For me, it would be to have the option of having Bethany with a Mage Hawke and Carver with a Warrior or Rogue Hawke.
Yes, I know the reasons why it doesn't happen. But I would love to see how the interactions between similar-themed siblings would play out.
Being able to turn anders and the elf to the templars. Anders would have to escape for the plot's sake but still.
there's a mod for that - sophie's choice - although the game will still recognise Hawke as a mage if you swap from Beth to Carve
If I had to change one thing, it'd be fixing the lack of assets used toward the environments and expand the areas into more unique locations. It was nice to see totally new layouts in the DLC's though.
Gotta be Anders. I can overlook a lot of things, but the Anders issue sticks out like a sore thumb. I do not merely tolerate dangerous companions in my merry entourage, I wholeheartedly embrace them, but Anders -- being an abomination -- goes beyond what even I can accept. I'm stuck with this guy who is always one fit of pique away from going mad (and he's moody to begin with).
When his spirit demon came out and took control in the Chantry I'd have murderknifed him on the damn spot. He then goes on to kill Ella (or almost) and all you can do about that is tell him to leave (great, now he'll be a danger to people elsewhere).
One of the worst cases of plot-armor I've ever seen.
Gotta be Anders. I can overlook a lot of things, but the Anders issue sticks out like a sore thumb. I do not merely tolerate dangerous companions in my merry entourage, I wholeheartedly embrace them, but Anders -- being an abomination -- goes beyond what even I can accept. I'm stuck with this guy who is always one fit of pique away from going mad (and he's moody to begin with).
When his
spiritdemon came out and took control in the Chantry I'd have murderknifed him on the damn spot. He then goes on to kill Ella (or almost) and all you can do about that is tell him to leave (great, now he'll be a danger to people elsewhere).
One of the worst cases of plot-armor I've ever seen.
You and many others.
Though like in DA:O you can't like walk up to someone to say, "Hello time to die". Usually the option comes up when they have done something. Anders having a spirit inside him is not enough reason and calling him an Abomination is oversimplifying him. Name another abomination that can fall in love and heal people with no personal gain and I will accept it with my eyes closed that Anders is in fact an abomination in its literal sense.
The option to kill him could have appeared after Ella but he was needed for plot therefore the leave option is presented instead. He does have a plot armor but so did many others and he is no especial case. Other than Ella he does nothing that makes us kill him that is if you are not a "kill first think later" sort.
I personally would love to save the dying sibling...
Arguably all abominations can fall in love. Demons and spirits provoke rampant ego and passion- those can be just as capable of love and generosity dependent on circumstance (like, say, how Anders was being sheltered and protected by the recipients of his charity).
Arguably all abominations can fall in love. Demons and spirits provoke rampant ego and passion- those can be just as capable of love and generosity dependent on circumstance (like, say, how Anders was being sheltered and protected by the recipients of his charity).
The wiki clearly explains the abomination as a creature that is concerned with nothing else but malice and destruction. You cannot claim Uldred and Baroness are same as Anders.
By broader definition spirit healers are "abominations" too but there is a clear difference between these abomination and Uldred and Baroness. Abomination somewhat has two meanings here, first ones means simply possessed and the second ones is used on abhorrent possessed beings. The question is was Anders the 2nd variety? Wynne is directly called an abomination in Asunder, is she the abhorrent being the Baroness was or was she in a similar case as Anders (more or less better and more in control but same nonetheless)?
The wiki clearly explains the abomination as a creature that is concerned with nothing else but malice and destruction. You cannot claim Uldred and Baroness are same as Anders.
I can, however, question the objectivity and accuracy of the in-game lore, which the wiki relies on. Thedas doesn't even have a concept of psychology, but from what I have seen and inferred I believe psychology is the most relevant subject when discussing spirits.
If Uldred and the Baroness were capable of of things other than malice and destruction, and they very well seem to have been (albeit their pride colored things), then I would certainly draw them as subject matter for Anders rather than an archaic and absolutist definition by people who teach that basically apply retroactive tautological classifications on spirits and demons.
By broader definition spirit healers are "abominations" too but there is a clear difference between these abomination and Uldred and Baroness. Abomination somewhat has two meanings here, first ones means simply possessed and the second ones is used on abhorrent possessed beings. The question is was Anders the 2nd variety? Wynne is directly called an abomination in Asunder, is she the abhorrent being the Baroness was or was she in a similar case as Anders (more or less better and more in control but same nonetheless)?
Given that the Anders of Act 3 murdered a lot of innocents for the deliberate purpose of sparking a massacre in order to generate a revolt he made no preparations to prevent becoming a third, even greater massacre...
Of course, the nature of demons and spirits is already known to be misunderstood (Anders fell to that one), which the subject of spirit possession is such a taboo that no one in the Chantry really understands how it works. What we have seen seems to indicate that abominations (spirit possession) sees the subject influenced by the aspect of the spirit in question, and vice versa. Uldred and the Baroness were influenced by various forms of pride. Merrill was playing with and being played by a spirit of Audacity.
We also, from Anders, see that the host and the spirit can influence eachother. It's not simply Justice turning into Vengeance. Before the merge, Justice was pretty broad and even contradictory, focusing on any apparent injustice of the moment over any prioritization or unifying theory. This is the spirit that accussed Anders of enslavement, after all. After the merge, however, Justice would only really respond to the subject of mages, Anders' personal fixation. And likewise, Anders himself was moved and pushed into being a more active actor by the influence of Justice.
The influence of spirits on their hosts appears to be the true impact of abomination-hood. Sometimes the effects an be delayed (Anders and the transition to Vengeance), sometimes they might even be benign (Wynn's spirit of Faith bolstering her, well, faith). The demonic abominatiosn we've seen also fit that model: Uldred and mage-pride, the Baroness and her pride in appearance even after her possession. But regardless, it does appear that spirits and demons both do influence and exagerate the psyches of their hosts.
If that is true (and we can't say for sure: only the Rivian shamans would be an authoritative source), the idea of 'abomination as an abhorent being' is outdated and misleading. It puts an ex post facto label on something's effects, rather than its nature. Demons become demons because they're bad, and you know they're bad because their demons. It breaks down the Chantry's arbitrary system when the definitions become less descriptive and more aspirational: Justice can become a Demon through Anders anger, so maybe a demon can become a spirit, and maybe had someone else taken in Justice everything might have changed.
The option to kill him could have appeared after Ella but he was needed for plot therefore the leave option is presented instead. He does have a plot armor but so did many others and he is no especial case. Other than Ella he does nothing that makes us kill him that is if you are not a "kill first think later" sort.
Anders. I would kill the piece of garbage when helping his friend in the chantry in Act 1
The other thing I would change is the way you kill dumb dumb. Instead of a knife in the back, I would chop off his head or burn him alive and laugh while he screams.
Name another abomination that can fall in love
Evelina. Connor. Any desire-abomination, really, seeing as the demon feeds off of its victims lust for anything.
and heal people with no personal gain and I will accept it with my eyes closed that Anders is in fact an abomination in its literal sense.
Out of all 1 characters we know to have been doing this?
Well, the wiki defines Wynne as an abomination. So, her.
Other than Ella he does nothing that makes us kill him that is if you are not a "kill first think later" sort.
This is a guy who -- long before Ella -- tells us that he loses control of himself in favor of a demonic frenzy any time he gets angry. You can call his merger with Justice "creepy" and he'll start glowing seconds later. That incident with Ella didn't show me anything I hadn't already determined about Anders, and that's why I wanted him slain even before it happened. You don't pamper a mad dog.
I can reason some of my Hawkes keeping him around, but for most others, it's very OOC.
Implement actually acceptable encounter designs.
Anders. I would kill the piece of garbage when helping his friend in the chantry in Act 1
The other thing I would change is the way you kill dumb dumb. Instead of a knife in the back, I would chop off his head or burn him alive and laugh while he screams.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way I mean its just a video game and our decisions in them does not reflect anything on reality.
Here you are talking about being able to change one thing and instead of wishing you could save someone (a simple example), you want to kill someone in a horrific way. Someone who is dying anyway and you just want to add more suffering and horror to it. I mean seriously? 
Earthborn/soldier/ruthless/sadistic. Humanity #1. This is Anders's personality too. He was born a mage and he had no choice in the matter or the events he had to suffer as a mage. Later he took it upon himself to free the mages no matter the consequences and he was mages #1. Its a matter of taking a side really. After all the game has the option to kill him or agree with him and his methods through the game even the chantry incident (requires 100% friendship and his quests done). If in romance you can be fugitives together, your Hawke can BECOME Anders.
Again I hope you have not taken this the wrong way. I just wanted to express my opinion and make sure you realize there are two sides or more in cases such as this. 
If that is true (and we can't say for sure: only the Rivian shamans would be an authoritative source), the idea of 'abomination as an abhorent being' is outdated and misleading. It puts an ex post facto label on something's effects, rather than its nature. Demons become demons because they're bad, and you know they're bad because their demons. It breaks down the Chantry's arbitrary system when the definitions become less descriptive and more aspirational: Justice can become a Demon through Anders anger, so maybe a demon can become a spirit, and maybe had someone else taken in Justice everything might have changed.
Then that is kinda the game's fault for not giving us enough information. Because by definition of what you said which I agree with the teachings of Chantry is outdated.
This is a guy who -- long before Ella -- tells us that he loses control of himself in favor of a demonic frenzy any time he gets angry. You can call his merger with Justice "creepy" and he'll start glowing seconds later. That incident with Ella didn't show me anything I hadn't already determined about Anders, and that's why I wanted him slain even before it happened. You don't pamper a mad dog.
I can reason some of my Hawkes keeping him around, but for most others, it's very OOC.
I kind answered this in my reply to themikefest. I actually see a troubled man that needs help and he can actually use the help. In friendship route as stated in codex and as we witness it ourselves Anders loses control/glows much less frequently. "Hawke's support is helping Anders control the spirit within and he seems to only lose control when fighting templars". Directly from codex. While the rivalry path says he is having major trouble controlling Justice.
Without being aware of the ending if you give moral support to Anders and encourage him to fix his mistakes rather than spitting on him he is completely fine until the chantry incident in which case I completely understand wanting to kill him as I said its about sides. He doesn't kill Ella, he heals people and in general is just a rebel apostate.
The thing with Justice as I understand it - is that he is pure justice and not tempered with compassion or mercy or anything. Wynne is fortunate in that her spirit wants to help her - its agenda is not itself. Justice's . . . well, justice . . . combined with Ander's anger makes for a heavy duty vengeance cycle. Templars are guilty not by their own actions but by association. He has lost the ability to think and think clearly and logically. He would have been better off with his manifesto. If I were to change one thing - Anders would be from Awakening and would have told Justice to sod off.
I personally think Tallis has more plot armor than Anders does, but she's in the game for substantially less time.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way I mean its just a video game and our decisions in them does not reflect anything on reality.
Here you are talking about being able to change one thing and instead of wishing you could save someone (a simple example), you want to kill someone in a horrific way. Someone who is dying anyway and you just want to add more suffering and horror to it. I mean seriously?
Earthborn/soldier/ruthless/sadistic. Humanity #1. This is Anders's personality too. He was born a mage and he had no choice in the matter or the events he had to suffer as a mage. Later he took it upon himself to free the mages no matter the consequences and he was mages #1. Its a matter of taking a side really. After all the game has the option to kill him or agree with him and his methods through the game even the chantry incident (requires 100% friendship and his quests done). If in romance you can be fugitives together, your Hawke can BECOME Anders.
Again I hope you have not taken this the wrong way. I just wanted to express my opinion and make sure you realize there are two sides or more in cases such as this.
I had no idea it was a video game. Silly me.
Why would I want to save Anders? The dumba** merges with a spirit. Like nothing would ever happen with that. He's an idiot. Even without the spirit he would still do the same thing. He didn't care about any thing except himself. Its his way or the highway. So I have no problem killing him
I have nothing against him being born a mage. I have no problem with him supporting mages, I have a problem with him wanting to kill everyone that isn't a mage to save one mage. In Act 2 you can stop him from killing that mage or let him kill the mage. He's doing his own thing. As I said, its his way or the highway. With him blowing up the chantry, he made that choice and deserves death in the most vicious way possible. I mean, the people he killed didn't have a choice in the way they were killed. Right? I have always killed him and that will never change.
If you want to support him, than more power to you.
Now with the Earthborn/soldier/ruthless/sadistic. Humanity #1 applies to my femshep. A character in Mass Effect. How does she fit in with Dragon Age 2?
I personally think Tallis has more plot armor than Anders does, but she's in the game for substantially less time.
That's not possible. There are multiple events throughout the story where Anders can set off quite a few alarms, AND, if you gain enough rivalry points, you can warn the Templars about him and nothing happens.
Yes, but you do things for Tallis without ever agreeing to do them. You can make threats against her but never act on them. Events happen for Tallis without consequence or penalty because the narrative demands they will happen.
We could argue the specifics of both characters, but that's neither here nor there..
I had no idea it was a video game. Silly me.
Why would I want to save Anders? The dumba** merges with a spirit. Like nothing would ever happen with that. He's an idiot. Even without the spirit he would still do the same thing. He didn't care about any thing except himself. Its his way or the highway. So I have no problem killing him
I have nothing against him being born a mage. I have no problem with him supporting mages, I have a problem with him wanting to kill everyone that isn't a mage to save one mage. In Act 2 you can stop him from killing that mage or let him kill the mage. He's doing his own thing. As I said, its his way or the highway. With him blowing up the chantry, he made that choice and deserves death in the most vicious way possible. I mean, the people he killed didn't have a choice in the way they were killed. Right? I have always killed him and that will never change.
If you want to support him, than more power to you.
Now with the Earthborn/soldier/ruthless/sadistic. Humanity #1 applies to my femshep. A character in Mass Effect. How does she fit in with Dragon Age 2?
I never said you should save Anders. You are given a chance to change something and you want to kill someone who you are already killing in more horrific way. You could have save your mother for example or prevent any other death. There is plenty and just look at what you chose.
Also the similarity between ruthless shepard and Anders is they will kill anyone for their goal to save their own kind (mage,human). Anders himself says (to Hawke) there is no one in kirkwall he wouldn't kill to see the mages free.
Anders himself says (to Hawke) there is no one in kirkwall he wouldn't kill to see the mages free.
I don't remember ever getting this line. What do you have to say to Anders to get it?
I don't remember ever getting this line. What do you have to say to Anders to get it?
He says that in ACT 3 if he is rival and romanced.
Hawke says his way is not going to work and only going to prove the Templars right. He says he has tried repeatedly to stop mages but he failed. One by one they have turned to blood magic to fight the Templars because its "easy" and now it must end. Better fight than to die slowly one by one. Then Hawke gets angry or happy depending in which dialogue you choose (Agressive hawke tends to agree with Anders' methods and even embraces them). Regardless it will lead to this line:
"Should I have told you the truth? There's no one in Kirkwall I wouldn't kill to see the mages free"
Ah. Too bad it's restricted to rivalmance. That would've been an interesting line to get if you explored his dialogue enough, regardless of friendship or romantic involvement, though I guess romance does need its own specific lines to have weight to them.
After hard thinking (so there is waves of thugs etc.annoyances) I go for Anders too. And this is hard for me because my love for him is deep "snif".
I really liked Anders in Awakening. Big time. Dragged him with me everywhere. Then I saw him first time in DA2. My reaction:
I don't like the whole Justice-thing. Sometimes we see glimpses of old Anders, the witty and merry one. Sometimes I wonder why I even like him so much, but I guess I am a very loyal person. The Anders/Justice-merge is like one, giant brain fart (no offence here ppl, no one gets angry!). I often feel like...from there one bad idea led to second bad idea and on and on. Yeah, lets make him nuts and he goes and blows the whole Chantry! Behind Hawkes back! That is like the worst thing in the whole shabang. He betrayes Hawke (the person he loves and lives with etc.) and now Hawke can kill him (the person he/she loves). So, the Anders I so much like is sort of a headcanon, I must say. Objectively my Hawke should kill him and spit on him. I'm not an objective person when it comes stuff like this. Someone might think the plot is interesting and full of moral choices when it comes to Anders. I would say it is crap and he deserves better.
I'm no writer and I have no idea how the plot could have been written in different way. But yes, if there is a one thing I would change, I would say goodbye to Justice and take back the old, good Anders and he would not go behind Hawkes back, and he would not be a nervous wreck (did I tell you I really love him?)
Also the similarity between ruthless shepard and Anders is they will kill anyone for their goal to save their own kind (mage,human). Anders himself says (to Hawke) there is no one in kirkwall he wouldn't kill to see the mages free.
That is incorrect. I did a triliogy run playing as ruthless Shepard and killed no one unless the story demanded it.
Retour en haut