Witcher 2 also had Geralt getting shot to death by the scoia'tael if you screwed up talking to them.
The exploding tag scene in the cellar too, the prison scene where ves shoots you if you attack roache, etc.
._. Awesome way to die, underneath a haunted house after fiddling around with a candle holder.
Seriously, guys.
HE IS RISEN!
Can there be a situation where there is no doubt about it? Anyway, accepting your very speculative scenario, yes, I would object because it would imply I am subservient to her and her cause. Giving me that power would be useful and I would be thankful, but never subservient unless I were so inclined in the first place. My view of what is good and bad cannot be bought.
It isn't Andraste that bestows the title upon you, it is the people that knows you've seen her. But, this is pointless, you are deadset on your anti-religion ways, so there is no use in further discussion.
Personally, I hope they provide the chance for non-human Inquisitors to project an Andrastian outlook. I'd love to see a Dalish Inquisitor slowly get won over by the Chant after an encounter with a spirit in Andraste's likeness. It would be an earth-shattering experience, I think.
Personally, I hope they provide the chance for non-human Inquisitors to project an Andrastian outlook. I'd love to see a Dalish Inquisitor slowly get won over by the Chant after an encounter with a spirit in Andraste's likeness. It would be an earth-shattering experience, I think.
If they offer that, then I also hope the reverse is also true. Say you have a character that starts of saying they believe in the Maker through dialogue choices, and can develop to believe otherwise as the game progresses.
Variety is the spice of life and I wouldn't mind more of it.
If they offer that, then I also hope the reverse is also true. Say you have a character that starts of saying they believe in the Maker through dialogue choices, and can develop to believe otherwise as the game progresses.
Variety is the spice of life and I wouldn't mind more of it.
I wouldn't mind it outright, but it really depends on what kind of story develops. After all, if a character professes belief in the Maker, a vision of Andraste in the Fade would be a pretty compelling reinforcement of their faith. It would take something pretty powerful to lead to a loss of faith after that kind of experience. Though you could argue that seeing Andraste away from the Maker's side is in of itself contradictory of Chantry tradition, which states that she is with HIm. But that argument is a little weak.
On the other hand, if a character starts out a doubter, a vision of Andraste won't convince them if they don't want to be convinced. Any Inquisitor set in his/her ways will not be convinced by any amount of evidence. I bet if the Maker Himself walked right up to them and smacked them across the face, some 'atheist' Inquisitors would still say "You're not the Maker! The Maker isn't real."
Of course, this is all academic until the game is out anyway. We don't even know if the glowing spirit figure even presents itself as Andraste(though it is the strongest theory by far). Also, we don't know if it differs by character race. I doubt that, but we have no evidence either way.
If they offer that, then I also hope the reverse is also true. Say you have a character that starts of saying they believe in the Maker through dialogue choices, and can develop to believe otherwise as the game progresses.
Variety is the spice of life and I wouldn't mind more of it.
I'm all for choices.
I like that title even though I am non-religious myself and I play a non-religious character. It has the potential to garner quite a lot of political power, social influence, social authority and moral authority.
Being a pragmatic person, I see the costs of being associated with such a title is far less than the potential benefits it gives my Inquisitor.
Attila the Hun was referred to by his Roman opponents as FLAGEL[L]VM DEI, or "Scourge of God".
This did not make him a Christian.
Well, you know.. Flagellum Dei hasn'ìt exactly a positive connotation. It means the scourge of God.
Maybe what a Herald is is lost on some people. XD
Still if a Herald the Inquisitor must be I hope that sparkly Lady is Gil Galad thus making the protagonist the herald of Gil Galad, namely Elrond.
Attila the Hun was referred to by his Roman opponents as FLAGEL[L]VM DEI, or "Scourge of God".
This did not make him a Christian.
Do you understand the difference between between the Scourge and the Herald?
LOL, *you* insisted that I answer your speculative scenario that isn't in the game, and now you take my answer as applying to the scenario we'll get? Didn't you read my OP? I said I know I have little control over how I'm perceived by the world. All I want is the chance to distance myself from it in a mature manner.It isn't Andraste that bestows the title upon you, it is the people that knows you've seen her. But, this is pointless, you are deadset on your anti-religion ways, so there is no use in further discussion.
With everything we know about how things go, some powerful mage trying to impersonate a god is a far more plausible scenario than a real god appearing in person before you, wouldn't you think? How would I go about assessing the truth of such a claim? If I have no way to assess it, why would I accept it unless I were inclined to believe in the first place?On the other hand, if a character starts out a doubter, a vision of Andraste won't convince them if they don't want to be convinced. Any Inquisitor set in his/her ways will not be convinced by any amount of evidence. I bet if the Maker Himself walked right up to them and smacked them across the face, some 'atheist' Inquisitors would still say "You're not the Maker! The Maker isn't real."
While I agree about the merit of such a setup - I think any system for educating mages, however much it benefits those willing to learn, will have to retain the possiblity of draconian measures for those who can't learn to control their power - there would've been little chance of the Chantry creating it, given that one of their primary tenets is that magic is a corrupting influence in the world (quote from WoT I).To try to keep on topic - had the Chantry encouraged opening the Circles to teach self-control while providing any mage that attends them with great societal boons (while leaving those dangerous beings that don't at the mercy of the templars "if" they prove wanting). Then I think their entire situation would be different - and probably what it "should" have been to begin with instead of the system of bigotry and oppression it has largely become.
So perhaps the elven protagonist could see the figure as one of the Creators - Falon'Din, Friend of the Dead?
all Inquisitors will see the same creatures who is the real ones who can be called as gods in Thedas...yes this is The Creators, the ones who was a source of the inprison 7 archdeamons and creation of the fade what was before building Arlathan in the Elvehnan Empire
the sh*t in Thedas goes to far, and because of the fade torn and elder one starts his war, they have oportunity and ability to involve
even eluvians are now active
With everything we know about how things go, some powerful mage trying to impersonate a god is a far more plausible scenario than a real god appearing in person before you, wouldn't you think? How would I go about assessing the truth of such a claim? If I have no way to assess it, why would I accept it unless I were inclined to believe in the first place?
But well....suppose the evidence has been mounting up in favor of the claim he's the Maker, that wouldn't make me more friendly towards him, only more careful. I think the Maker is an ass, and his stepping out of the realm of possibility into actuality isn't going to change my opinion.
I agree. Even from an Andrastian POV, there is plenty of reason to doubt an occurrence like this being true. But that just shows that the Maker could be as obvious or as subtle as He wants, and it still won't convince anyone who, in their heart, doesn't want to be convinced. Just like in the real world, people have the free will to decide for themselves what god(s) are worthy of their worship, if any.
Still glad that DG clarified that atheism as we understand it doesn't really exist in Thedas. A person can have any amount of nonbelief in the Maker, but it is on them to provide an alternate explanation for themselves. If they are comfortable in not knowing, or not caring, then they are closer to agnostic than atheist.
Agnosticism I consider a perfectly logical stance to take in Thedas, cause I do agree with you that the Maker according the Chantry, yeah, he's kind of a dick.
@Ieldra2: While I do believe the greatest forms of self-control are connected to traditionally held values of moral virtue (having no bearing on whether or not they are spiritually moral)... I did include Tevinter as a model of self-control and I certainly consider them among the most vile groups to exist on Thedas (from what I have managed to extrapolate from games/books/etc.)
I am not telling you what you think, but may I suggest that - being a sensitive topic to you - you may sometimes see assertions of moral authority where there are none?
I will still assert that no matter how much people on the boards want to believe it, Bioware is making a very clear state that magic IS corrupting. That does not mean it is morally wrong, it does not mean that everyone who has magic is corrupted... it means, that a mage must take extra vigilance against forces arrayed against them that will corrupt their mind, body, spirit.
You can be morally corrupt, sure (my opinion - blood magic). But being an abomination is corruption of the body. Being possessed is corruption of the spirit. And it is a fact on Thedas that mages are more appealing to demons.
We could argue about the "ideal" state of a thing... but I'll just try to appeal to a "base line" of a thing. A mortal is not born an abomination... an abomination comes from a change - and a demon sees it as ascendance (vs. corruption). However - if you would not want to become an abomination - then the exercise of arguing whether%
I wouldn't mind it outright, but it really depends on what kind of story develops. After all, if a character professes belief in the Maker, a vision of Andraste in the Fade would be a pretty compelling reinforcement of their faith. It would take something pretty powerful to lead to a loss of faith after that kind of experience. Though you could argue that seeing Andraste away from the Maker's side is in of itself contradictory of Chantry tradition, which states that she is with HIm. But that argument is a little weak.
It depends. The Imperial Chantry, for example, teaches that many mages converted because they had encountered Andraste's spirit in the Fade. In fact, there's a feast day for the "Visitations", celebrating "the appearance of Blessed Andraste in dreams to many mages as she crossed the Fade."
It would be incredibly unexpected that a game set in the craddle of power of the Orlesian Chantry proved the Imperial Chantry's version to be correct.
While I agree about the merit of such a setup - I think any system for educating mages, however much it benefits those willing to learn, will have to retain the possiblity of draconian measures for those who can't learn to control their power - there would've been little chance of the Chantry creating it, given that one of their primary tenets is that magic is a corrupting influence in the world (quote from WoT I).
Also while I agree that learning self-control is paramount for mages, even more so than for a non-mage, the way you've phrased it you appear to think self-control is tied to morality in some way. Which isn't completely true. Self-control may be a prerequisite for temperance, which is a cardinal virtue for a reason, but you can go about doing evil in a very controlled manner, and those who do so are usually much more dangerous than those who can't keep their passions in check.
Just using you as an example, Ieldra, because you reminded me of something, not because you necessarily feel this way:
It is interesting how, over in the 'Why the hate on Andraste', thread, we see a lot of "I don't hate her, just the religion", yet if the Maker were somehow proven real, He wouldn't be given a similar benefit of the doubt. Recall that all we know about Him is filtered through the lens of an organization many people claim to hate, just as many people claim Andraste's teachings may be.
She gets a pass, because it's the Chantry's fault, but He doesn't? Seems a bit of a double standard.
So you think I should ask first whether the stories told about him are true? Fair enough, but I think the difference is that if you were to meet the Maker, he would inevitably be several orders of magnitude more powerful and knowledgeable than you, while Andraste would be more on your human level. I think being more wary of the powerful is reasonable to a point, but yeah, I should hear him out first.Just using you as an example, Ieldra, because you reminded me of something, not because you necessarily feel this way:
It is interesting how, over in the 'Why the hate on Andraste', thread, we see a lot of "I don't hate her, just the religion", yet if the Maker were somehow proven real, He wouldn't be given a similar benefit of the doubt. Recall that all we know about Him is filtered through the lens of an organization many people claim to hate, just as many people claim Andraste's teachings may be.
She gets a pass, because it's the Chantry's fault, but He doesn't? Seems a bit of a double standard.
So you think I should ask first whether the stories told about him are true? Fair enough, but I think the difference is that if you were to meet the Maker, he would inevitably be several orders of magnitude more powerful and knowledgeable than you, while Andraste would be more on your human level. I think being more wary of the powerful is reasonable to a point, but yeah, I should hear him out first.
Assuming she IS in fact a normal human, which I kind of find slightly implausible
So you think I should ask first whether the stories told about him are true? Fair enough, but I think the difference is that if you were to meet the Maker, he would inevitably be several orders of magnitude more powerful and knowledgeable than you, while Andraste would be more on your human level. I think being more wary of the powerful is reasonable to a point, but yeah, I should hear him out first.
Personally I've always been fond of the idea of the "Maker" as more of a watchmaker god. No moral judgements, no shunning of mankind, just interested observation.
I will still assert that no matter how much people on the boards want to believe it, Bioware is making a very clear state that magic IS corrupting.
Oh goddess. You're taking it too literally and still don't get the whole point.
Power is corrupting. Always. But there's many other powerful people out there, be they 'just' nobles,city guards, templars, crows or anything. Once a man think he's above the others and he can actually do something about it, he's dangerous. Period. All that corruption lies in the nature of men, not in the freaking magic, magic here is just a tool like anything else.
Retour en haut
