153434 réponses à ce sujet

[lynroy]

Was messing around with flycam and...er...Solas broke his arm...or Lavellan did it, I'm not sure...

Spoiler

[Ellawynn]

I did not say the authors hadn't done so at all. Somebody said "they had no options, their hands were tied" and I answered to that comment stating that this is not true and (regardless of what happened in the game or not) is generally not a legit argument in my eyes.

 

 

That was me, and I still stand by it. That comment was made because it was pointed out that the devs should've focused on Lavellan's tragic nature - but it's hard to bill her story as a tragedy when some players don't want to play it like one, and will get pissed if forced into that role. So the devs had to sort of leave it open-ended. If the options they gave were satisfying to you anyway, then I don't see what the problem is. 

[Baboontje]

Baboontje, can I ask what mod you're using for the elf in your icon? It looks really nice.

 

The hair mod? It's this one and I use it together with this texture mod, the smooth version.

 

Or was that not what you meant? I just woke up....I have no idea which way the world is turning. :')

[midnight tea]

 

The hair mod? It's this one and I use it together with this texture mod, the smooth version.

 

Or was that not what you meant? I just woke up....I have no idea which way the world is turning. :')

 

Yes, it's what I mean - thank you Your Inquisitor is very pretty btw!

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

So Solas' orb is on the cover of Magekiller #5. Anyone read that? I'm behind. How's Solas play into it? (Spoiler tag responses, I suppose?)

[midnight tea]

So Solas' orb is on the cover of Magekiller #5. Anyone read that? I'm behind. How's Solas play into it? (Spoiler tag responses, I suppose?)

 

Spoiler

It only plays into it in a sense that Marcus and Tessa are involved in cutting their way through the same tunnels we went through in prologue, cleaning it from demons and allowing Inquisitor and some small reinforcements get to Temple Of Sacred Ashes in order to stop Corypheus from re-opening the Breach with its help.

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

Spoiler

It only plays into it in a sense that Marcus and Tessa are involved in cutting their way through the same tunnels we went through in prologue, cleaning it from demons and allowing Inquisitor and some small reinforcements get to Temple Of Sacred Ashes in order to stop Corypheus from re-opening the Breach with its help.

Spoiler

Isn't this supposed to be the last issue? I thought they were saying before Magekiller came out that it was going to include the Inquisition's timeline and then go slightly beyond it??? Or is that "Well that's done" talk from the artists referring to a simple haitus? 

 

EDIT: I misread your statement. I thought you were referring to the beginning of Inquisition. But you meant this is taking place during "Doom Upon the World". Which makes more sense. nvm. lol

[DustyTulip]

Magekiller 5 question

 

Spoiler

 

Did I see Solas is some of the previews for the issue? Or did I imagine him..? 

 

Edit: Looks like him in 2-3 panels - http://www.comicosit...e-magekiller-5/

 

[midnight tea]

Magekiller 5 question

 

Spoiler

 

Did I see Solas is some of the previews for the issue? Or did I imagine him..? 

 

 

Spoiler

That's just Voth - from Sutherland's little company.

[DustyTulip]

Spoiler

That's just Voth - from Sutherland's little company.

 

Thought this was too good to be true!    Thanks! 

[dawnstone]

Spoiler

That's just Voth - from Sutherland's little company.

Spoiler

Ahaha! Now I want to write a story about poor Voth, who keeps getting mistaken for Solas at the bar by people who don't know either of them well (except bald elf mage), and when they realize Voth is Dalish it's always "Oh, it's just you." XD

[Sifr]

I can't get over this image UGH

Spoiler

tiafrye.tumblr.com

 

I know it is anathema to Solas but this looks so gorgeous *cries*

 

I think the simplified Mythal vallaslin, the one that is just the branches under the eyes probably suits him the best. If Solas was once Mythal's lieutenant or enforcer and wore her markings, I can see him rocking that particular look.

 

Garrett?

 

While the default "Marian" for a female isn't too bad, it does make me wonder if another part of the reason Hawke insists on going by their surname at all times is because they find their first name to be sufficiently embarrassing enough to never want to go by it.

 

I can relate to that, I far prefer going by various nicknames to my actual name, or shortening it when I do.

 

 

He did delete the tweet and then BW had to do damage control.  I think it was Ellis screwing up rather than a deliberate move.

 

Yeah, we shouldn't blame Greg Ellis (or Jonny Rees now), slip ups are bound to happen from time to time, such as when it comes to spoilers or even innocent comments that were taken out of context or blown out of proportion.

 

Anyone remember when Erik Todd Dellums teased that Three Dog might return? Everyone went nuts believing he had confirmed Fallout 4 and his presence in the game, when in reality he was simply reprising the role for something for Shoddycast.

 

Same thing happened to poor Ryan Alosio (Deacon), when a misunderstanding of a tweet he made lead people to assume he was confirming Fallout 5... as if they typically spill information to voice actors and bring them back 2 months after a game is released, to work on the sequel that the devs had not even doodled ideas for on a napkin yet? Voice actors are typically so out of the loop in terms of game info, apparently Ryan Alosio had no idea Katy Townsend was the one playing Cait until the game came out, despite the two of them being friends, since neither could mention it due to the NDA.

 

Besides it's not as bad as Ian McShane giving no damns about spoiling his part and certain S6 events in Game of Thrones... we'd understand if fantasy isn't his cup of tea and he only did the role for the paycheck, but that's no reason to ruin it for the rest of us! Nice going there, Lovejoy!

[Qun00]

I'm not sure where the ambiguity is in "I would not lay with you under false pretenses".

If he had done it before the Fen'harel reveal, it would be exactly what he just said.

[Addictress]

I'm not sure where the ambiguity is in "I would not lay with you under false pretenses".

If he had done it before the Fen'harel reveal, it would be exactly what he just said.

Since it is in fact completely ambiguous, I'm still not sure what YOUR interpretation of it is.

[Baboontje]

Yes, it's what I mean - thank you Your Inquisitor is very pretty btw!

Oh good! And thanks you!

[lynroy]

 

I'm not sure where the ambiguity is in "I would not lay with you under false pretenses".

If he had done it before the Fen'harel reveal, it would be exactly what he just said.

 

Relevant again.

 

(Here we go again...)

 

Whether Solas slept with Lavellan or not is entirely up to you. Personally for me, when I heard Solas say those lines in Trespasser, I thought it was confirmation that they did sleep together. Otherwise, why bring up the subject of sex at all?

 

Others interpreted it as he didn't. Both are valid.

 

Again, I'm gonna quote someone on Tumblr for the explanation:

 

http://ar-lath-ma-vh...at-the-line-was

 

"I see two interpretations of this exchange.

 

1) Lavellan is referring to sex. She’s saying that he took advantage of her, the implication being that he simply used her either for his own pleasure or in order to manipulate her - or both. He denies this, claiming that he never would have slept with her simply for the sake of his deception. In other words, his feelings for her and their relationship were both genuine. His desire for her, sexual and otherwise, was not a tool for controlling her or falsely earning her trust.

 

2) Lavellan is using the phrase strictly in the way the Dalish do. He deceived her and toyed with her. Everything about their relationship was a lie in order to use her as a pawn in his plot. He tricked her into thinking that he loved her and took advantage of her trust. He denies this and reinforces it by explaining that he would not cross that line of intimacy with her when she still did not know the truth.

 

Headcanon away. It’s meant to be ambiguous."

 

-

 

And of course there is Patrick Weekes' tweet.

 

 

 

And another:

 

http://telanadas.tum...st/128715797237

 

"if you want to say solas and lavellan didn’t have sex that’s totally your right because weekes said he left it up to player interpretation.

which means people who think they did have sex are just as right as people who think they didn’t.

 

Solas does not say he never slept with lavellan, he says he would not have slept with her under false pretenses, which really just means she wasn’t a conquest for the big bad dread wolf, his feelings for her were 100% real and legitimate. you all just read the ‘i did not lay with you’ part and that’s it.

 

again, it’s a very valid interpretation to say they didn’t have sex, but it’s also just as valid to say they did."

 

[Illyria]

I'm not sure where the ambiguity is in "I would not lay with you under false pretenses".

If he had done it before the Fen'harel reveal, it would be exactly what he just said.

 

The ambiguity is:

 

'I did not sleep with you because I felt that would be dishonest of me since I was lying to you a lot'

 

Or

 

'I meant everything I said and did during our relationships.  I never lied to about those, and what we had was genuine.'

[midnight tea]

I'm not sure where the ambiguity is in "I would not lay with you under false pretenses".

If he had done it before the Fen'harel reveal, it would be exactly what he just said.

 

I'll just copy-paste what I said about it months ago: 

 

Lol, think about it - why would Lavellan say that he DID and then he responded that he didn't?

 

It makes little sense, unless you accept that Lavellan was delusional and just imagined sleeping with him (in that case - would that be a meta-comment directed to fans? I don't think Bioware is THAT trollish).

 

It also makes little sense for him to suddenly steer the conversation into this area if she didn't mean it as a rather obvious pun.

 

The sentence is most logical/least clunky in a sense that he denies that the relationship was fake. He didn't 'take her' as Dread Wolf - the crafted persona remembered by Dalish as the deceiver. He began the relationship and eventually slept with her, because he genuinely loved her.

[Qun00]

While the default "Marian" for a female isn't too bad, it does make me wonder if another part of the reason Hawke insists on going by their surname at all times is because they find their first name to be sufficiently embarrassing enough to never want to go by it.

I can relate to that, I far prefer going by various nicknames to my actual name, or shortening it when I do.

Parents can be evil, yes. In my country, it isn't rare to see couples blend their own names and give it to their child, which can lead to disastrous results...

The ambiguity is:

'I did not sleep with you because I felt that would be dishonest of me since I was lying to you a lot'

Or

'I meant everything I said and did during our relationships. I never lied to about those, and what we had was genuine.'

That's pretty interesting.

[Baboontje]

Not much Solas art at the moment.

 

Have some tribute videos then. 

 

Spoiler

 

[Addictress]

Cole and Legion. Brilliant.

[Qun00]

Regarding the argument that Solas' goal is strictly about people, not the intertwined crystals and palaces in the skies.

A strange statement, considering that is exactly what his plan entains. Bringing back elven glory, power, immortality and everything that made Elvhenan great (minus Evanuris).

If such things truly don't matter, why not leave the old behind and focus on improving the new?

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

Lowering the veil doesn't necessitate there will be crystal spires and elvhen empires, qun00. Lowering the veil will allow the return of magic and immortality (in theory). It might also result in only ancient elves/elf-like beings being able to survive. But that's not the stated goal, just a side effect. Solas has never indicated that restoring his people's empire is his goal. He had more than enough of his own problems with the empire/power structure of his day, that I find it unlikely he specifically wants that back. What he seems torn up about is how his raising of the veil wounded their nature. That's what he want's to restore. 

 

 

Spoiler

Ahaha! Now I want to write a story about poor Voth, who keeps getting mistaken for Solas at the bar by people who don't know either of them well (except bald elf mage), and when they realize Voth is Dalish it's always "Oh, it's just you." XD

B/c his name was mentioned here, it reminds me: Who wants to start a betting pool about whether Voth is an agent of Fen'Harel? lol I may just be being paranoid and seeing them everywhere now and I blame Solas entirely, but he's so quiet and mysterious. I don't think we ever really hear how Sutherland met him, he just shows up after the Inquisitor has shown an interest in equipping Sutherland for adventuring and he's completed his first mission. Convenient. Or not really.

 

I honestly hope Sutherland and company make a return in DA4. lol

[Qun00]

The only problem with the old empire was the Evanuris leadership. Elvhenan still is Elvhenan without them.

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

The only problem with the old empire was the Evanuris leadership. Elvhenan still is Elvhenan without them.

I don't understand your point. Please expound further.

 

Yes, just removing the Evanuris wouldn't necessarily have made the empire crumble at the time, if that's your point. Its crumbled now, though, regardless. And Solas hasn't said a thing about wanting to restore the "old glory of the empire", or w/e. He has only ever mentioned restoring what he took from the elves in terms of their connection to the Fade. Removing the veil will give them back that connection. It won't automatically resotre the empire. The survivors could decide to make a republic or go full anarchy or live in nomadic tribes or something else entirely. Nothing about the veil being gone would necessarily promote one option over the other.