63 réponses à ce sujet

[hellbiter88]

Pete's Dragon is the one we need

Spoiler

Pretty much a total conflict stopper, there.

[Amaya_redfern]

I think we oughta just bring in all the dragons from Dragon Tales.

[Revan Reborn]

I agree - taming a dragon is too similar to Skyrim and quite a forced concept in a game called Dragon Age. However, as you have brought up that dragons are highly intelligent, it would be interesting if this 'tamed' dragon is befriended through a quest chain and ends up helping here and there throughout other story areas, kind of like a temporary companion - and potentially the dragon we see 'fighting for' the Inquisitor in the trailers (if it turns out to be a placeholder for the trailers (like the Inquisitor in them is) and not Flemeth).

...Also, befriending a dragon would be cool, just ask this one:


Though if we get the choice, I would definitely pick this one (especially for my ice-wielding mage):

I'm all for an alliance or some sort of mutual goal (assuming its not Flemeth or Morrigan). I'm just not interested in having a dragon as a pet. That just spits on the franchise and disrespects the source material. I expect better from BioWare than that. Next people will be begging for dragon mounts like Skyrim... *shivers*

[hellbiter88]

oooooooo!!!! draaagon mounts!!! ^.^

[Revan Reborn]

oooooooo!!!! draaagon mounts!!! ^.^

I said too much... This escalated quickly... BioWare, you may as well just close these forums for a few months. It's for your own good and sanity.

[DinX64]

I think befriend a high dragon  or a mutual partnership with a high dragon is a better term than 'tame' a high dragon.

 

They shouldn't bend to the will of a mortal, but will assist the Inquisitor due to their mark.

 

dragon mount. No

wyvern mount. yes

[PapaSmurfer]

I'm all for an alliance or some sort of mutual goal (assuming its not Flemeth or Morrigan). I'm just not interested in having a dragon as a pet. That just spits on the franchise and disrespects the source material. I expect better from BioWare than that. Next people will be begging for dragon mounts like Skyrim... *shivers*

 

I mean, if they figured out a way to make it work lore-wise, I would not complain. If it seems clunky, then I totally agree with you. Still, though, I think we can all agree that dragons are the opposite of lame. I would probably do some pretty weird things to get a pet dragon - or a tame dragon or whatever.

[Palidane]

I'd take Griffons over Dragons any day. Feathers trump scales!

[PapaSmurfer]

Blasphemy.

[DinX64]

I'd take Griffons over Dragons any day. Feathers trump scales!

I take both. Strength in numbers!

[mikeymoonshine]

 

First, dragons are a highly advanced, intelligent, and rare species. The most powerful ones, known as the "Old Gods," were even worshiped by the inhabitants of Thedas pre-Andraste. The last thing we need is the supposed "Herald of Andraste" using a dragon as a pet to play Pokemon battles.

 

DA dragons are not highly intelligent and the old gods were not simply the most powerful dragons.

[Osena109]

We need puff the magic dragon  up in this piece 

[Revan Reborn]

DA dragons are not highly intelligent and the old gods were not simply the most powerful dragons.

Okay...? A lot of assertions but no links or evidence to support your claims. You don't make a very convincing argument.

 

How are dragons, in particular high dragons, not intelligent? Why are the Old Gods not "simply the most powerful dragons"?

 

Archdemons seemed extremely intelligent and were clearly powerful, and were able to command the forces of the Dark Spawn to bend to their will. It's also common knowledge that not anyone could slay a dragon for obvious reasons. Archdemons can only be slain by Wardens. Regular high dragons are also very challenging and require true heroes to meet the challenge.

 

Also, if I had to guess what the "Elder One" is, I'd bet all the coins in Thedas he is a dragon. The reason I say this is because Dragon Age is largely inspired by Dungeons and Dragons, of which BioWare admitted to using heavily to build the world of Dragon Age. Just in case you don't know anything about that game, dragons are extremely intelligent. Dragons are also intelligent in LOTR, they are intelligent in TES, I really don't know a lot of games where dragons aren't intelligent.

 

However, I may change my views if you actually make a credible and well-considered argument (with evidence of course). Otherwise, I'll just have to assume you don't know what you are talking about. Nothing personal.

[Todd23]

I want a dracolich (undead dragon)!

[Todd23]

I'm all for an alliance or some sort of mutual goal (assuming its not Flemeth or Morrigan). I'm just not interested in having a dragon as a pet. That just spits on the franchise and disrespects the source material. I expect better from BioWare than that. Next people will be begging for dragon mounts like Skyrim... *shivers*

Straying from what inspired Dragon Age is a good thing, and makes the series more its own. Dragon taming is no way against the lure of Dragon Age, all we've known so far is that they are at least somewhat endangered and seemed to be extinct because of a family that hunted them (the Pentaghasts). We've even seen signs of dragons being able to be tamed in awakening, in the silveright mines, we find a darkspawn (it didn't even seem to be awakened) who was taming young dragons.

[X Equestris]

Okay...? A lot of assertions but no links or evidence to support your claims. You don't make a very convincing argument.
 
How are dragons, in particular high dragons, not intelligent? Why are the Old Gods not "simply the most powerful dragons"?
 
Archdemons seemed extremely intelligent and were clearly powerful, and were able to command the forces of the Dark Spawn to bend to their will. It's also common knowledge that not anyone could slay a dragon for obvious reasons. Archdemons can only be slain by Wardens. Regular high dragons are also very challenging and require true heroes to meet the challenge.
 
Also, if I had to guess what the "Elder One" is, I'd bet all the coins in Thedas he is a dragon. The reason I say this is because Dragon Age is largely inspired by Dungeons and Dragons, of which BioWare admitted to using heavily to build the world of Dragon Age. Just in case you don't know anything about that game, dragons are extremely intelligent. Dragons are also intelligent in LOTR, they are intelligent in TES, I really don't know a lot of games where dragons aren't intelligent.
 
However, I may change my views if you actually make a credible and well-considered argument (with evidence of course). Otherwise, I'll just have to assume you don't know what you are talking about. Nothing personal.

DA dragons don't have human level intelligence. They are animals, cunning animals, but animals nonetheless.

[Revan Reborn]

Straying from what inspired Dragon Age is a good thing, and makes the series more its own. Dragon taming is no way against the lure of Dragon Age, all we've known so far is that they are at least somewhat endangered and seemed to be extinct because of a family that hunted them (the Pentaghasts). We've even seen signs of dragons being able to be tamed in awakening, in the silveright mines, we find a darkspawn (it didn't even seem to be awakened) who was taming young dragons.

So straying from what inspired Dragon Age into something else that is clearly inspiring Dragon Age? That sounds like an identity crisis to me. Unless BioWare has an incredibly well-thought explanation for "dragon taming," I don't see how that adds to the franchise. I wouldn't look too far into the conveniently placed dragonlings, as they were mainly for the materials to craft rare gear.

 

DA dragons don't have human level intelligence. They are animals, cunning animals, but animals nonetheless.

I find this answer unconvincing. "Intelligence" is a very subjective term. How do you explain the Archdemon leading armies? Even the Wardens are not immune to "the call." I also wouldn't hold "human intelligence" as the pinnacle of success, as most humans typically lack intelligence or common sense.

[CENIC]

From the currently established lore (including tangential media like the comics, anime and novels) I always got the impression that in ancient times dragons were sapient. In the Dragon Age though, they are animals. For some reason I remember an official statement that their intelligence is on par with Earth dolphins? So they are fairly intelligent animals, but still animals.

Nailing down whether or not Old Gods and Archdemons are dragons, however (as well as whether or not Old Gods and Archdemons are themselves related in anything other than name) is still impossible. It's one of the game's many lore mysteries, and may be one we're never given a clear answer to.

[mikeymoonshine]

Okay...? A lot of assertions but no links or evidence to support your claims. You don't make a very convincing argument.

 

How are dragons, in particular high dragons, not intelligent? Why are the Old Gods not "simply the most powerful dragons"?

 

One assertion actually, you are the one making "a lot of assertions" and It wasn't an argument. It's been stated by the devs before. I didn't post a link because I couldn't find where it was said, i'll post it if I find it. Their intelligence was compared to an animal like a dog or something. You can feel free to not believe that i guess but you didn't post a link for your " highly advanced, intelligent" assertion either. 

 

I didn't say they weren't intelligent, I said they weren't highly intelligent. Nobody really knows what the old gods are but they are certainly different to high dragons. 

Archdemons seemed extremely intelligent and were clearly powerful, and were able to command the forces of the Dark Spawn to bend to their will. It's also common knowledge that not anyone could slay a dragon for obvious reasons. Archdemons can only be slain by Wardens. Regular high dragons are also very challenging and require true heroes to meet the challenge.

 

Archdemons can be slain by non wardens, the problem is their soul would not die if that happened. We don't know if that is because of the taint or something to do with them being old gods but that doesn't happen with high dragons so I don't know how that is evidence for your claims. 

Also, if I had to guess what the "Elder One" is, I'd bet all the coins in Thedas he is a dragon. The reason I say this is because Dragon Age is largely inspired by Dungeons and Dragons, of which BioWare admitted to using heavily to build the world of Dragon Age. Just in case you don't know anything about that game, dragons are extremely intelligent. Dragons are also intelligent in LOTR, they are intelligent in TES, I really don't know a lot of games where dragons aren't intelligent.

 

Well the elder one could be a Great Dragons I guess, or even an old god. If they are not just the same thing. I'm not saying dragons aren't intelligent. I am saying they aren't super intelligent, apart from great dragons maybe. 

[mikeymoonshine]

So I couldn't find a link to the dev comment I was thinking of but the codex entry on dragon cults goes into dragon and high dragon intelligence a bit. I'll quote the relevant parts. 

 

 

Let us suggest, for the moment, that a high dragon is simply an animal. A cunning animal, to be sure, but in possession of no true self-awareness or sentience. There has not, after all, been a single recorded case of a dragon attempting to communicate or performing any act that could not likewise be attributed to a clever beast.

 

How, then, does one explain the existence of so-called "dragon cults" throughout history?

 

 

Members of a dragon cult live in the same lair as a high dragon, nurturing and protecting its defenseless young. In exchange, the high dragon seem to permit those cultists to kill a small number of those young in order to feast on draconic blood

 

but how did the symbiotic relationship between the cult and the high dragon form in the first place? How did the cultists know to drink the dragon's blood? How did the high dragon convince them to care for its young, or know that they would?

 

Is there more to draconic intelligence than we have heretofore guessed at?

 

http://dragonage.wik...y:_Dragon_Cults

So, high dragons are intelligent enough to have a symbiotic relationship with dragon cultists (as we already know). Their full intelligence is not known but they are presumed to be of animal like intelligence because of the way they behave. 

[Revan Reborn]

So I couldn't find a link to the dev comment I was thinking of but the codex entry on dragon cults goes into dragon and high dragon intelligence a bit. I'll quote the relevant parts. 

 

 

http://dragonage.wik...y:_Dragon_Cults

So, high dragons are intelligent enough to have a symbiotic relationship with dragon cultists (as we already know). Their full intelligence is not known but they are presumed to be of animal like intelligence because of the way they behave. 

Essentially the answer is nobody knows the extent of their "intelligence." Which means my "many assertions" aren't wrong at all, because BioWare is inconclusive about them. It seems the judgment of their intelligence is based purely on hearsay and observation. Nothing actually grounding in evidence to support they aren't "highly intelligent."

[Revan Reborn]

One assertion actually, you are the one making "a lot of assertions" and It wasn't an argument. It's been stated by the devs before. I didn't post a link because I couldn't find where it was said, i'll post it if I find it. Their intelligence was compared to an animal like a dog or something. You can feel free to not believe that i guess but you didn't post a link for your " highly advanced, intelligent" assertion either. 

 

I didn't say they weren't intelligent, I said they weren't highly intelligent. Nobody really knows what the old gods are but they are certainly different to high dragons. 

 

Archdemons can be slain by non wardens, the problem is their soul would not die if that happened. We don't know if that is because of the taint or something to do with them being old gods but that doesn't happen with high dragons so I don't know how that is evidence for your claims. 

 

Well the elder one could be a Great Dragons I guess, or even an old god. If they are not just the same thing. I'm not saying dragons aren't intelligent. I am saying they aren't super intelligent, apart from great dragons maybe. 

You already discussed the extent of their intelligence is inconclusive.

 

Well if the stories about the Blight and the Maker's castle being corrupted are to be true, Archdemons are Old Gods corrupted by the taint. While technically anyone can "slay" a dragon, only a warden can "kill" it. The taint plays a role somehow otherwise the wardens wouldn't be needed for the job.

 

As far as I'm aware, Great Dragons and Old Gods are synonymous. I'd be surprised if the Elder One isn't an Old God that has not been corrupted by the taint. We'll have to wait and see though.

[The Night Haunter]

Personally I think High Dragons are more animal than intelligent. Far more intelligent than even Mabari's but still animal level intelligence. Old Gods on the other hand might only be superficially dragons and thus could be far more intelligent. The whole thing remains ambiguous though, but I suspect we will actually learn quite a bit about dragons in DAI, Silent Grove had an interesting story line and that should tie pretty closely into DAI's plot (since it included Varric and Alistair, and Flemeth's Daughters).

[mikeymoonshine]

Essentially the answer is nobody knows the extent of their "intelligence." Which means my "many assertions" aren't wrong at all, because BioWare is inconclusive about them. It seems the judgment of their intelligence is based purely on hearsay and observation. Nothing actually grounding in evidence to support they aren't "highly intelligent."

 

No there is evidence to support the claim that they aren't highly intelligent. Observation is pretty much the main way of collecting evidence it's just not proof that they aren't. The fact that they have a complicated relationship with humans does not mean they are highly intelligent, there are plenty of animals that have symbiotic relationships and there are several species animal that  form relationships with humans. These animals generally aren't viewed as highly intelligent though.

 

So your assertion was wrong because you asserted they were without evidence. 

Well if the stories about the Blight and the Maker's castle being corrupted are to be true, Archdemons are Old Gods corrupted by the taint. While technically anyone can "slay" a dragon, only a warden can "kill" it. The taint plays a role somehow otherwise the wardens wouldn't be needed for the job.

 

Again you are implying that a dragon is pretty much the same thing as an old god. Archdemons cannot truly be killed unless a warden kills them. Dragons can be killed by a non warden and as far as we know they stay dead. Dragons have mortal lives, we don't know if the same can be said of the old gods but somehow i doubt it. 

 

Soul jumping is not exclusive to archdemons. It is entirely possible that a non tainted old god soul could still find another host if it was killed. We just can't be sure if they can do that or how that would work. The taint means that an archdemon soul can only jump to a tainted host and somehow if a warden kills that archdemon he/she becomes that host but instead of becoming a new archdemon both the warden and the soul will die. 

As far as I'm aware, Great Dragons and Old Gods are synonymous. I'd be surprised if the Elder One isn't an Old God that has not been corrupted by the taint. We'll have to wait and see though.

 

As I said already it is possible that the old gods were just these great dragons but we don't actually know if this is true or not, we also don't know much at all about great dragons. 

[efd731]

I seriously hope we CANNOT tame a dragon. That would be terrible for Dragon Age for multiple reasons:

 

First, dragons are a highly advanced, intelligent, and rare species. The most powerful ones, known as the "Old Gods," were even worshiped by the inhabitants of Thedas pre-Andraste. The last thing we need is the supposed "Herald of Andraste" using a dragon as a pet to play Pokemon battles.

 

Second, there was another, perhaps unknown, fantasy RPG that came out not too long ago that had lots of dragons and you could even call upon a few to aid you in combat. It went by the title of Skyrim I believe? Anyways, BioWare should really try to separate itself from other franchises as much as possible. "Taming" dragons in Skyrim at least made a bit of sense since you were Dragonborn. Why would the Inquisitor have the capacity to tame a dragon?

 

Third, I don't even see how BioWare could justify this from a gameplay standpoint. Honestly, while a dragon (as depicted in that trailer) may come to the Inquisitor's aid, it's likely fighting of its own volition. I doubt I'm the only one who'd like to keep the Skyrim out of DAI as much as possible. The game already copied enough from Skyrim as it is, for better or for worse.

if i could post images, you would be getting the "you are dumb fo real" antione dodson one. catergorically why you are wrong; 1) dragons aren't advanced in the slightest why would you think that? 2)they're about as intelligent/maybe slightly more so than your average mabari(confirmed by devs). 3) rarity doesnt stop us from killing a few every game, if we can kill it we can beat it into submission. 4) no one knows what the old gods actually were. 5)the amount of overlap in RPG genres is simultaneously ridiculous and expected. there is any number of ways that the game could 'justify' a tamed dragon, and a "dont be lyk skyrimz" comment on your part is nothing more than an unsubstantiated opinion, do not attempt to make it appear anything but.