232 réponses à ce sujet

[JasonPogo]

I hope its 3/3/3  Adding more warriors or whatever dose not help you and your party all that much.  if their are 3 warriors or 4 you will still more than likely only bring one with you anyway....

[Zu Long]

I think there's a tendency for some people to hope for some combination of circumstances (the Warden being cut, or being a temp companion, or being a rogue, Iron Bull being a rogue, *Cullen* being a rogue) that will allow Cullen to be a companion, even if they don't really make much sense.

But both Iron Bull and the Warden are obviously warriors. The former is confirmed as a companion, and the latter has been seen in the party during gameplay. Cullen being a rogue is a ludicrous idea.

 

Just out of curiosity, why is it so ludicrous? I've actually wondered for some time if Cullen was the final rogue. Looking at his armor concept from the survey, and from the dagger to table concept art, he doesn't really look like a sword and board type. His Templar armor has vanished and indeed, he doesn't even have the symbol anywhere on him.

 

Is it so impossible that Cullen traded in his shield and became a two-swords type?

[ElitePinecone]

Balanced does not mean even, though - I think you're confusing a single party of four with the overall companion roster of nine.

"Even spread" literally implies that each portion gets an equal amount. Nine over three is three. I have no idea how you could interpret that any other way, especially as that comment came right after Mike was talking about the overall distribution of all the companions, not a single party.

[JasonPogo]

Just out of curiosity, why is it so ludicrous? I've actually wondered for some time if Cullen was the final rogue. Looking at his armor concept from the survey, and from the dagger to table concept art, he doesn't really look like a sword and board type. His Templar armor has vanished and indeed, he doesn't even have the symbol anywhere on him.

 

Is it so impossible that Cullen traded in his shield and became a two-swords type?

 

It is ludicrous because he was a warrior in the first two games.  Changing him to a rouge now would be silly.

[leaguer of one]

He's a side NPC ...again. Why even tease people with his character art? 

If you look to see how npc are treated in ME3 that are romanceable and always near the MC then there is no issue. He just won't be on quest with you but he be at the keep to talk to.

[St. Victorious]

Just out of curiosity, why is it so ludicrous? I've actually wondered for some time if Cullen was the final rogue. Looking at his armor concept from the survey, and from the dagger to table concept art, he doesn't really look like a sword and board type. His Templar armor has vanished and indeed, he doesn't even have the symbol anywhere on him.
 
Is it so impossible that Cullen traded in his shield and became a two-swords type?

He hasn't been shown with weapons at all actually. Some theories conclude that since there's no armaments then he's likely an advisor. Which you should be happy with. They could of not had Cullen in the game at all.

I'm assuming there's a completely unrevealed companion out there for rogue who we aren't going to learn about until either right before the game goes gold or not at all prior to release.

[Zu Long]

It is ludicrous because he was a warrior in the first two games.  Changing him to a rouge now would be silly.

 

Again, why? Assuming they decided they wanted Cullen in the party and realized they wanted an even distribution, why couldn't they change him to rogue? It's not like there's a requirement for it like mages.

 

I don't have a horse in this race, and to be honest I think Cullen is probably not a companion. But it's a bit odd to make proclamations like "That's ludicrous/silly" when we don't really know anything and there's no practical reason they couldn't if they wanted to. To my mind it's no different than people declaring how much they'll hate other companions if Cullen isn't one of them.

[ElitePinecone]

Is it so impossible that Cullen traded in his shield and became a two-swords type?

It's not impossible, no, but it's highly implausible that they would change a character's class after two games in which he was clearly a warrior. We've never seen a Templar rogue, and they are knights, after all, plate armour and enormous shields included.

But more than that, would we even be having this discussion if there weren't already three warriors and if it didn't look like Cullen was out of the party? In other words, it seems to be that this theory only exists because people are looking for ways that Cullen can still be a companion. Nobody is wondering if Leliana or Varric are warriors now, or if Morrigan decided to suddenly become an expert in archery.

I don't think it's based on any serious thought about the character, because "Cullen might be a rogue" never seemed to come up before there was the likelihood that he wouldn't be a companion. If the idea only exists because it's a one last way in which people can get what they want, isn't it based on wishful thinking instead of a serious examination of its possibility?

[Zu Long]

He hasn't been shown with weapons at all actually. Some theories conclude that since there's no armaments then he's likely an advisor. Which you should be happy with. They could of not had Cullen in the game at all.

I'm assuming there's a completely unrevealed companion out there for rogue who we aren't going to learn about until either right before the game goes gold or not at all prior to release.

 

Why would I be happy or sad at which companions are in the game? I don't particularly care who Bioware decides to put in. I have confidence they'll be interesting. (I've only been disappointed once in that regard. I didn't really like anyone in Awakening except Mhairi, whom they killed off the start.)

[Former_Fiend]

3/3/3 is actually a big assumption from one off hand comment about an 'even distribution'. Given how balanced parties invariably require more warriors/rogues than mages, an 'even distibution' might mean more warrior companions than mage, and that's not accounting for things the other DA games have always used; mutually exclusive companions, meaning we might have access to only 8 companions at a given time.

 

IIRC correctly, a Gaider tweet insinuated that a fan was wrong to assume there would only be three warriors. So I wouldn't be surprised if we have four, or that the 'even distrubution' of the party is dependent on which class the player chooses.

 

Gaider is of the opinion that it's wrong for fans to assume anything about the game. As far as he's concerned we're wrong to assume there are dragons in the game.

[Andraste_Reborn]

We've never seen a Templar rogue

 

That isn't really true - DA2 is full of Templar Hunters who stealth, backflip and stab you in the kidneys with the best of them. They somehow manage all of this while in full plate.

 

I don't think that makes it any more likely that Cullen has changed his class, mind you. Far more likely that he's an important NPC.

[Zu Long]

It's not impossible, no, but it's highly implausible that they would change a character's class after two games in which he was clearly a warrior. We've never seen a Templar rogue, and they are knights, after all, plate armour and enormous shields included.

But more than that, would we even be having this discussion if there weren't already three warriors and if it didn't look like Cullen was out of the party? In other words, it seems to be that this theory only exists because people are looking for ways that Cullen can still be a companion. Nobody is wondering if Leliana or Varric are warriors now, or if Morrigan decided to suddenly become an expert in archery.

I don't think it's based on any serious thought about the character, because "Cullen might be a rogue" never seemed to come up before there was the likelihood that he wouldn't be a companion. If the idea only exists because it's a one last way in which people can get what they want, isn't it based on wishful thinking instead of a serious examination of its possibility?

 

Well, given that I wondered about it just from his new armor design prior to learning it was a likely 3/3/3 split (though I suspected they might go that direction), I don't think it's necessarily wishful thinking, especially since we've seen zero evidence of any other rogue character, Cole or otherwise.

 

Unlike Lelianna or Varric, we've never actually had Cullen fight as a member of the party. Not that I would really object to Lelianna switching over to two-handed weapon or Varric doing so. Varric at least has a signature weapon which would make the choice a bit odd. I have yet to hear of Cullen naming his sword and shield, but maybe that was a bit of lore I missed?

 

I just think it's pretty short-sighted to adopt a dogmatic approach to anything at this point. "This can't happen! They wouldn't do THIS! They're definitely going to do that!" Unless they've officially confirmed something, it's open to debate.

[Phate Phoenix]

Gaider is of the opinion that it's wrong for fans to assume anything about the game. As far as he's concerned we're wrong to assume there are dragons in the game.

 
That's exactly right. I remembered that tweet and went to go look it up. It's definitely a jokey non-answer, so I wouldn't consider it "evidence" for or against a certain viewpoint.
 
If you want to see the tweet for yourself:
 

‏@user omg i just realized all three warrior spots are already taken which means cullen isn't a companion??? UNFORGIVABLE :'( @davidgaider
 
David Gaider ‏@davidgaider 5h
@user I suppose that depends on who you assume the three warriors are, and whether we only have three warriors, doesn't it?

[St. Victorious]

Why would I be happy or sad at which companions are in the game? I don't particularly care who Bioware decides to put in. I have confidence they'll be interesting. (I've only been disappointed once in that regard. I didn't really like anyone in Awakening except Mhairi, whom they killed off the start.)

I feel like you're backing out of your own argument now. There are rogue Templars in DA2, however Cullen is portrayed as a weapon and shield type. If you're indifferent to Cullen that's fine. I am too. What really twists my nipples is how people feel entitled to have him as a companions and are looking for any excuse to make that true.

[duckley]

So I noticed no-one is suggesting that Cullen is the third Mage LOL? Now that would be ludicrous.... or would it???

 

But seriously, Cullen could indeed have developed some rogue skills as a Templar - they do have rigorous training I assume? Perhaps all Templars need to have at least basic archery and knife weilding  skills. I assume that as Knight Captain he trained rookies and so presumably he has a range of skills. Although maybe there are no Templar rouges? I think he did change from a one handed to a sheild and sword guy between his stints in DAO and DAI. In Fantasy, anything is possible, including  that he has left the Templars and has changed his class...

 

Having said that, if he is to be a companion, it would think it most likley that takes on the warrior class.

 

If Cullen is not a companion that's fine, but I do think it odd that he would be an NCP in all three games. Flemith, yes, Bodhan and Sandal, yes... but Cullen... just seems off/odd to me. Honestly - and please dont shoot me cause I really love the Cullen character but....  to make him a romancable NPC  now that would feel like fan service..... to me.

 

 

[Zu Long]

I feel like you're backing out of your own argument now. There are rogue Templars in DA2, however Cullen is portrayed as a weapon and shield type. If you're indifferent to Cullen that's fine. I am too. What really twists my nipples is how people feel entitled to have him as a companions and are looking for any excuse to make that true.

 

No, I stand by my argument that saying he has to be this or he can't be that is shortsighted, including declarations that Cullen being a rogue is ludicrous or grasping at straws or what have you. You appeared to determine from that that I was somehow invested in Cullen being a companion, which I corrected you on, as I don't particularly care.

 

I see people declaring Cullen MUST be a companion and those declaring on the basis of what we have presently been told that he CAN'T be a companion as being two sides of the same coin.

[ElitePinecone]

There's actually more evidence for Cole being a rogue than Cullen - the survey calls Cole a rogue and we know he's both stealthy and used daggers.

If we're looking at potential people to fill the third rogue spot, Cullen isn't even at the top of that list.

[JasonPogo]

I feel bad for Bioware.  No matter what they do with Cullen at least half the fan base will be all pissy.

[St. Victorious]

Either way, people are not entitled to have Cullen, Lelliana, Morrigan, Flemeth, Harry Potter, Puff the Magic Dragon, or any of the Power Rangers in the party. They're just not.

[Zu Long]

So I noticed no-one is suggesting that Cullen is the third Mage LOL? Now that would be ludicrous.... or would it???

 

But seriously, Cullen could indeed have developed some rogue skills as a Templar - they do have rigorous training I assume? Perhaps all Templars need to have at least basic archery and knife weilding  skills. I assume that as Knight Captain he trained rookies and so presumably he has a range of skills. Although maybe there are no Templar rouges? I think he did change from a one handed to a sheild and sword guy between his stints in DAO and DAI. In Fantasy, anything is possible, including  that he has left the Templars and has changed his class...

 

Having said that, if he is to be a companion, it would think it most likley that takes on the warrior class.

 

If Cullen is not a companion that's fine, but I do think it odd that he would be an NCP in all three games. Flemith, yes, Bodhan and Sandal, yes... but Cullen... just seems off/odd to me. Honestly - and please dont shoot me cause I really love the Cullen character but....  to make him a romancable NPC  now that would feel like fan service..... to me.

 

Man, now that would be interesting? Maybe Cullen developed magic powers from Red Lyrium exposure? Can you imagine the boards imploding after a reveal like that? XD

 

As far as Cullen being fanservice, I would wonder why that was such a bad thing myself. We know that Bioware does take fan feedback into account. If they said, "Okay, we need a Templar rep for the Inquisition council, who's it going to be?" "What about Cullen? He's an established character who definitely isn't dead, and there are still some places to take his character." "Sure, plus there's a big Cullen fanbase. We wanted some of the NPCs to be romanceable anyway, right? We would really please some of the fans."

 

They've said repeatedly that fan requests are not the SOLE reason they do anything these days, but I've never heard them claim that they don't take fan reaction into consideration, and I don't see why it would be bad that they do.

[Former_Fiend]

Damnit, now I want Puff the Magic Dragon as the third rogue.

[Zu Long]

There's actually more evidence for Cole being a rogue than Cullen - the survey calls Cole a rogue and we know he's both stealthy and used daggers.

If we're looking at potential people to fill the third rogue spot, Cullen isn't even at the top of that list.

 

Yet we've seen no character art of him, have no confirmation that he's even definitely in the game at this point. Which we have both for Cullen, as well as a confirmation that he'll be a major romance-able character.

 

Again, I don't necessarily disagree with you. Cole is still an excellent candidate for a party rogue. I just don't see any reason to dismiss things as ludicrous when there's no practical reason it couldn't be true, and have no evidence disproving it.

[CENIC]

What really twists my nipples is how people feel entitled to have him as a companions and are looking for any excuse to make that true.

I don't see any entitlement here at all. And in fact, MY nipples are getting pretty twisted by all the claims about wishful thinking, "ludicrous" speculation and the like re: Cullen.
If someone is hopeful for something that you do not want or are indifferent to, why is it so difficult for you to ignore it? Why do you feel compelled to prove them wrong?

[ElitePinecone]

^ Agreed, I think acknowledging a character's popularity by giving them a larger role is hardly pandering, especially when that character is thematically as interesting as Cullen.

(After all, how many of the people moaning about fanservice were fine with Garrus and Tali appearing again and again and again in ME, even if their arcs wore a little thin, just because everyone was going on about bros and romance all the time and BW recognised their popularity?)

I do have an issue with feeling entitled to a particular character being a companion, though, because it's very literally taking creative power away from the developers in a fairly major way. Those sorts of decisions should only be informed by fan feedback, never governed by it. That way lies despair.

And I especially shake my head at some of the mental gymnastics people are doing to keep the idea of Cullen as a companion alive, or worse treating it as a fait accompli, because there's a significant possibility that in the end they're going to be bitterly disappointed by getting too hyped about something with no confirmation.

[ElitePinecone]

I don't see any entitlement here at all. And in fact, MY nipples are getting pretty twisted by all the claims about wishful thinking, "ludicrous" speculation and the like re: Cullen.
If someone is hopeful for something that you do not want or are indifferent to, why is it so difficult for you to ignore it? Why do you feel compelled to prove them wrong?

Because if people get way too excited now on the basis of flimsy, exaggerated or flat out wrong evidence, and then go nuts in two or three months if we find out Cullen isn't a companion, this whole forum is going to have to deal with a backlash that could've been prevented if people were more realistic, and less willing to invent ever-more intricate theories to suit their purposes.