much was done.

[The Elder King]

Even if you side with the mages, he will defend you, order Meredith to stand down stating, that this is not what the order stands for. Then he allows you (possibly a mage) and the mages in your party to leave. I think it's pretty evident he does not believe that the annulment should take place.

I don't actually think that those things showna well that he was against the Annulment. The scenes in the templar playthrough are way clearer on his opinion.

[Damate]

To clarify some of this: serving the Chantry doesn't inherently make you deserving of death, but if you're fighting for an oppressive cause, I will have no hesitation in killing you in combat. Cassandra's jurisdiction doesn't touch on mages directly, so while she might not be doing the right thing as such, she's not doing anything actively wrong either (at least, not that we've seen onscreen).
 
I don't necessarily see Cullen's defiance of Meredith there as cowardly; the problem was not with that in particular, but going along with the Annulment to begin with. And "sense of duty" is one of the greatest motivators for wringing atrocities out of people who might be decent otherwise.

So far as the first part of the quote above goes: We simply don't know enough about what Cassandra's done as a Seeker to say wether or not she's had a large part in dealing with mages. But going by what we know of the Seekers of Truth so far -- I'd say it's highly likely she's done her part in helping to maintain the Templars as an institution, definitely. The Seekers are pretty much Internal Affairs -- who are typically both hated and needed by police/military forces. And they are also known to be elite hands of the Chantry, stepping in to handle situations the Templars haven't or cannot -- including especially tricky apostates. They come from the best of the crop that Templars can offer. They exist to protect the Chantry/Andrastrian faith as a whole from whatever they may perceive as threats therein....

...I'm not saying Cassandra is a zealot (I don't believe she is) but I'm personally of the opinion that the zealotry of the Seekers probably outstrips that of many Templars.

[Hellion Rex]

No, just thought that would be appropriately sarcastic/confusing.

Hmmmm....well played, madam.

[LolaLei]

I haven't, mostly because I have no desire to see any such Hawke in action.

I'd personally say just watching his scenes from a pro-Templar playthrough is worth a look, if only for debating purposes. Hawke doesn't really feature all that heavily in them.

I could find you the ones where Hawke isn't behaving like a totally D-bag in response, should you ever change your mind. Alternatively I could type up the dialogue from each scene to save you having to sit through them, if you want?

[Hellion Rex]

I suspect you are now the one with who is being fucked with.

Yup. That Lillian is a dangerous one. Definitely a bard in midst, ladies and gentlemen.

[Damate]

Hawke hadn't been in an official position to act on anything for seven years, and yet look at how much was done.

But so much of what Hawke did was so utterly hand-waved! I mean, a mage Hawke is probably the worse of the lot (and my personal canon Hawke is a mage, so I'm not hating on that class or anything) given that the too-brief production time rendered the plot full of glaring holes so far as acknowledgement of an apostate getting as far as he/she did goes. And Hawke is the protagonist of a fantasy story -- of course they are going to accomplish the implausible, it's part of being the hero, yes? Whereas other NPCs are "mere mortals" and greater bound by the laws of the world-setting and slaves to whatever is needed to progress the story line and associated events. So I'm not sure you can fairly compare Hawke and Cullen on that level.

[wiccame]

Hawke hadn't been in an official position to act on anything for seven years, and yet look at how much was done.

Hawke wasn't acting under anyone's orders though. Cullen had a job, that he was devoted to and believed in. Yes it had been sullied by events that he had been through, which made it even harder for him to see the extremist actions that were taken. So it took him longer to see that what was done was not justified, but he did correct that when he did eventually see it.

[SamaraDraven]

To clarify some of this: serving the Chantry doesn't inherently make you deserving of death, but if you're fighting for an oppressive cause, I will have no hesitation in killing you in combat. Cassandra's jurisdiction doesn't touch on mages directly, so while she might not be doing the right thing as such, she's not doing anything actively wrong either (at least, not that we've seen onscreen).

 

I don't necessarily see Cullen's defiance of Meredith there as cowardly; the problem was not with that in particular, but going along with the Annulment to begin with. And "sense of duty" is one of the greatest motivators for wringing atrocities out of people who might be decent otherwise.

 

That's exactly what I guess I'm trying to say. I want to see Cullen deal with coming to the realization that maybe the Order has had it a bit ballsed up. I consider him a decent person caught up in what he thinks is his duty. He was torutured and saw corruption, which made him believe all the more in that duty. Then, as he healed, he went back more toward his previous beliefs. The Kirkwall annulment seemed to be his breaking point, though from a mage playthrough you see him rebelling only when it comes to Hawke. Before that point, he expresses misgivings and a desire to save the mages who are innocent. I think rebelling before then would have been nice, though. I suspect the writers were more focused on writing the final battle and didn't really stop to see how sudden Cullen's 180 was despite, his occasional questioning dialogue in Act 3. So I too want to know why he went along with the annulement at first. As far as I could tell, he would be right to be concerned about being outnumbered and/or killed outright by Meredith at that point. He either was still hoping to talk her down or not convinced the threat wasn't lesser than she believed and, once he seemed to decide the threat posed wasn't as great as feared, he spoke up.

 

As for his story? I kind of hope he is off dealing with the rebel factions of templars. First and foremost, he seems to be devout so those red knights would be wrong to break off from the Chantry. And since he seems to have some inkling that mages do deserve to be protected and the red templars are out to slaughter them all, I think it's plausible to find him defending mages from his own fellows. But maybe I'm just projecting headcanon, who knows?

[wiccame]

I don't actually think that those things showna well that he was against the Annulment. The scenes in the templar playthrough are way clearer on his opinion.

Oh definitely, they could have been shown better I agree. 

[DreGregoire]

Hmmmm... Hey look it's Cullen in Dragon Age Inquisition. Very cool.

[Xilizhra]

I'd personally say just watching his scenes from a pro-Templar playthrough is worth a look, if only for debating purposes. Hawke doesn't really feature all that heavily in them.

I could find you the ones where Hawke isn't behaving like a totally D-bag in response, should you ever change your mind. Alternatively I could type up the dialogue from each scene to save you having to sit through them, if you want?

I think I've got the gist of them from these discussions as it is. Something about how Cullen says that it isn't what the Order stands for.

 

 

But so much of what Hawke did was so utterly hand-waved! I mean, a mage Hawke is probably the worse of the lot (and my personal canon Hawke is a mage, so I'm not hating on that class or anything) given that the too-brief production time rendered the plot full of glaring holes so far as acknowledgement of an apostate getting as far as he/she did goes. And Hawke is the protagonist of a fantasy story -- of course they are going to accomplish the implausible, it's part of being the hero, yes? Whereas other NPCs are "mere mortals" and greater bound by the laws of the world-setting and slaves to whatever is needed to progress the story line and associated events. So I'm not sure you can fairly compare Hawke and Cullen on that level.

I don't think the laws of drama exist as an in-universe thing, so I don't know how well that holds up.

[SamaraDraven]

Hawke hadn't been in an official position to act on anything for seven years, and yet look at how much was done.

 

Hawke didn't stand to be destitute and made crazy by a drug they'd been addicted to and also didn't have Cullen's belief in that duty. I think he believes in the duty - it's part of who he is -  but not how it's done at times but his position makes dissenting a dangerous prospect. His sense of self and very sanity could be lost if he objected too strongly without provable cause.

[LolaLei]

I think I've got the gist of them from these discussions as it is. Something about how Cullen says that it isn't what the Order stands for.

That's a small part of it, yes. There's quite a bit more though via the other cutscenes, ambient dialogue in the courtyard before Hawke goes in to deal with Orsino and facial expressions pulled when Meredith starts spouting off about killing the mages and shooting him down when he suggests that the Annulment isn't needed in this situation etc.

[Damate]

I don't think the laws of drama exist as an in-universe thing, so I don't know how well that holds up.

It's a story. An interactive story, sure, but one created by writers/developers all the same. Puppet-masters, pulling the strings so that we as the player can enter into this fantasy world and play about in it, affect it, change it, but always within the prescribed confines of the story base they've created. As such there are some core truths-of-the-plot that we as players cannot change no matter how much we may wish to. Within that story all characters are bound to key behaviors/actions: We as the protagonist only have a limited number of options and paths we can ever take. NPCs are going to behave in a manner that the writers/devs deemed necessary to further their story along.

If the above is true, then saying that a (relatively) bit-part NPC in the story (Cullen) should behave like the protagonist and hero...makes no sense. The comparison lacks any equal footing because if Cullen had been a character who could take on the corrupted Chantry/Templar establishment all on his own... well, then he'd be the hero of the tale, not Hawke.

For better or worse, Cullen - as he has existed in the games thus far - is a pawn within the story. IF he is a companion, then we can probably expect to have more of a chance to influence his actions in one direction or another which tends to the case with Followers/Companions as opposed to NPCs. Until we have a chance to see what the character does when his role is much broader and his actions directly/more strongly influenceable by the protagonist, then we really don't have enough information yet to decide just how much he truly buys into the tenants of the Templar order or not.

[LolaLei]

I wonder if the DA franchise will ever make a character that is universally disliked for being a complete arsehole, like Joffrey is/was from GoT?

[Hellion Rex]

I wonder if the DA franchise will ever make a character that is universally disliked for being a complete arsehole, like Joffrey is/was from GoT?

Petrice....

[Xilizhra]

Hawke didn't stand to be destitute and made crazy by a drug they'd been addicted to and also didn't have Cullen's belief in that duty. I think he believes in the duty - it's part of who he is -  but not how it's done at times but his position makes dissenting a dangerous prospect. His sense of self and very sanity could be lost if he objected too strongly without provable cause.

Getting smuggled lyrium doesn't seem gigantically difficult, given all the lyrium smugglers we see (and templar Hawke).

 

 

That's a small part of it, yes. There's quite a bit more though via the other cutscenes, ambient dialogue in the courtyard before Hawke goes in to deal with Orsino and facial expressions pulled when Meredith starts spouting off about killing the mages and shooting him down when he suggests that the Annulment isn't needed in this situation etc.

There are people who are worse than him, I concede.

 

 

I wonder if the DA franchise will ever make a character that is universally disliked for being a complete arsehole, like Joffrey is/was from GoT?

Arl Howe?