I'm playing this game now because I want to catch up on the lore for DAI.
Got a question - whats the point of killing Hawkes mother? Is it a cheap way to create conflict about mages? I mean, why? Doesn't even fit in the story. And Hawke doesn't seem to upset about it. And his uncle - ok his reaction was ok - but his statement "I'll tell your sister"? Are you kidding me?
I was like WTF? Where'd this come from?
Yes it was. To inflame and prejudice the player against Circle mages without regard for context. And against Orsino with his contrived connection to Quentin via a letter without context that honestly feels OOC for Orsino.
I'm playing this game now because I want to catch up on the lore for DAI.
Got a question - whats the point of killing Hawkes mother? Is it a cheap way to create conflict about mages? I mean, why? Doesn't even fit in the story. And Hawke doesn't seem to upset about it. And his uncle - ok his reaction was ok - but his statement "I'll tell your sister"? Are you kidding me?
I was like WTF? Where'd this come from?
The idea of Dragon Age II was to show the worst of both sides. Meredith and Alrik show the worst of how the Templar Order's power can be abused, and Quentin and Tarohne show what the mages can do if they aren't watched by someone. Then we have Anders and Orsino, who show exactly what the Templar abuses lead people to do. Finally, Cullen and Alain round this portrayal out by showing that there are semi-reasonable people on both sides.
I'm playing this game now because I want to catch up on the lore for DAI.
Got a question - whats the point of killing Hawkes mother? Is it a cheap way to create conflict about mages? I mean, why? Doesn't even fit in the story. And Hawke doesn't seem to upset about it. And his uncle - ok his reaction was ok - but his statement "I'll tell your sister"? Are you kidding me?
I was like WTF? Where'd this come from?
I don't agree that it was just a cheap means of creating conflict. Hawke's personal story is being told as well as that of Kirkwall's ruin, and part of that story involves the loss of most, if not their entire, family. It's simply the story that the writers wanted to tell, is all.
Also, I don't agree at all that Hawke doesn't seem too upset about it. People react to loss in different ways and I thought it was conveyed well enough that Hawke was plenty upset.
It can also add in a nice little conundrum about whether Hawke would actually turn to blood magic if it was necessary to save their mother.
Kinda. I mean, the fact that the choice is easily missed, and that you don't save her even if you do use it do undermine the dilemma.
I don't agree that it was just a cheap means of creating conflict. Hawke's personal story is being told as well as that of Kirkwall's ruin, and part of that story involves the most of most, if not their entire, family. It's simply the story that the writers wanted to tell, is all.
Also, I don't agree at all that Hawke doesn't seem too upset about it. People react to loss in different ways and I thought it was conveyed well enough that Hawke was plenty upset.
I would however say the potential for Leandra's death was poorly handled, in the grand scheme of things. Not a cheap means to create conflict, but definitely something Bioware could've worked with better.
As for how Hawke reacts, that's one of the beauties of the tonal dialogue. You can headcanon Hawke became a sad clown afterwards... or is so filled with anger and resentment (at himself/herself and the world) that he/she lashes out at people, or just wants to be a good person afterwards.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
The idea of Dragon Age II was to show the worst of both sides. Meredith and Alrik show the worst of how the Templar Order's power can be abused, and Quentin and Tarohne show what the mages can do if they aren't watched by someone. Then we have Anders and Orsino, who show exactly what the Templar abuses lead people to do. Finally, Cullen and Alain round this portrayal out by showing that there are semi-reasonable people on both sides.
I got the best part of that message from my companions alone. I didn't need to be hit over the head constantly with it from the whole city. All of companion's personal stories and attitudes were done well (Fenris, Anders, Merrill), but I hated the insanity of Kirkwall itself. It got to be too much. I liked Kirkwall when dealing with the criminal underworld, playing the part of a lowly refugee, kicking Qunari ass, etc.. There should've been a little more of that to round it out. Like more crime or raider quests with Isabela, for example. There's too much damn magic in Kirkwall.
Perhaps the best side story however is Thrask and Grace, and how that eventually became a mess. The message behind it was sad, but wasn't too ridiculous... How all of those mages and templars finally worked together, only to have you and Grace sabotage it in the end. lol
edit: Sorry if I'm getting too off-topic. If Leandra had to die, I wish it hadn't been so senseless.
I'm playing this game now because I want to catch up on the lore for DAI.
Got a question - whats the point of killing Hawkes mother? Is it a cheap way to create conflict about mages? I mean, why? Doesn't even fit in the story. And Hawke doesn't seem to upset about it. And his uncle - ok his reaction was ok - but his statement "I'll tell your sister"? Are you kidding me?
I was like WTF? Where'd this come from?
1. To create an emotional effect. Someone has to die to make the story a bit more realistic.
2. No IMO it didn't create conflict about the mages... although I can understand from a pro templar stand of point that mages are proven to be extremely dangerous.
3. Without sadness a story is not a story. Of course it fits in the story. the mage who killed your hawks mother was also close to the First enchanter.
4. Hawke seem pretty upset to me. Sitting on the chair staring at the fire as it burns the logs... having "alone" time. Yeah Hawke is grieving for the loss of his/her mother. Even the uncle seem emotional over the death of his sister.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
The problem there is that Quentin isn't even representative of mages. Why get mad at mages because of him? He uses an extremely rare and ingenious form of necromancy. Plus, he's batshit insane.
He isn't even representative of blood mages. He's in a class of his own. I think of blood mages more like Hadriana. Not Quentin or Tarohne. Or at least, Hadriana represents the typical threat they pose (sacrifice, draining others for their own gain).
The problem there is that Quentin isn't even representative of mages. Why get mad at mages because of him? He uses an extremely rare and ingenious form of necromancy. Plus, he's batshit insane.
He isn't even representative of blood mages. He's in a class of his own. I think of blood mages more like Hadriana. Not Quentin or Tarohne. Or at least, Hadriana represents the typical threat they pose (sacrifice, draining others for their own gain).
And you think he is unique in being a member of this class? I'm quite certain he isn't the only mage with impressive abilities to lose his mind. In fact I know he isn't, since he's fairly easy to compare to Zathrian. Which is the point: Quentin shows the very real danger of a competent mage losing his head and lashing out at others.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
And you think he is unique in being a member of this class? I'm quite certain he isn't the only mage with impressive abilities to lose his mind. In fact I know he isn't, since he's fairly easy to compare to Zathrian. Which is the point: Quentin shows the very real danger of a competent mage losing his head and lashing out at others.
Zathrian wasn't crazy. Not to me at least. He was just pissed.. Granted, he was pissed for a long time, but still. lol. There's a difference between hatred and nuttiness.
edit: Since the name Riverdale is in your profile, I'll assume you're a fan of Loghain. Which is just how I see Zathrian. An Elven Loghain.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
Oh wait.. I read that wrong. haha. I got it mixed up with "River Dane". Nevermind.
Zathrian wasn't crazy. Not to me at least. He was just pissed.. Granted, he was pissed for a long time, but still. lol. There's a difference between hatred and nuttiness.
edit: Since the name Riverdale is in your profile, I'll assume you're a fan of Loghain. Which is just how I see Zathrian. An Elven Loghain.
That's River Dane. Riverdale is the place everywhere else in Maryland tries to forget exists. (As for being a Loghain fan, let's just say I can see where he's coming from on a lot of his decisions.)
Edit: Ninja'd.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
That's River Dane. Riverdale is the place everywhere else in Maryland tries to forget exists. (As for being a Loghain fan, let's just say I can see where he's coming from on a lot of his decisions.)
Edit: Ninja'd.
Heh.. yeah, my bad. But you get my point. I think Zathrian was pretty lucid for the most part. He was just extremely bitter and one sided, like Loghain.
Heh.. yeah, my bad. But you get my point. I think Zathrian was pretty lucid for the most part. He was just extremely bitter and one sided, like Loghain.
Fair point. I still think he's comparable to Quentin as far as the outcome, though.
I'm playing this game now because I want to catch up on the lore for DAI.
Got a question - whats the point of killing Hawkes mother? Is it a cheap way to create conflict about mages? I mean, why? Doesn't even fit in the story. And Hawke doesn't seem to upset about it. And his uncle - ok his reaction was ok - but his statement "I'll tell your sister"? Are you kidding me?
I was like WTF? Where'd this come from?
Cheap is not quite the word I'd use. Under-baked yes. Its a pretty significant event and its doesn't get enough TLC from the writing to drive home the effects of all that has happened, particularly since Hawke has already lost the rest of his/her immediate family. This is a common problem with character death in games. They are too quickly forgotten in the narrative.
I got the best part of that message from my companions alone. I didn't need to be hit over the head constantly with it from the whole city. All of companion's personal stories and attitudes were done well (Fenris, Anders, Merrill), but I hated the insanity of Kirkwall itself. It got to be too much. I liked Kirkwall when dealing with the criminal underworld, playing the part of a lowly refugee, kicking Qunari ass, etc.. There should've been a little more of that to round it out. Like more crime or raider quests with Isabela, for example. There's too much damn magic in Kirkwall.
Perhaps the best side story however is Thrask and Grace, and how that eventually became a mess. The message behind it was sad, but wasn't too ridiculous... How all of those mages and templars finally worked together, only to have you and Grace sabotage it in the end. lol
edit: Sorry if I'm getting too off-topic. If Leandra had to die, I wish it hadn't been so senseless.
@StreetMagic, I think you are inadvertently hitting on both the best and worst parts of DAIIs story. DAII generally explores playable party characters well, I'd argue more successfully even than DA:O. Over three chapters the character quests for Fenris, Merrill, Anders and others demonstrate the best and worst of the game's competing principles: freedom and security. I feel like I know the characters, their actions have weight, and their stories have a realistic progression. However with the game's central narrative, excluding the excellent Qunari build in act 2, the pieces don't really come together. I'm not sure if its too much magic as you indicate, or rather a lack of those magician-type characters (or templars for that matter) feeling connected. We don't even meet Orisno until the end of act two. Meridith is a really strong character, but under utilized. I felt much more impact from Anders end game, than either of their responses, but because he felt like a character that I knew. This probably why Leandra's death had less impact as well. It wasn't given enough narrative capital.
If it was supposed to show how dangerous mages are, I think it failed.
Quentin may have used magic, but he didn't do any more damage than any maniac with a knife could have done.
He was just a serial killer. Plenty of them around, mage and non-mage.
As far as the murdered women are concerned, dead is dead no matter what the cause.
From a story point - meh. DAII could have worked just as well without Leandra's death. I don't see any reason they had to have 'poor tragic Hawke loses their whole family'.
If it was supposed to show how dangerous mages are, I think it failed.
Quentin may have used magic, but he didn't do any more damage than any maniac with a knife could have done.
He was just a serial killer. Plenty of them around, mage and non-mage.
And you don't see how a serial killer who can summon demons to guard his lair is slightly scarier?
My biggest problem with this part of the story is that Gamlen is automatically the one to break the news to Bethany. My Hawke was much closer to Bethany than Gamlen could ever hope to be, so it should have been her to do it. But then, not being able to see Bethany at all during all that time spent in the Circle (despite Leandra claiming to have visited her at some point) is problematic too. Aside from that, I think that the lack of dialogue you could engage in with Leandra was problematic too. Hawke obviously knows her/his own mother, but we don't get a whole lot.
And you don't see how a serial killer who can summon demons to guard his lair is slightly scarier?
gameplay/story segregation. I can't take the game seriously if you assume all those demons and abominations Hawke fought were actually true to the story.
If those blood mages really were summoning demons and abominations like candy then Hawke didn't find them scary because they were usually easier to take out than the roving gangs of thugs who took over Kirkwall at night.
It puts the lie to the codex statement that a single abominations can destroy a city as well. According to gameplay abominations are pushovers. Those freaking disappearing rogues were much worse.
the real reason is: BAD WRITTING!
Hawke's mother had NEGATIVE common sense (enough to make a chaotic place like Bobobo to look scientifically lawfull if you ask me), heck i've seen clueless roleplayers being more aware of their surroundings that Hawke's mother (And one of them tried to use diablere on a MAGMA GARGOYLE without fortitude skill, the other was a lvl 1 bard with performance based in drama who pursuited a dragon). She died because she was too dumb to live and because whoever was leading the script of DA2 was aiming to put plotholes everywhere instead of trying to make sense.
Hawke's mother was too dumb to live to tell the truth, if she belonged to World of Darkness instead of dragon age she would be a Vampire going to the tibet for refuge (Tibet's landmass causes unsoakable damage for those who don't have fortitude discipline). Kirkwall was the worst place in all Thedas to hide an apostate. Also she went walking in the streets at midnight when Hawke was parachutted by infinite hordes of plant eating zombies bandits and a femicide on the lose. She was ASKING FOR IT.
Hawke's mother had NEGATIVE common sense (enough to make a chaotic place like Bobobo to look scientifically lawfull if you ask me), heck i've seen clueless roleplayers being more aware of their surroundings that Hawke's mother (And one of them tried to use diablere on a MAGMA GARGOYLE without fortitude skill, the other was a lvl 1 bard with performance based in drama who pursuited a dragon). She died because she was too dumb to live and because whoever was leading the script of DA2 was aiming to put plotholes everywhere instead of trying to make sense.
There was this one time I went off to do independent investigation while the group was being interrogated by the cops. In Call of Cthulhu. (Luckily, I was asked if I was sure I wanted to do that.)
gameplay/story segregation. I can't take the game seriously if you assume all those demons and abominations Hawke fought were actually true to the story.
If those blood mages really were summoning demons and abominations like candy then Hawke didn't find them scary because they were usually easier to take out than the roving gangs of thugs who took over Kirkwall at night.
It puts the lie to the codex statement that a single abominations can destroy a city as well. According to gameplay abominations are pushovers. Those freaking disappearing rogues were much worse.
When the lore and the gameplay don't line up, I tend to assume it's the gameplay that's having the lie put to it. Especially if the gameplay (is in context of a framing story) supposed to be narrated by Varric.
gameplay/story segregation. I can't take the game seriously if you assume all those demons and abominations Hawke fought were actually true to the story.
If those blood mages really were summoning demons and abominations like candy then Hawke didn't find them scary because they were usually easier to take out than the roving gangs of thugs who took over Kirkwall at night.
It puts the lie to the codex statement that a single abominations can destroy a city as well. According to gameplay abominations are pushovers. Those freaking disappearing rogues were much worse.
This has been a bit of a problem in both games. In DA:O, I found golems to be a particularly difficult enemy to take seriously. The Warden can take multiple golems by his/her lonesome, despite these things being big hulking blocks of rock or metal.
Retour en haut
