78 réponses à ce sujet

[Uccio]

Haha. I remember doing that my first playthrough of Dragon Age. Had a good laugh just because an option like that was there in a game. I also remember telling my friends about it later on Teamspeak, they were like "ooookaaaayyyy, I think you you need to see a therapist".
 
The only option I could think of that was anywhere close to being evil was bedding Gheyna and telling Cammen about it. The look on his face was priceless.

I had a hilarious laugh with the reply to Cammen, "just sampling the goods, no harm done".

Didn't have a heart to break him like that in the main playthrough though.

[KainD]

Selling Connor's soul for demon sex is the only thing I can think of... now that's really nasty.

Sounds hot.

You could "rape" the demon as well though if you had enough persuasion skill to request that in exchange for not killing the demon, making sure that she leaves Connor alone anyway.

[TurretSyndrome]

Sounds hot.

You could "rape" the demon as well though if you had enough persuasion skill to request that in exchange for not killing the demon, making sure that she leaves Connor alone anyway.

 

I have to say, intimidating a demon to have sex with you and then scare it away after using it, is the most badass renegade action I have seen done in both Mass Effect and Dragon Age combined. It's not evil or anything, just pure epicness.

[Shapeshifter777]

brb still waiting to have sechs with a deep stalker.

[KainD]

It's not evil or anything, just pure epicness.

 

Edit: I was going to say something. But I don't want a 5th warning point. 

[Spirit Keeper]

The problem with saying 'I don't like 'X' because 'X' is evil' is a logical fallacy, nothing is inherently evil, it's all subjective. The Desire Demon who gives you Blood Magic in DAO says she has a contract with the child and they made a deal. In its mind, the demon probably thinks what it's doing is right. Morality is a man-made thing and totally subjective. I personally don't think the demon is right for example, because I wouldn't want something like that happening to me because that would be harmful to me and effect my quality of life. Someone else however, might totally want a desire demon to possess their bodies.

 

So Blood Magic ISN'T evil 'because it is'. Blood Magic like any other type of magic in the series can be used for good or evil. A blood mage (like my Warden and Hakwe) would use it to save peoples' lives or stop a blight. A regular mage might use a normal fireball to burn newborn babies to a crips. My current warden is a dalish elf, Blood Mage/Sprirt healer who is incredibly sweet, nice and helpful to others. Same as my Hawke who always uses Nice/Diplomatic choices and do I even need to point out Merrill? Freaking Merrill, she's the most sweetest heart in the entire series.

 

Not to mention that Warden mages use blood magic and aren't restricted in its use. Then there is the practical benefits of blood magic such as extending a person's life. Avernus in Soldier's Peer is centuries old because of the use of blood magic AND has been using it to avoid the calling and corruption of the taint (think Larius from Legacy).

 

If you want to talk about the risk of demonic possession because of Blood Magic then first go read the information about Spirit Healer. "It should also be noted that the calling of a spirit healer is a dangerous one. Contacting anything beyond the Veil inevitably draws the notice of demons, sometimes very powerful ones. More than one tale exists of a spirit healer being fooled by a demon masquerading as a benevolent spirit, and inadvertently bringing them across the Veil... or being tricked into letting down their guard, and possessed. As such, once a mage becomes a Spirit Healer they must especially heighten their vigilance for the remainder of their lives. It is a calling that not all will gladly suffer"

 

Blood Magic isn't evil in nature, just something that can be used to harm others if the mage wants to, just like any other magic. You can try to argue that It's like the Dark Side of the force. Maybe it calls the user to do things to harm others but all you need to be is smart and aware. Even then however there are pleanty of Jedi and Grey Jedi which used dark side powers to do good without ever becoming corrupted. I don't know if Bioware has actually come out and stated that Blood Magic is evil, but quite frankly they would be wrong if they did.

 

As for the OP, he just sounds like one of those 'I don't like this so therefore nobody can have it' people.

[Trikormadenadon]

I'm glad they made the change--if "blood magic is Evul!" is ACTUALLY what they were going for.  I complained about this a ton on the Origins and DA2 forums, that their gameplay COMPLETELY undercut the story.  If blood magic REALLY IS that risky and dangerous, if you allow the protagonist to just be a blood mage and NOT risk turning into an abomination you've created a huge breach between story and gameplay that will necessarily lead any intelligent person to completely discount blood magic as a real threat.  It made the entire issue look like a joke.  So they basically had these options:

 

1.) take blood magic away (as a specialization) from the PC and make it a REAL threat

2.) leave the PC with blood magic as a specialization but randomly have a "you turned into an abomination" GAME OVER screen (which would NOT be fun)

3.) turn blood magic into a Conversation Only thing that you can only choose (or not choose) to use in cut scenes.  This removes the dissonance and allows for consequences for using blood magic that aren't driven by a gameplay specialization.  I'm kind of hoping this is the path they chose and "use blood magic" becomes a mage-only conversation option kind of like the "use the force" options from KoTOR.

4.) Keep the blood magic specialization and ignore it from a story perspective turning the entire thing into an eye-rolling example of locking the story and gameplay in different rooms.

 

Of course nothing is going to change the fact that in the 2 games thus far you could freely be a blood mage with zero consequences therefrom.  So deciding to do something powerfully unsubtle in Inquisition (if they actually do so) will indeed look like a ham-handed retcon.  These are the things that happen when you don't fully integrate your stuff from the get go.

 

Heck, even turning blood magic into a conversation-only thing places way too much story presence on playing a mage that really ought to require some corresponding options for Warrior and Rogue . . . but what would those options be?  This is what happens when ONE class is based on "what you are basically by accident" and the other two are "methods you've learned".  Options that are appropriate to the Mage class have no corresponding factor in the other two classes.  It'd look stupid if mages ONLY get the option to "use blood magic" while Rogue and Warrior get a variety of "be persuasive" options.  ANYONE can be persuasive.  Being a mage doesn't PRECLUDE persuasiveness, while being a Rogue or a Warrior effectively precludes you from using magic.  Granted, they could allow you to tell a party member (if you have a mage in the party who doesn't mind the idea) to use blood magic . . . but then you still have the problem that Mage in Party > Lack Of Mage.

This has been a problem with the game from the start.  Mage is THE most important class because an entire big plot of the game REVOLVES around that class.  There aren't any plot points that REVOLVE around people being Rogues or Warriors.  Heck, if it wasn't for a few locked chests and generally pointless traps there wouldn't be any difference BETWEEN the other two classes.  Everything is either "mage" or "not mage".

They could balance this by making some avenues inaccessible to the blood mage however. For example, You run across a group of Templars and they recognize you, they say..."Ah your a blood mage! Kill it kill it kill it!" instead of "Hello, can you help us capture these mages to return to the circle?" Therefore effectively making some interactions impossible if they know you are a blood mage.

[Trikormadenadon]

Personally I don't see blood mage more evil than walking bombs or necromancery etc. There is pretty brutal and disturbing spells mages can have in DA games even without blood magic ^^; Horror and nightmare sound like they can mess up with someone's head as much as blood magic. Also since we have had pretty nice blood mages around, Jowan and Merrill, who weren't exactly evil just potentially dangerous, I don't see how blood magic is evil. Risky but not evil.

 

It's intresting if they are going now to blood magic is very evil route in DAI when previous games gave different opinions on it and let you decide.

 

I liked my blood mage in DA2 so I wouldn't mind playing one in DAI either. I hope it'd have been noticed more though by companions etc in DA2. Merrill got lot of crap for being one and Hawke didn't which was odd.

As I said before I don't think they removed it as a spec. due to it being evil but because they were unsure of how to make being a blood mage have consequences. The devs have stated they did not want the schism that existed in DAO and DA2 where you could be a blood mage and no one cared.

[dduane o]

I don't want the option to be a blood mage. Since blood magic turns every mage who use it evil. No blood magic please.

Adding blood magic to the game would solidify the reason the inquisition must exist between the templar and mage war. The presence of it in the world, not necessarily as a specialization could give the players the extra push of decision whether mages should be freed from the templars or not.

It's understandable that the inquisition shouldn't specialized on blood magic since it has affiliation with notable chantry members and as a character, that is one huge kick in the groin if I found out that the person leading the inquisition is a douche.

On the side note, you can be a blood mage and not necessarily become evil. I made Wynne specialized with blood magic, she turned out okay. She hated blood mages before but since she became one, she starts being understandable with other blood mages.

[TurretSyndrome]

On the side note, you can be a blood mage and not necessarily become evil. I made Wynne specialized with blood magic, she turned out okay. She hated blood mages before but since she became one, she starts being understandable with other blood mages.

 

Wynne is never a Blood Mage story-wise. You can have her specialize in it because the developers did not want you to be restricted on what you could do with your characters based on lore(honestly, I think they should've done that). Lore Wynne =/= Gameplay Wynne.

[Trikormadenadon]

Wynne is never a Blood Mage story-wise. You can have her specialize in it because the developers did not want you to be restricted on what you could do with your characters based on lore(honestly, I think they should've done that). Lore Wynne =/= Gameplay Wynne.

They DID do that in DA2.

[Spirit Keeper]

As I said before I don't think they removed it as a spec. due to it being evil but because they were unsure of how to make being a blood mage have consequences. The devs have stated they did not want the schism that existed in DAO and DA2 where you could be a blood mage and no one cared.

The thing is though, Necromany is viewed with scorn outside of tevinter and is apparently going to get you negative comments from people. So if they can do that with Necromancy, why not Blood Magic?

[Spirit Keeper]

Wynne is never a Blood Mage story-wise. You can have her specialize in it because the developers did not want you to be restricted on what you could do with your characters based on lore(honestly, I think they should've done that). Lore Wynne =/= Gameplay Wynne.

My Warden and Hawke were blood mages. Made to be wonderful people and they remained that way over the main games and DLCs. Hawke's story took place over 10 years and he was fine.

[KainD]

My Warden and Hawke were blood mages. Made to be wonderful people and they remained that way over the main games and DLCs. Hawke's story took place over 10 years and he was fine.

Problem is not that your warden and Hawke were fine. It's that everybody else were fine with them.

[Spirit Keeper]

Problem is not that your warden and Hawke were fine. It's that everybody else were fine with them.

Well let's be honest here, because of the Chantry not many people in Thedas like mages in general. Blood Magic isn't the only magic that is forbidden or vilified, Necromancy is another. So it's people's prejudices against Blood Magic that make it 'bad', not that it is in and of itself bad. Even Spirit Healers are just barely tolerated.

[Trikormadenadon]

The thing is though, Necromany is viewed with scorn outside of tevinter and is apparently going to get you negative comments from people. So if they can do that with Necromancy, why not Blood Magic?

I am not sure, maybe the magnitude of the scorn is undoable with how they envision the interactions? Necromancy might be, 'dude you suck" and blood magic might be 'kill it kill it kill it'. The Chantry does not label necromancers a maleficar but they do name Blood Mages so. Even with the Chantry gone (is it? or just the templars?) either way the general population will likely view necromancy with less scorn that blood magic. You will never get anything done if everyone is against you. Just a thought.

[Trikormadenadon]

Well let's be honest here, because of the Chantry not many people in Thedas like mages in general. Blood Magic isn't the only magic that is forbidden or vilified, Necromancy is another. So it's people's prejudices against Blood Magic that make it 'bad', not that it is in and of itself bad. Even Spirit Healers are just barely tolerated.

This is true, but it doesn't really the change the point does it? To the general public, mages are not to be trusted, but blood mages are to be feared and killed if possible. Necromancy may be vilified but I doubt it is as frowned upon as blood magic.

[KainD]

Well let's be honest here, because of the Chantry not many people in Thedas like mages in general. Blood Magic isn't the only magic that is forbidden or vilified, Necromancy is another. So it's people's prejudices against Blood Magic that make it 'bad', not that it is in and of itself bad. Even Spirit Healers are just barely tolerated.

 

Yes I agree. What are we talking about again? Dev's don't know how to provide the consequence of negative attitude and prejudice from most people you meet, which would make the whole plot different, that's why they removed blood magic.  

[Spirit Keeper]

I am not sure, maybe the magnitude of the scorn is undoable with how they envision the interactions? Necromancy might be, 'dude you suck" and blood magic might be 'kill it kill it kill it'. The Chantry does not label necromancers a maleficar but they do name Blood Mages so. Even with the Chantry gone (is it? or just the templars?) either way the general population will likely view necromancy with less scorn that blood magic. You will never get anything done if everyone is against you. Just a thought.

Yeah, I agree. maybe i'm just a sadist though, but having to kill angry mobs of people as a consequence of picking blood magic is something I would have loved to see. They actually did it well in DAO ( I think you need restored content mods though). But if you have blood magic then once you save the circle tower Wynne will confront you about your 'strange magics which weren't different from the enemies'. If you admit to using blood magic or fail the persuade check, Greagoir will try to arrest you and you'll be forced to kill Wynne, Irving, Greagoir, all the mages and templars in the tower etc losing support from those factions. Really well done.

 

I don't think the chantry is gone, just that the Templars and Chantry have split. Reason being is that the Grand Cleric wanted to give more freedom to mages but this really important Templar leader was all "NO!" and split from the chantry when the Grand Cleric did something to help the mages escape.

[KainD]

But if you have blood magic then once you save the circle tower Wynne will confront you about your 'strange magics which weren't different from the enemies'. If you admit to using blood magic or fail the persuade check, Greagoir will try to arrest you and you'll be forced to kill Wynne, Irving, Greagoir, all the mages and templars in the tower etc losing support from those factions. Really well done.

 

You know what's not well done? Inability to recruit Uldred and his abominations instead of regular mages or templars. 

[Spirit Keeper]

You know what's not well done? Inability to recruit Uldred and his abominations instead of regular mages or templars. 

Now I would have loved to see that.

[Trikormadenadon]

Yeah, I agree. maybe i'm just a sadist though, but having to kill angry mobs of people as a consequence of picking blood magic is something I would have loved to see. They actually did it well in DAO ( I think you need restored content mods though). But if you have blood magic then once you save the circle tower Wynne will confront you about your 'strange magics which weren't different from the enemies'. If you admit to using blood magic or fail the persuade check, Greagoir will try to arrest you and you'll be forced to kill Wynne, Irving, Greagoir, all the mages and templars in the tower etc losing support from those factions. Really well done.

 

I don't think the chantry is gone, just that the Templars and Chantry have split. Reason being is that the Grand Cleric wanted to give more freedom to mages but this really important Templar leader was all "NO!" and split from the chantry when the Grand Cleric did something to help the mages escape.

That's cool too. Not my cup of tea but we all are allowed our tastes in gaming.

 

I was not sure about what happened with the Chantry to be honest that's why I was trying to make a more general statement. Kind of makes it a bit more interesting the way you describe it rather than the Chantry is gone completely.

[Trikormadenadon]

You know what's not well done? Inability to recruit Uldred and his abominations instead of regular mages or templars. 

That would have been interesting too for those who would enjoy that arch.

[Uccio]

As I said before I don't think they removed it as a spec. due to it being evil but because they were unsure of how to make being a blood mage have consequences. The devs have stated they did not want the schism that existed in DAO and DA2 where you could be a blood mage and no one cared.

It is just not a problem with blood magic but being a mage in general. Mage Hawke, an apostate, running around in Kirkwall fighting infront of templars in circle. Nobody cares. I just don't believe being a 'champion' would have protected a apostate mage from being apprehended by the templars in a city which was going nuts over its fear and hate of mages.

 

Warden could get away with being a free mage since he was a part of organization that had special priviledges (being a mage outside circle). This was also being confirmed by authorities, templar commanders even.

Mage Hawke was the odd ball there, he was just a nobody on the run, getting some money and status would protect him only so far. A open mage act would have forced templars (whom he had payed under the table) to move on him because citizens would have probably complained about his behavior.

Now inquisitor is another thing. I am pretty sure there is chantry behind this organization (despite what devs say, I don´t buy that) since a lone schmuck just can´t set it up and call everyone under his banner. You need leverage to do it. So inquisitor is a special case like Warden. He could even have a written permission from the king Alistair/empress Celena/divine justitia/templar commander/senior enchanter that authorites him to use "any means necessary", including blood magic to get the job done. Then you could have some (funny) moments when you try to convince local authorities/templars that you are infact allowed to be a mage outside circle AND use blood magic (maybe with a bit of help from the blood magic).

[KainD]

That would have been interesting too for those who would enjoy that arch.

 

That would be so awesome. Just imagine an army of Golems, Abominations and Werewolves, darkspawn and allied soldiers would ****** themselves. 

Warden be like: ''Why so serious Alistair?''

Alistair: ''I hate you..''

 

Stopping the blight comes first for the Grey Warden, everything else that follows, is not my concern. xD