The city elf boon is probably the only one that would actually benefit from a retcon, considering that it always ended up in murder in the origins epilogue.
Wait what?
I made Shianni the Bann and Alistair ruled with Anora (Canon save) and there was no mention of murder, in fact things were going pretty well.
Wait what?
I made Shianni the Bann and Alistair ruled with Anora (Canon save) and there was no mention of murder, in fact things were going pretty well.
Your choice matters not. Things are rumored to go well....
Wait what?
I made Shianni the Bann and Alistair ruled with Anora (Canon save) and there was no mention of murder, in fact things were going pretty well.
Things are not going well at all, in fact City elf specific boon are doomed from the start. There is no display about the consequences from picking this boon because it's bugged but a mod like "ZDF Dialog Fix" fix that.
Wait what?
I made Shianni the Bann and Alistair ruled with Anora (Canon save) and there was no mention of murder, in fact things were going pretty well.
I got that too. Apparently it's a bug.
According to Dev comment, the Chantry refused to grant the Fereldan circle autonomy and maker praise them for that.
NO NO NO! In DA2, Meridith is angry at Alistair for having granted the Circle autonomy.
NO NO NO! In DA2, Meridith is angry at Alistair for having granted the Circle autonomy.
Well we could argue she was angry because he tried pull that he even says that he can't remove templars in conversation with hawke if hawke ask him about that.Pretty much if devs said it didn't worked hardly we can argue whether it worked or not.
NO NO NO! In DA2, Meridith is angry at Alistair for having granted the Circle autonomy.
Meredith must have been misinformed then.
Meredith must have been misinformed then.
Meredith was angry because he tried, not because the attempt succeeded.
And Meredith's always angry.
I don't get why people keep saying this.
Because the developers confirmed it didn't happen. Since they define reality as it pertains to DA, their statements are the ultimate authority.
Yeah, creator statements mean absolutely nothing. Only the text matters. I don't have a dog in the fight over the Circle boon specifically, but my pet peeve is when creators change something by interview/tweet/forum post. You want to change the canon? Write another book/make another game.
The interpretations of a work, agreed and intended by a creator, are not the only valid interpretations of said work... Sure, the developer's interpretations of a game are important and helpful in determining why/how things in that world happened, but David Gaider's opinion(or any developer's opinion) on the situation can only be weighted insofar as he is working on the next game, because he can adjust the text to suit his opinions. But if he were not, he couldn't influence that text, and thus his opinion is no more valid than the player's.
If DAI doesn't further address what happened with the boons, we only have DA2 to go on. And if the words and images of a work depict A, no Word of God can make it B. Dragon Age 2 confirms that King Alistair declares the Circle of Ferelden free, for a Warden who asks for the mage boon. Meredith claims it isn't his right, but we don't know for sure whether or not the mages of Ferelden are free under King Alistair. Until a Inquisition(or DA4, or DA5) comes out and defines that event further(by saying, as the developers say, that the Circle of Ferelden never actually became free), everything regarding the mage boon is just an interpretation of that scene and the epilogue slide.
None of that is relevant when it gets in the way of the story Bioware wants to tell.
The interpretations of a work, agreed and intended by a creator, are not the only valid interpretations of said work... Sure, the developer's interpretations of a game are important and helpful in determining why/how things in that world happened, but David Gaider's opinion(or any developer's opinion) on the situation can only be weighted insofar as he is working on the next game, because he can adjust the text to suit his opinions. But if he were not, he couldn't influence that text, and thus his opinion is no more valid than the player's.
If DAI doesn't further address what happened with the boons, we only have DA2 to go on. And if the words and images of a work depict A, no Word of God can make it B. Dragon Age 2 confirms that King Alistair declares the Circle of Ferelden free, for a Warden who asks for the mage boon. Meredith claims it isn't his right, but we don't know for sure whether or not the mages of Ferelden are free under King Alistair. Until a Inquisition(or DA4, or DA5) comes out and defines that event further(by saying, as the developers say, that the Circle of Ferelden never actually became free), everything regarding the mage boon is just an interpretation of that scene and the epilogue slide.
Yeah, creator statements mean absolutely nothing. Only the text matters. I don't have a dog in the fight over the Circle boon specifically, but my pet peeve is when creators change something by interview/tweet/forum post. You want to change the canon? Write another book/make another game.
Well, since we already know that the Magi boon did not happen in the novels, and current information and statements indicate it will not have happened in DA:I, I'd say developer intent is pretty important. People don't have to like it, but unless their idea of 'enjoyable' is being annoyed every time the writers disregard an option to suit the story, I suggest they accept it.
If DA had ended, then I'd agree that author intent past that point would have subjective value. If they aren't making anything else to contradict the source, then their intent is only as good as their execution. However, in this case the writers are continuing to create the world. As such, they determine what did and didn't happen on a per-entry basis and they hold ultimate authority. And they have explicitly stated that if something gets in the way of the story they want to tell, it gets disregarded.
When they discuss something in an interview/tweet/forum post, they aren't doing it to sneak some important bit of information past you. They are using the available and acceptable methods of communication to set expectations for the next installment. The developers are telling us now in the hopes that when people finally do have the finished product to play, they won't be surprised when their pet choice isn't represented. If you don't see it or don't hear about it, it's not because they haven't made the effort to tell you. And if you disregard the information because you don't like what they're telling you, that's your problem, not theirs.
Still, if I were dictator of the universe, I'd forbid authors--any authors--from ever interacting with their fans beyond "glad you liked it." Until it's actually text, it's only author intent, which is worth absolutely nothing. If DAI got cancelled tomorrow, I'd feel free to speculate on any number of things DG and the other writers have already addressed.
I should not that this is a philosophical/professional gripe. I don't care about the mage boon and DA continuity in general. But my degree is in English, and I was trained very traditionally.
Well, since we already know that the Magi boon did not happen in the novels, and current information and statements indicate it will not have happened in DA:I, I'd say developer intent is pretty important. People don't have to like it, but unless their idea of 'enjoyable' is being annoyed every time the writers disregard an option to suit the story, I suggest they accept it.
I'm curious about whether or not you realize that the reason there is no magi boon in the novels is because the Warden isn't a mage, the Warden is a Dailsh, who did the ultimate sacrifice. That means the novels cannot disprove the idea that the magi boon did happen in world states which have a mage asking for it.
If DA had ended, then I'd agree that author intent past that point would have subjective value. If they aren't making anything else to contradict the source, then their intent is only as good as their execution. However, in this case the writers are continuing to create the world. As such, they determine what did and didn't happen on a per-entry basis and they hold ultimate authority. And they have explicitly stated that if something gets in the way of the story they want to tell, it gets disregarded.
When they discuss something in an interview/tweet/forum post, they aren't doing it to sneak some important bit of information past you. They are using the available and acceptable methods of communication to set expectations for the next installment. The developers are telling us now in the hopes that when people finally do have the finished product to play, they won't be surprised when their pet choice isn't represented. If you don't see it or don't hear about it, it's not because they haven't made the effort to tell you. And if you disregard the information because you don't like what they're telling you, that's your problem, not theirs.
Yes, developers are using various outlets to set expectations for the next installment. But, as said, until the next installment actually comes out, and verifies what these developers are saying, the words that comment on a prior game's events are just interpretations of those prior games. After all, if Edmonton were to be the subject of a nuclear explosion before October, it's debatable a game that confirms such words would ever come to pass.
Essentially, the only thing one can go by is what is actually in the game. If it's not in the game at all, you can use developers statements to make your case about the subject, but no one is obligated to accept that as canon, because it's not actually in any of the games, and thus not officially canon. I, personally, agree with Gaider that the Chantry would have stepped in and stopped the Ferelden circle from being autonomous(or tried to stop them). But, based on the games, no such action is mentioned. Only that the mages were declared free by King Alistair. And as such, claiming that such an event is canon is less than genuine, because until those events are stated to have occurred by Dragon Age:Inquisition(and not just by a developer), it's not yet canon...
I'd be alright if they had a good reason for not adhering to the boons. like I think that Alistair TRIED to free the circle, but the chantry told him no. Something similar, I think, might have been what occurred with the Dalish getting their own lands.
A few lines, or something like what someone else said and having a few humans among the Orzamaar guards. I'm okay if they can't do it,as long as they address it. The lack of impact is why these days my wardens want a title and riches. If my warden was an elf, a mage, or a dwarf, that I'd like addressed.
I'm curious about whether or not you realize that the reason there is no magi boon in the novels is because the Warden isn't a mage, the Warden is a Dailsh, who did the ultimate sacrifice. That means the novels cannot disprove the idea that the magi boon did happen in world states which have a mage asking for it.
Yes, developers are using various outlets to set expectations for the next installment. But, as said, until the next installment actually comes out, and verifies what these developers are saying, the words that comment on a prior game's events are just interpretations of those prior games. After all, if Edmonton were to be the subject of a nuclear explosion before October, it's debatable a game that confirms such words would ever come to pass.
Essentially, the only thing one can go by is what is actually in the game. If it's not in the game at all, you can use developers statements to make your case about the subject, but no one is obligated to accept that as canon, because it's not actually in any of the games, and thus not officially canon. I, personally, agree with Gaider that the Chantry would have stepped in and stopped the Ferelden circle from being autonomous(or tried to stop them). But, based on the games, no such action is mentioned. Only that the mages were declared free by King Alistair. And as such, claiming that such an event is canon is less than genuine, because until those events are stated to have occurred in Inquisition(and not by a developer), it's not yet canon...
It was already crushed in daa or better in witch hunt where we see that circle don't have independence of course when da 2 is confusing in that matter because bartender says that circle get independence and meredith says that alistair declared circle as free what is very confusing.Realistically speaking boon didn't worked why?
First in story reasons chantry said no and ferelden is too weak to disagree (what is pretty much not so hard to belive) but it is more to that outside story truth is that bioware simple can't handle save import so they pretty much it they brought decisions to the same outcome in every pt.Pretty much leliana and anders show it the best where practically no matter what you do anders is always grey warden and merged with justice even if you don't recruit him and send him on his dead and kill justice.
I'm curious about whether or not you realize that the reason there is no magi boon in the novels is because the Warden isn't a mage, the Warden is a Dailsh, who did the ultimate sacrifice. That means the novels cannot disprove the idea that the magi boon did happen in world states which have a mage asking for it.
Yes, developers are using various outlets to set expectations for the next installment. But, as said, until the next installment actually comes out, and verifies what these developers are saying, the words that comment on a prior game's events are just interpretations of those prior games. After all, if Edmonton were to be the subject of a nuclear explosion before October, it's debatable a game that confirms such words would ever come to pass.
Essentially, the only thing one can go by is what is actually in the game. If it's not in the game at all, you can use developers statements to make your case about the subject, but no one is obligated to accept that as canon, because it's not actually in any of the games, and thus not officially canon. I, personally, agree with Gaider that the Chantry would have stepped in and stopped the Ferelden circle from being autonomous(or tried to stop them). But, based on the games, no such action is mentioned. Only that the mages were declared free by King Alistair. And as such, claiming that such an event is canon is less than genuine, because until those events are stated to have occurred by Dragon Age:Inquisition(and not just by a developer), it's not yet canon...
The thread is titled, and the question is posed "Will we finally be able to see the boons in effect?"
When it comes to the Magi boon and the Dalish boon, the answer is no. The developers have said they didn't work out. So, going into the next game, we know, because they told us, that the boons didn't work out, so they won't be shown. What possible reason would they have for saying "Yeah, the boons didn't work out so there won't be any difference based on those decisions" only to code in differences based on those decisions? This isn't a case where they have been ambiguous about a subject. They've said they didn't work out, and the game won't reflect them. It's not an interpretation of a past game's events, it's a statement on what they didn't put into the current installment.
Retour en haut