2170 réponses à ce sujet

[Ajna]

Hahaha, oh if only this had really happened...

[LPPrince]

This thread is getting all nostalgic now.

 

Duncan love?

[Steelcan]

Internal consistency is not even remotely relevant to the concept of "realism".

 

Even if 9/10 fantasy worlds do rely on "IRL scientific principles" (which you cannot prove, because you're not privy to the internal workings of any fictional universe outside of the ones that you create yourself), what the **** does that have to do with anything?

 

The myriad excuses that authors come up with for why the protagonist can't just "craft a magic arrow that immediately seeks out the big bad and kills him" very rarely have anything whatsoever to do with "IRL scientific principles". In fact, the excuse is almost always magical in nature: ie, the villain is impervious to all harm and can only be slain by one specific weapon or spell, or some prophecy demands a one-on-one fight to the death.

 

Honestly, how is this even a question? It's like you've never read a fantasy story at all.

The irl scientific principles bit ties into your "fantasy means anything can happen" because in fact, no not anything can happen in a fantasy, that's also where internal consistency comes in.

 

Magic should be internally consistent, for example in Lord of the Rings, the Ring's power is related to the power of the weilder so an incredibly powerful being such as Sauron or Gandalf wielding it would make the Ring a truly terrifying force, however in the hands of a hobbit it is much less powerful.  This holds true throughout the series

 

What I see you arguing is "screw consistency, screw anything that will get between me and muh waifu" and you have yet to come up with a reason at all for why that system is preferable to gender-restricted romances, I've listed a few reasons why I think so.

 

At this point I am going to assume you are simply trolling again Plaintiff, you clearly don't even know what you are trying to argue other than that you disagree with me

[PinkDiamondstl]

no this thread is legendary 

Quite the opposite of legendary ...

[Brian ofthe Dialogue Wheel]

I'm never trolling. I have never trolled this forum ever. Everything I say, barring obvious jokes, is and always has been completely genuine.

 

Sexuality is invisible and abstract, and you're not privy to the internal feelings of your party members, so there is no "inconsistency" whatsoever, nor is there any conflict with "realism".

 

Once again, internal consistency has nothing to do with "realism", and the very concept of "magic" is inherently in opposition to "IRL scientific principles". Your argument is a mess.

 

I'm going to assume you just can't read at all, since you completely missed the point where I said that I prefer a system that gives all players more choice. You have yet to explain why less choice is inherently "better", or why your false conception of "realism" is inherently better.

 

As for not knowing what I'm arguing about, you don't even seem to be able to grasp the extremely basic concept that stories only happen the way they do because the author wants them to be that way, and not for any other reason. Not for "realism", and not for internal consistency. It's all down to the completely arbitrary whims of the person holding the pen.

I have faith in the creative choices of the people writing the characters- you're overlooking the basic concept that romances happen within the story the authors write.

 

[Gwydden]

I must say I agree with the premise that it is up to the author/s to decide how his/her/their fantasy world works. If they decide bisexuality is very common in said world, the story is still internally consistent. Against the argument that it is unrealistic, well, I would say the story has no obligation of being realistic in this particular aspect any more than in any other, and that I don't think this particular idea is as "unrealistic" as some people think.

 

Personally, I don't care either way.

[PinkDiamondstl]

The irl scientific principles bit ties into your "fantasy means anything can happen" because in fact, no not anything can happen in a fantasy, that's also where internal consistency comes in.

 

Magic should be internally consistent, for example in Lord of the Rings, the Ring's power is related to the power of the weilder so an incredibly powerful being such as Sauron or Gandalf wielding it would make the Ring a truly terrifying force, however in the hands of a hobbit it is much less powerful.  This holds true throughout the series

 

What I see you arguing is "screw consistency, screw anything that will get between me and muh waifu" and you have yet to come up with a reason at all for why that system is preferable to gender-restricted romances, I've listed a few reasons why I think so.

 

At this point I am going to assume you are simply trolling again Plaintiff, you clearly don't even know what you are trying to argue other than that you disagree with me

^

This.

And wow Mockingword is really Plaintiff ....

[Brian ofthe Dialogue Wheel]

Bully for you. When you've been consistently marginalised by popular media for your entire life, maybe I'll care what you have to say.

That's rectified by forcing Bioware to make solely bisexual characters? You don't see how that can be taken as hypocritical or insulting to anyone of a monosexual slant? Also- you're telling me a good deal about what you think my sexuality and experiences are without knowing me; it's not wise to do that.

[Steelcan]

Bully for you. When you've been consistently marginalised by popular media for your entire life, maybe I'll care what you have to say.

So not only are we bigots, our opinions are invalid

[Mukora]

Bully for you. When you've been consistently marginalised by popular media for your entire life, maybe I'll care what you have to say.

... You realize this is the very reason we have Sera as a female-only option, yeah? Representation for homosexuals?

[Steelcan]

I must say I agree with the premise that it is up to the author/s to decide how his/her/their fantasy world works. If they decide bisexuality is very common in said world, the story is still internally consistent. Against the argument that it is unrealistic, well, I would say the story has no obligation of being realistic in this particular aspect any more than in any other, and that I don't think this particular idea is as "unrealistic" as some people think.

 

Personally, I don't care either way.

thats why I have no issue with bisexual romances whatsoever, player sexual characters on the other hand grind my gears

[Brian ofthe Dialogue Wheel]

Let's bring this thread back to the actual purpose it was made for- implying that certain NPCs will be romanceable- I already called Carroll and the Revered Mother from Lothering- y'all can have the rest.

[Steelcan]

Now you're catching on.

and there we have it folks

 

look no further

[LPPrince]

Let's bring this thread back to the actual purpose it was made for- implying that certain NPCs will be romanceable- I already called Carroll and the Revered Mother from Lothering- y'all can have the rest.

 

Celene's handmaiden.

[Milan92]

 

This made me laugh harder then it should have XD

[LPPrince]

This made me laugh harder then it should have XD

 

Oh no, you absolutely should have laughed that hard

[Brian ofthe Dialogue Wheel]

Celene's handmaiden.

You mean Briala? I think that might be Sera. . .

[Will-o'-wisp]

So not only are we bigots, our opinions are invalid

Just report and ignore him, he seems to be trolling again.

On Topic:

Do you think they count things like the Gorim-"romance" from the dwarfen noble origin as romances? And will maybe include this kind of relationship with a rather unimportant NPC again? I found that particular one to be very fun, but I don't really think they can do something like this with the Inqisitor.

[LPPrince]

You mean Briala? I think that might be Sera. . .

 

Thats a huge maybe

[Brian ofthe Dialogue Wheel]

Thats a huge maybe

A fighter for downtrodden elves; (explicitly NOT the Dalish) an Elven rogue who uses a bow. Lesbian. (I don't recall any mention of Briala being bisexual- I could be wrong, or it could just not have been revealed in the books.) That's a decent bit of overlap.

[Mockingword]

... You realize this is the very reason we have Sera as a female-only option, yeah? Representation for homosexuals?

I understand BioWare's reasoning, I also disagree with it completely.

 

Firstly: I don't need a character to specifically be labelled as "gay" in order to feel represented by them, and I think that attitude is biphobic. It is enough for me to see same-sex romance occur. It does not bother me even slightly that Anders and Fenris are also available to women, and I don't need to know what label they most identify with. An individual's sexuality doesn't need any justification or explanation, in either real life or fiction.

 

Secondly: Representation of LGB characters is much, much less important than giving choice to LGB players. If representation is important to BioWare, then instead of restricting the choices of LGB players (or anyone else, for that matter), they could include proper LGB representation outside of the romance mechanic.

[LPPrince]

A fighter for downtrodden elves; (explicitly NOT the Dalish) an Elven rogue who uses a bow. Lesbian. (I don't recall any mention of Briala being bisexual- I could be wrong, or it could just not have been revealed in the books. That's a decent bit of overlap.

 

I haven't read any of the DA novels, so I wouldn't know. Only what I've heard from others, I'm just playing the skeptic.

[Brian ofthe Dialogue Wheel]

Just report and ignore him, he seems to be trolling again.

On Topic:

Do you think they count things like the Gorim-"romance" from the dwarfen noble origin as romances? And will maybe include this kind of relationship with a rather unimportant NPC again? I found that particular one to be very fun, but I don't really think they can do something like this with the Inqisitor.

If Gorim shows up, maybe? Depending on who you supported in Origins, maybe Gorim is a part of the uplifted Surface Caste, and could be a diplomat?

[CGuiteau]

Goldanna romance? Anyone?

[Steelcan]

they could include proper LGB representation outside of the romance mechanic.

And how would that work?  Seeing gay couples in universe?  Like we did with Leliana and French obnoxious name lady?  or Wade and Herren?