494 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

I still don't see why the visual representation of our PC needs to conform to the lore if we don't want it to.

I think they should let us go tattooless (or even better, use any race's tattoos) and have the game just ignore it.

[Icy Magebane]

I still don't see why the visual representation of our PC needs to conform to the lore if we don't want it to.

I think they should let us go tattooless (or even better, use any race's tattoos) and have the game just ignore it.

If you choose to ignore the reasons that have been given, what more can people say?  Just mod the game when it comes out... you're going to do that anyway if it's possible, so what's the point of ignoring lore in the base game?  The background story does not support tattooless Dalish elves or Dalish with actual tattoos instead of blood writing.  I don't know how much simpler this can be said.

[Lady Luminous]

I still don't see why the visual representation of our PC needs to conform to the lore if we don't want it to.

I think they should let us go tattooless (or even better, use any race's tattoos) and have the game just ignore it.

 

Doesn't that break immersion, having the game ignore lore? 

 

I'd rather not get my way 100% of the time and have a cohesive world. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Doesn't that break immersion, having the game ignore lore?

I'd rather not get my way 100% of the time and have a cohesive world.

Me too. I agree that would break immersion, and I certainly wouldn't do it for any playthrough in which I was the least bit interested in roleplaying.

But some players aren't, and this seems like a remarkably low-effort feature. The faces don't have the tattoos baked into them, I'd bet. So simply not having one, or letting us set the transparency to 100%, grants thr players more options.

They might not be options you want, and they might not be options I want, but somebody wants them.

They're going out of their way to force the tattoos on Dalish PCs.

[Lady Luminous]

Me too. I agree that would break immersion, and I certainly wouldn't do it for any playthrough in which I was the least bit interested in roleplaying.

But some players aren't, and this seems like a remarkably low-effort feature. The faces don't have the tattoos baked into them, I'd bet. So simply not having one, or letting us set the transparency to 100%, grants thr players more options.

They might not be options you want, and they might not be options I want, but somebody wants them.

They're going out of their way to force the tattoos on Dalish PCs.

I do find it odd that the CC is enforcing some things and not others. Like you can be a hornless qunari but not a tatless elf?

 

It should be one or the other. Full enforcement or null enforcement. 

[drummerchick]

I do find it odd that the CC is enforcing some things and not others. Like you can be a hornless qunari but not a tatless elf?

 

It should be one or the other. Full enforcement or null enforcement. 

Except hornless qunari are supported by the lore.


Edit: I don't really "get" the lore reasons behind the hornless qunari, though. I think having horns would be More intimidating, but maybe that's because I'm a puny human? 

[Lady Luminous]

Except hornless qunari are supported by the lore.


Edit: I don't really "get" the lore reasons behind the hornless qunari, though. I think having horns would be More intimidating, but maybe that's because I'm a puny human? 

 

It's supported by the lore, but as far as I can speculate, no one is going to comment on your state of hornlessness in game. So, I think it's sort of silly to allow. 

 

I definitely think that horns are intimidating. A hornless qunari is basically born with one less available weapon! 

[Majestic Jazz]

I don't like this, personally. I think it would be a cool thing to show that your Inquisitor is a bit of a rebel. "I don't need to put some blood writing on my face to prove I can handle myself."

 

So basically you want to be a City Elf? Someone who rejects tradition to fit into the shem world?

[The Elder King]

It's supported by the lore, but as far as I can speculate, no one is going to comment on your state of hornlessness in game. So, I think it's sort of silly to allow. 
 
I definitely think that horns are intimidating. A hornless qunari is basically born with one less available weapon!

We don't know if it won't be commented in the game (more by qunari then others).

[Icy Magebane]

It's supported by the lore, but as far as I can speculate, no one is going to comment on your state of hornlessness in game. So, I think it's sort of silly to allow. 

 

I definitely think that horns are intimidating. A hornless qunari is basically born with one less available weapon! 

A qunari is pretty easy to spot whether they have horns or not...    A "Dalish" elf, on the other hand, would appear to be no different from any elf without the cultural marker that is vallaslin.  So if an NPC assumes that an elf is Dalish, there should be some reason for them to come to that conclusion... otherwise it would just be "elf this and elf that."

[Sylvius the Mad]

A qunari is pretty easy to spot whether they have horns or not... A "Dalish" elf, on the other hand, would appear to be no different from any elf without the cultural marker that is vallaslin. So if an NPC assumes that an elf is Dalish, there should be some reason for them to come to that conclusion... otherwise it would just be "elf this and elf that."

Yes, it would require some handwaving on the part of the player.

But if the player is willing to do that, why not let him?

[Lady Luminous]

We don't know if it won't be commented in the game (more by qunari then others).

I hope it'll be commented on, but I doubt it unless they've put some sort of flag in the CC to say "Wait! This qunari has no horns!"

 

Otherwise it would be like someone commenting that your PC has brown hair or green eyes, which would basically never happen. 

[Icy Magebane]

Yes, it would require some handwaving on the part of the player.

But if the player is willing to do that, why not let him?

A competent writer does not unnecessarily introduce characters into a story whose mere existence violates lore.  Sometimes this is unintended, unavoidable, or merely the byproduct of sloppy writing, but it is unreasonable to expect a skilled writer or game designer to knowingly include CC options that break their own lore.  If the writers had intended for an immature, weak, openly rebellious, and/or irresponsible Dalish elf to be a possible protagonist, they could just as easily have written the background to accommodate this.  The story as written, combined with mandatory vallaslin indicates that they have a plan in mind and that they expect us to work with or around this during character creation.

 

Tbh, it seems very odd that you insist on arguing in favor of a weaker narrative and intentionally broken lore.  If it matters that much to you, don't choose Dalish elf or mod the game.  I see no reason for the game to be designed the way you are suggesting... do you have one, or are you simply interested in asking the question?  I'm not hearing much in the way of justification for this, aside from a vague allusion to the player's "right" to unlimited freedom.

[Jessihatt]

At first, I was pretty pooped Dalish tattoos were compulsory,

However, I've come around to the idea and I'm actually quite looking forward to choosing one (I hope we get explanations somewhere for each tattoo a few days before the game).

I still would have preferred to be a City Elf, and despite the tattoo and being a First (or apprentice) I'm gonna role play as rejecting most Dalish culture and embracing Andraste (well if that spirit that marks us convinces me of her anyway).

I do think it makes sense for us to have a tattoo.

[Sylvius the Mad]

A competent writer does not unnecessarily introduce characters into a story whose mere existence violates lore.

I would agree. Therefore, any player who creates a character that appears to violate lore either has sufficient justification to satisfy himself, or is an incompetent writer.

But I don't see why that matters. Why can't players do things the writers won't?

Sometimes this is unintended, unavoidable, or merely the byproduct of sloppy writing, but it is unreasonable to expect a skilled writer or game designer to knowingly include CC options that break their own lore.

Okay, there I disagree. Are you assuming that every option provided in the CC should be supported by the writers?

Because I'm not assuming that. This is likely why we're reaching different conclusions.

If the writers had intended for an immature, weak, openly rebellious, and/or irresponsible Dalish elf to be a possible protagonist, they could just as easily have written the background to accommodate this. The story as written, combined with mandatory vallaslin indicates that they have a plan in mind and that they expect us to work with or around this during character creation.

They can expect it without forcing it on us.

If the writers wrote the game such that the vallaslin are important, then a player choosing not to have them could well break the game, yes.

But why don't we let players break the game if they want?

Tbh, it seems very odd that you insist on arguing in favor of a weaker narrative and intentionally broken lore.

I'm only arguing in favour of it being an option. The lore would only break or the narrative be made weaker if the player chose to make that so.

There's no cost to those of us who want to maintain the lore.

If it matters that much to you, don't choose Dalish elf or mod the game. I see no reason for the game to be designed the way you are suggesting... do you have one, or are you simply interested in asking the question? I'm not hearing much in the way of justification for this, aside from a vague allusion to the player's "right" to unlimited freedom.

I'm not claiming any such right. I just like the game to be inclusive of different playstyles. That, I think, should be a core design goal.

I find the idea of protecting the player from himself paternalistic, and vaguely offensive.

[Icy Magebane]

Okay, there I disagree. Are you assuming that every option provided in the CC should be supported by the writers?

Because I'm not assuming that. This is likely why we're reaching different conclusions.

Edit:  Yeah, my mistake... I missed the word "should," which is the cornerstone of this entire point.  Yeah, I guess we just disagree on this one.  If the writers don't think that humans should have blue skin, then that should not be an option during character creation... again, we seem to disagree on the value of restrictions and when it is appropriate for them to be applied...

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 26 août 2014 - 05:40 .

[Chari]

The adult Dalish has a vallaslin like she/he is supposed to
Thank God, Creators and everything beyond the Fade for finally sticking to the lore

[BloodyTalon]

I am hioubg that the blood writing is sticking around, wouldn't be a dalish without a tattoo well at0least not considered an adult one.


I just hope the designs are very well one done and range from small ones to full face ones.

Also for some reason the coming of age tattoos and their meanings and such sort of remind me of some irl cultures that are very unique and some no longer exist sadly, so its a good choice for the dalish.

[Icy Magebane]

If the writers wrote the game such that the vallaslin are important, then a player choosing not to have them could well break the game, yes.

But why don't we let players break the game if they want?
I'm only arguing in favour of it being an option. The lore would only break or the narrative be made weaker if the player chose to make that so.

There's no cost to those of us who want to maintain the lore.

The option itself doesn't seem important when the result would be a lore inconsistency where one previously did not exist and the otherwise inexplicable recognition of the PC as Dalish by NPCs.  Any number of design decisions can be made based on a simple cost/benefit analysis, and this is likely the rationale behind both retcons and the strict adherence to lore.  Although we as consumers often ask "why can't we," the more important question to the developer is most likely, "why should we."  There are a lot of things we may want to see added to this or any other game, but that doesn't mean that such ideas are always beneficial to the final product.  Since nothing would be gained by providing the option to violate lore, it was probably decided that this is something best left to save editors and mods.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I only keep going on about it because it seems such a low-cost feature.

It seems as though the designers think that their vision is objectively better than each player's vision (where those visions differ). But I think the mistake there is thinking that there can be an objective standard at all.

[drummerchick]

It seems as though the designers think that their vision is objectively better than each player's vision (where those visions differ). But I think the mistake there is thinking that there can be an objective standard at all.

But... it's their game. It's their product, their work.   
 

[In Exile]

I only keep going on about it because it seems such a low-cost feature.

It seems as though the designers think that their vision is objectively better than each player's vision (where those visions differ). But I think the mistake there is thinking that there can be an objective standard at all.

I don't think it's a value judgement. I think rather than there is no design goal to support any vision of the player. Bioware has always offered a price fixed menu of options, going back to BG1 (recall how in vanilla BG you would get a preset background description depending on your class?).

[Lady Luminous]

I only keep going on about it because it seems such a low-cost feature.

It seems as though the designers think that their vision is objectively better than each player's vision (where those visions differ). But I think the mistake there is thinking that there can be an objective standard at all.

 

I honestly think their vision is the correct one. Their product, their story, their lore. I mean, if people don't like the way BioWare does things, they have so many other games to play that will let you CC your character however you want. 

 

Also, unless you've actually worked on a team creating a game like this, you have no idea what the cost breakdown is. 

[Chari]

Guys, guys
I get it that you love your head canons. But the developers have no obligation to pander to such headcanons. Any headcanons
Their only "obligation" is to make a game and give you choice. Obviously there will be limits. There has to be. For story sake. The only problem is when these limitation include unfair exclusion of gender, race, sexuality, religious, political point of view etc (and only if the story itself isn't about one unique character).
It is up to you how to play with these limitations. Canon story is always more important than any headcanons ever

[In Exile]

Go back far enough in time and i dare say you would have had a hard time with the rest of the community for refusing the rite of passage. Basically all human societies have had a time when it was like that: conform to the cultural norm or take a hike. Anyone expecting a nomadic hunter-gatherer society to be some liberal utopia is deluding themselves. It's a harsh life where all members are required to contribute and internal division spells doom for the whole community.
As for the tattoos....adulthood has allways been decided culturally. In our modern society the culture favors the letter of the law. Go back a couple of centuries and the line was a lot more murky. Go back some more and you have all sorts of coming-of-age rituals. So like many have said before: No tattoos= not an adult in dalish culture.No exceptions.

Of course in the ancient past, tribes were absolutely vicious with dissent. There are studies that suggest some tribes had murder rates in the 10-20% range too.

The point is that today, we look to those groups as being essentially morally bankrupt. Bioware games clearly import a great deal of 21st century moral principles in their games: basic ideas about nationhood and equality are an undeniable fabric of the game.

Turning the Dalish into xenophobic bigots - which their lore already worringly suggests they are - basically creates a huge problem for their setting because it otherwise operates on 21st century morality.