756 réponses à ce sujet

[Gtdef]

i don't really find the post from Mr. Gaider very comforting. Even if it's not fan service per se, I still think that a retcon character exists because someone really wanted to include him. Either for the fans or just because. Small difference.

 

That can be for various reasons. Perhaps the development of the character got sidetracked because of various constraints in the creative process and the writers thought it would be a good idea to give it one more try. Still doesn't change the fact that the character feels forced. Cullen underwent major changes that are uncharacteristic of him. From a broken little man, retcon into a supposed reasonable and effective templar with firsthand experience to the horrors mages can unleash, and I say supposed cause that's not what I "experienced" in my DA2 playthroughs. I thought he was average at best, not really worthy to be an important figure.

 

I don't doubt that the writers can make him charming with a great personality, but even if I like the character in the game, I won't think of him as the Cullen I know, rather as a new character with the same name. For these reasons his existence does more bad than good for me.

 

Now people can say a lot of things, express their hate and blame Bioware for fanservice, but it doesn't really change the fact and not everyone has the patience to make a serious argument. I'm mostly irritated by the backstory in his character page because it introduces elements that sound like retcons or forced additions that feel out of place just to justify him being important. I can accept that it is what it is because they said so but I don't have to like it.

[CENIC]

If one didn't like Cullen before, it's fair to expect that one still won't like him now, though I'd hope most would have an open mind going into the game. People can change in 3 years, and the last 3 years in Kirkwall would certainly have been good for character building!

Regardless of one's personal feelings - the development team made the decision to put him in a leadership/advisory position. One can assume they had reasons for picking Cullen over Cassandra, or Blackwall, or an entirely new character. It's unfair to assume that he was chosen because he's fanservice.

[Sekou]

Seems to me that many who've commented in this thread are unable to consider that you as Inquisitor are not the same as Hawke or Warden. 'Quiz has none of those characters' presumptions as a base for their interaction with Cullen. I believe we have to view Cullen through the 'Quiz' eyes, independent of our prior understanding of the character, especially if we want to respect the RPG elements of the DA world.

Secondly, so much of this thread possesses a strong whiff of what ails Thedas in general. That being, here we have a world that is quite literally being destroyed by demons from the sky, and until recent, was again threatened by darkspawn hordes raging up its backside. In such a light it is the height of folly and hubris to continue fighting the old battles- mages and templars, chantry and qun, Ferelden v Orlais, etc- when the very playground that enables such debates remains in absolute peril.

But that is what we humans are really good at some times, eh? Losing sight of the forest for the trees? And for this, I must salute Bioware for nailing this aspect of life and society to a T (and not the Vilegrim type of nailing).
;-)

[Catche Jagger]

I am honestly fine with seeing the Cullen we saw in DA2 become some sort of military advisor. He seemed to be a fairly reasonable guy and three years of leadership training could do well for him.

It's the transition from DA:O to DA2 that still irks me. However, since most the issues that I would have with his leadership were randomly exterminated then, I'll be fine with his new advisory position.

[Dean_the_Young]

So we aren't associated with the Chantry...but we have the Divines right and left hand in the inquisition, a templar as a military advisor...in what way are we not allied by design with that cult?  I mean seriously, I don't want any of these within a hundred miles of me, unless they are on fire at the time....

I'm fairly sure Bioware never claimed we weren't associated with the Chantry- merely that we were not subordinate or answering to it.
 

[J-Reyno]

Welp, I'm happy about Cullen playing a part.  To an extent I agree that he could have been a companion rather than an advisor, but that's not to say he isn't qualified.  Most of you that claim he isn't just don't want him in the game at all and probably wouldn't bat an eye if we got a new character without an extensive resume posted in the character profile.  Not sure why it matters to the player, anyway.  It's the inquisitor who should be concerned.  And since we have Cassandra and Leliana vouching for him, two very capable allies, why is that not enough?  

 

Personally I like to have characters from past games as well, because we get to experience an ongoing story with them.  Characters don't have to be perfect and Cullen showed potential for growth.  And that's what matters, the story.  If he works for the story arguments otherwise are just being petty.

[GloriousDame]

That doesn't address my concerns. Fanservice was one of them, but Cullen simply isn't a good Advisor or leader without some major changes.

 

I'll see what they've done with him, but Cullen from the first two games is not someone I'd consider of good judgment.

How can you so easily determine Cullen isn't a good adviser, when you clearly have yet to play Inquisition? To turn what is an obvious dislike for the character (an opinion), and make a statement out of it is rather silly, isn't it? As is the fact that some people already dislike some of the characters they've announced without even getting to know them in-game, properly.  Your reasoning that Cullen is a bad fit for an adviser is as ill-founded as those whose opinions are set before they've had a chance to interact with characters in Inquisition.

If your opinion of him not making a good adviser based on what you've seen from previous games, then it's clear you cannot see things past black and white (in this respect). I urge you to remember that Cullen has been through both sides of the equation: What too much freedom, and too little, can do to mages. His unique perspective makes him an exceptionally valuable asset, and a great candidate for an adviser. You say he would need some major changes to be a good adviser, but you haven't taken account the changes we have already seen him through.

 

I'll grant you this: the near-polar opposites of Cullen that we see in Origins and DA2, are not enough for him to make a good leader or adviser- at least NOT when taking each of these individually. Put together, they give him a well-rounded perspective-something any good adviser needs.

[AllThatJazz]

@Sekou - I cannot tell you how much I love your post, a 'like' button doesn't seem sufficient! It seems to me too that many in this thread are conflating player and character. The Inquisitor has no idea of the specifics of Cullen's involvement in either Origins or DA2 - we only (from a character perspective) know that he is a former Templar who rose to a position of authority after the events in Kirkwall and impressed Cassandra enough to have her seek his help. Anything else that we, the players, know is meta-knowledge, and can't really be seen as a great basis for a brand new character not to trust him (in my view). Those Inquisitors who hate the Chantry/Templars regardless are probably the only ones with a decent reason from the outset.

 

I'm also pretty sure that Cullen can have experienced natural, logical, development since the end of DA2 - there seems to be an argument that he has to be exactly the same individual with exactly the same views and that any change in that is a 'retcon' or whatever rather than independent development/maturation of Cullen's character. I'm not particularly a Cullenite and have little interest in the romance, but I can see potential for an individual with interesting and even-handed perspective, someone who has seen the good and the bad in both Mages and Templars, someone who has done awful things and noble things, and who has had to adapt and adjust his views accordingly. Sounds like a pretty good advisor to me.

[Sekou]

 
I'm also pretty sure that Cullen can have experienced natural, logical, development since the end of DA2 - there seems to be an argument that he has to be exactly the same individual with exactly the same views and that any change in that is a 'retcon' or whatever rather than independent development/maturation of Cullen's character. I'm not particularly a Cullenite and have little interest in the romance, but I can see potential for an individual with interesting and even-handed perspective, someone who has seen the good and the bad in both Mages and Templars, someone who has done awful things and noble things, and who has had to adapt and adjust his views accordingly. Sounds like a pretty good advisor to me.

And similarly must I concur with the above paragraph of yours. Well said, and spot on.

[zooooooro]

I'm curious, have the writers actually explained why they chose to include Cullen as the head of the military branch of the inquisition instead of a new character? I remember reading somewhere that the inquisitor could choose to oppose the chantry altogether, but with several of the main pillars of the organization made up of some very high ranking pro-chantry figures, this seems seems a bit unlikely.

[The Elder King]

I'm curious, have the writers actually explained why they chose to include Cullen as the head of the military branch of the inquisition instead of a new character? I remember reading somewhere that the inquisitor could choose to oppose the chantry altogether, but with several of the main pillars of the organization made up of some very high ranking pro-chantry figures, this seems seems a bit unlikely.

The two things are separate though. Even if there was a new character instead of Cullen, i think he'd still be pro-Chantry, since Cassandra started forming the organization, and it's logical she'd choose people with similar views.

[Giubba]

@Sekou - I cannot tell you how much I love your post, a 'like' button doesn't seem sufficient! It seems to me too that many in this thread are conflating player and character. The Inquisitor has no idea of the specifics of Cullen's involvement in either Origins or DA2 - we only (from a character perspective) know that he is a former Templar who rose to a position of authority after the events in Kirkwall and impressed Cassandra enough to have her seek his help. Anything else that we, the players, know is meta-knowledge, and can't really be seen as a great basis for a brand new character not to trust him (in my view). Those Inquisitors who hate the Chantry/Templars regardless are probably the only ones with a decent reason from the outset.

 

I'm also pretty sure that Cullen can have experienced natural, logical, development since the end of DA2 - there seems to be an argument that he has to be exactly the same individual with exactly the same views and that any change in that is a 'retcon' or whatever rather than independent development/maturation of Cullen's character. I'm not particularly a Cullenite and have little interest in the romance, but I can see potential for an individual with interesting and even-handed perspective, someone who has seen the good and the bad in both Mages and Templars, someone who has done awful things and noble things, and who has had to adapt and adjust his views accordingly. Sounds like a pretty good advisor to me.

 

Point is that in a year (given or taken) no one can mature the experience needed for handling the logistic and directing a pan national army scattered on half the know continent, and don't even talk about directing an army of hundred or thousand on the field.

 

A man like Logahin had a curricula that would make him perfect but not Cullen even with a year more of time at his disposal.

[The Elder King]

Point is that in a year (given or taken) no one can mature the experience for handling the logistic experience for creating,handling and directing a pan national army scattered on half the know continent, and don't even talk about directing an amry of hundred or thousand on the field.

Three years passed between DA2 and DAI.

[Vilegrim]

What worries me is that we are told here are you 3 advisers, you have zero agency about hiring and firing, you get these guys, zero choice.  2 I know already I am completely opposed to,  and unlike companions where I can completely ignore them in camp until they leave at the worst case, Cullen is my military advisor, Lelianna is my 'political' advisor...and I want neither of them anywhere near me, but appear to be given no choice.

 

I mean it's not like Lelianna would take the mission that really needs doing: Assassinate the entire chantry hierarchy, finish the job Anders so gloriously started.

[The Elder King]

What worries me is that we are told here are you 3 advisers, you have zero agency about hiring and firing, you get these guys, zero choice.  2 I know already I am completely opposed to,  and unlike companions where I can completely ignore them in camp until they leave at the worst case, Cullen is my military advisor, Lelianna is my 'political' advisor...and I want neither of them anywhere near me, but appear to be given no choice.
 
I mean it's not like Lelianna would take the mission that really needs doing: Assassinate the entire chantry hierarchy.

Leliana is the spymaster. Scribbles is the political advisor.
You're assuming that Bioware ever had the intention of creating a quest when you can assassinate the Chantry's leaders, Leliana or not.

[Vilegrim]

Leliana is the spymaster. Scribbles is the political advisor.
You're assuming that Bioware ever had the intention of creating a quest when you can assassinate the Chantry's leaders, Leliana or not.

 

 

hence the quotes round 'political' and yes I realise that bioware probably wouldn't let us actually oppose the chantry in any meaningful way, the companions and advisors make it clear that we are subservient to one degree or another.  Doesn't mean that mission wouldn't do more good for
Thedas than the GW ever managed.

[Giubba]

Three years passed between DA2 and DAI.

 

Wow two more years.

 

We are speaking about a person that must have decades of experience for filling that role.

[Chewin]

The OP does bring up a valid point, since Cullen being a Knight-Captain in Kirkwall and from that to a military adviser is a huge step and involves different responsobilities. We haven't witnessed much from Cullen to fill that role, but considering the time that has passed since we last saw him, it isn't an impossibility that he would serve us our advisor on the military field.

Hopefully the Inquisition will go into further explanation and showcase why Cullen is the right man for thr task.

[CENIC]

What worries me is that we are told here are you 3 advisers, you have zero agency about hiring and firing, you get these guys, zero choice.  2 I know already I am completely opposed to,  and unlike companions where I can completely ignore them in camp until they leave at the worst case, Cullen is my military advisor, Lelianna is my 'political' advisor...and I want neither of them anywhere near me, but appear to be given no choice.
 
I mean it's not like Lelianna would take the mission that really needs doing: Assassinate the entire chantry hierarchy, finish the job Anders so gloriously started.

Aw, don't worry. I'm sure someone will create a fan-mod expansion for Inquisition titled "Atheist Anarchy Apoplecticpalooza" wherein the Inquisitor partakes in the popular (but bloody) custom of removing the scourge of organized religion from the face of Thedas.

[NRieh]

 

'Quiz has none of those characters' presumptions as a base for their interaction with Cullen. I believe we have to view Cullen through the 'Quiz' eyes, independent of our prior understanding of the character, especially if we want to respect the RPG elements of the DA world.

Then could they be so kind to ship an amnesia potion with a game?  I can't unsee what I've seen and unhear what I've heard, sorry. 

 

David Gaider used to deal with table-top P&P RPGs, he should be perfectly aware, that one of the worst thing a DM can do is allow player to know something that character knows not. That always adds meta-gaming and problems.

 

I'll do my best to keep as neutral as possible, but I wish they had used another character, so that I could meet and discover him along with my character.  

[Chewin]

Wow two more years.
 
We are speaking about a person that must have decades of experience for filling that role.

Or someone who just happens to be naturally gifted on the field, and they couldn't get someone else to fill the role.

Sounds far-fetched.

[The Elder King]

hence the quotes round 'political' and yes I realise that bioware probably wouldn't let us actually oppose the chantry in any meaningful way, the companions and advisors make it clear that we are subservient to one degree or another.  Doesn't mean that mission wouldn't do more good for
Thedas than the GW ever managed.

Defined 'meaningful way'.  

Wow two more years.
 
We are speaking about a person that must have decades of experience for filling that role.

The Inquisitor sure has plently of experience to lead the Inquisition, right .
Regardless, i was just correcting you on the timeframe.

[J-Reyno]

I'm curious, have the writers actually explained why they chose to include Cullen as the head of the military branch of the inquisition instead of a new character?

Because that's the story they want to tell.

 

For all we know Cullen could be terrible at his job and that could be the entire point.  When it comes to the writing, it doesn't even need to be about his qualifications.  It's about how BW intends for the story to play out.

 

Whether he is qualified or not is a question to ask Cassandra or Leliana.  

[Vilegrim]

Because that's the story they want to tell.

 

For all we know Cullen could be terrible at his job and that could be the entire point.  When it comes to the writing, it doesn't even need to be about his qualifications.  It's about how BW intends for the story to play out.

 

Whether he is qualified or not is a question to ask Cassandra or Leliana.  

 

 

The other 2 fanatics I am not happy with having to take you mean? Yea...no thanks.

[AllThatJazz]

Point is that in a year (given or taken) no one can mature the experience needed for handling the logistic and directing a pan national army scattered on half the know continent, and don't even talk about directing an amry of hundred or thousand on the field.

 He's your personal military advisor, not a general. Why would he personally be directing a thousand-strong army on the field? And also, what Elder King said. It's been three years since DA2 and many more than that since Cullen joined the Templars (he was a rookie during Origins which is about 13 years prior to the events of Inquisition, which would mean maybe 15-20 years altogether since he began his templar training?). There have been instances of soldiers rising meteorically through the ranks, particularly in times of crisis when they somehow prove themselves (think someone else in this thread mentioned Napoleon who went from nothing to general in less than 20 years). In-game, there's the Warden, who went from zero to hero in about a year. There's also the fact that Cassandra possibly wasn't spoiled for choice when it came to picking people for the role. She saw Cullen while she was in Kirkwall, he did enough to impress her, she drafted him into the Inquisition. I'm still not getting what's so ridiculous about this, beyond you not liking Cullen and not wanting to see him back?

 

@Vilegrim what you seem to be asking for is unlimited freedom, which just doesn't happen in games with a stronger narrative focus. Your role in this game is not to destroy the chantry, it is to destroy the breaches in the fade and (presumably) whatever is causing them, and to sort out the chaos. Pursuing your own agenda isn't part of that story. It makes perfect sense that, since Cassandra started setting up the Inquisition before the events at Haven (and was maybe supposed to lead it originally?), that she would have chosen chantry-loyal people. Presumably there's nothing in the game that dictates you have to like your advisors. You may not even have to listen to their advice, we shall just have to wait and see.