158 réponses à ce sujet

[Helios969]

Yes, Time Magic is unstable and untested. Yes, it created weird time Fade Rifts.

 

Having two different time streams going on is never addressed again after you recruit the mages. It's like having Fiona showing up at Val Royeux has absolutely no effect on that time line and therefore would lead to a slightly different timeline than the one that occurs in Redcliffe. Eventually the timelines will fork into different directions, and therefore cause something really, really convoluted, or merge together, ignoring casualty.

 

Except nothing apparently happens or changes.

 

Shitty writing.

 

 

I'd argue Steins;Gate does a really good job at portraying Time Travel, but that's just me.

 

Steins;Gate is probably the most logically consistent time travel story I've run across.

 

Alexius/Red Cliff was just bad, bad, bad.

[Luckyanna]

I may be wrong but I believe I recall someone in the game saying it was not Fiona at all but a demon disguised as her to lure the inquisitor to Redcliffe. 

 

That's how I remember it. I thought the time travel stuff only affected Redcliffe. 

[Ranadiel Marius]

Alternate explanation for the time travel magic. The magic doesn't actually change the past it just changes people's memories of it. So whenAlexius went back in time, he was actually creating a so.ulation of how events would have happened in the fade and everyone within a certain distance if the rift when the spell is cast has their memories rewritten to match.

So you remember talking to Fiona because it happened, but she doesn't remember because Alexius overwrote her memories. Inq's trip to the future is just effectively a dream in this theory.

Steins;Gate is probably the most logically consistent time travel story I've run across.

Alexius/Red Cliff was just bad, bad, bad.

Steins gate is great and has extremely consistent time travel logic, but they f it up at the last second by changing the perceived event at the vending machine. Otherwise whole thing would perfectly internally consistent.

[ComfortablyNumb]

I always wonder if it even was Fiona, who we're originally meeting. Cass (I think it was her?)  is questioning why the leader of rebel mages is showing up just  like that in Val Royeaux. And I always agree with that question.

 

So personally, I'm more inclined to go with "it was a demon" explanation. Or someone/something else, impersonating her.  

[JumboWheat01]

Maybe it was Envy we met in Val Royeaux.  Envy really wanted those Templars for a while there, and thus threw us some fake bait so it could focus on the Templars more.

 

If we go down the mage storyline, it's all well and good.  Envy goes about its normal thing with the Templars, gets them for its glorious Elder One, and it lives a happy, envious demon life.  We go about with a quick time-travel trip with Breach magic and emotionally break down an overly protective father with a blighted son.  Guilt trips for all!

 

If we decide to go with the Templars, Envy starts to get unbalanced.  Why did we go there when we could have (and "should" have,) gone to those mages?  It becomes obsessive with us.  It wants to learn more, it needs to learn more.  And it will take our face to do so.  This bit of unbalanced obsession is what lets us ultimately defeat and destroy it.

 

Just my two coppers.

[Aimi]

Maybe it was Envy we met in Val Royeaux.  Envy really wanted those Templars for a while there, and thus threw us some fake bait so it could focus on the Templars more.

I like that, but I think it would be hard for Envy to pull off two separate imitations at the same time. Notes throughout "Champions of the Just" indicate that Envy put a lot of time and effort into figuring out how Lucius Corin worked, and that it required his assistance to make a semi-convincing doppelgänger. Neither of those conditions really applies for Fiona. We'd have to posit Envy/Lucius leading the Templars and Seekers out of Val Royeaux, slipping away from all of them to double back, change into Fiona (assuming it even can change into Fiona), and make its appearance. Seems unlikely.

[JumboWheat01]

I like that, but I think it would be hard for Envy to pull off two separate imitations at the same time. Notes throughout "Champions of the Just" indicate that Envy put a lot of time and effort into figuring out how Lucius Corin worked, and that it required his assistance to make a semi-convincing doppelgänger. Neither of those conditions really applies for Fiona. We'd have to posit Envy/Lucius leading the Templars and Seekers out of Val Royeaux, slipping away from all of them to double back, change into Fiona (assuming it even can change into Fiona), and make its appearance. Seems unlikely.

 

True, true, didn't think about that... maybe a minor Envy demon, then?  Fear has minor demons that belong to its domain, why wouldn't Envy?  I don't really know, somewhat grasping at straws here, trying to make something that fits without breaking all the rules of Thedosian magic.  Though this game did pretty much looked at those rules and threw them out from the first moment.

[turuzzusapatuttu]

It's funny how many times time trivel is used to explain bad writings and plot holes.

[Saberchic]

And here I thought Fiona was being controlled by blood magic; I didn't even think of time travel being the issue. It doesn't quite make sense to me. Now I have to go youtube and watch the scenes again.   

[MikaelNovasun]

When you talk to Fiona at Skyhold she states at not point was she impaired/mind controlled. The whole time travel thing unravels when you really start to think about it. If it was just limited to Redcliff as some propose, explain how the inquisitor travels to the future and the all of Thedas has changed according to the dialog. While time travel is a cool concept, unless it is written extremely well it always uncovers plot holes if you think to deeply about it. It is one of the many reasons I prefer to visit Fiona in Redcliff and then recruit/conscript the Templars, then you only get hints of it as time dilation/manipulation instead of full blown time travel.

[IanPolaris]

When you talk to Fiona at Skyhold she states at not point was she impaired/mind controlled. The whole time travel thing unravels when you really start to think about it. If it was just limited to Redcliff as some propose, explain how the inquisitor travels to the future and the all of Thedas has changed according to the dialog. While time travel is a cool concept, unless it is written extremely well it always uncovers plot holes if you think to deeply about it. It is one of the many reasons I prefer to visit Fiona in Redcliff and then recruit/conscript the Templars, then you only get hints of it as time dilation/manipulation instead of full blown time travel.

 

When you talk to Fiona at Skyhold she states at not point was she impaired/mind controlled. The whole time travel thing unravels when you really start to think about it. If it was just limited to Redcliff as some propose, explain how the inquisitor travels to the future and the all of Thedas has changed according to the dialog. While time travel is a cool concept, unless it is written extremely well it always uncovers plot holes if you think to deeply about it. It is one of the many reasons I prefer to visit Fiona in Redcliff and then recruit/conscript the Templars, then you only get hints of it as time dilation/manipulation instead of full blown time travel.

 

That means nothing.  She could be mind-controlled to lie about being mind-controlled and it would fit the hazy memory.

[Aimi]

That means nothing.  She could be mind-controlled to lie about being mind-controlled and it would fit the hazy memory.

That's one of the reasons mind control is such an unsatisfactory answer. It's not falsifiable.

[MikaelNovasun]

It means something until there is evidence to counter it, which there isn't. It just goes show what a poor plot device time travel can become.The writers seem to  want her on the hook for her own decisions regarding joining with Tervinter but then the whole time travel magic makes a mess of it.

[BloodyTalon]

Its time magic just go with it.

I stilll want a paradox dlc if they are going to use time magic like that

[IanPolaris]

That's one of the reasons mind control is such an unsatisfactory answer. It's not falsifiable.

 

True enough but neither are any of the alternatives (incl Time Travel).  I guess it's pick your choice of poorly written explainations.

[Bullets McDeath]

Oh, time travel. How I hate thee. Let me count the ways.

 

The Inquisitor and companions can remember not because of the anchor but because they do not encounter the second timeline until they reach Redcliffe. For them, meeting Fiona in Val Royeaux happened. For Fiona, it did not. The whole world is ruined in the future timeline and not just Redcliffe because the future they are sent to is not just the future of Redcliffe. The state of the world was due to demons and the Elder One, not Alexius' time manipulation.

 

Make sense? Of course not? Good.

[ThreeF]

Make sense?

Yes it does.

 

(that's how I see it too)

[draken-heart]

This is how I think it goes:
 
Original Timeline:  Fiona meets the Inquisitor in Val Royeaux.
 
Second Timeline:  After the original timeline happened, Alexius goes to Redcliffe and goes back in time to before she goes to Val Royeaux, offering Fiona his deal before the Inquisition is well known at all, in order to lure the Inquisitor in.  The Fiona in that timeline has never met the Inquisitor.
 
Fiona doesn't need to forget anything.  The Inquisitor experienced the original timeline and then the later stages of the second timeline.  Only the people Alexius contacted and influenced changed.

Honeslty, this makes even less sense. If Fiona never met the Inquisition, it would not matter if it was a "second" timeline or not, it would actually be the same timeline, as Fiona would never have left Redcliff meaning that the "original" timeline never happened. Like the Flashpoint event in DC comics.

[Aimi]

True enough but neither are any of the alternatives (incl Time Travel).  I guess it's pick your choice of poorly written explainations.

Agreed on all counts.

[ThreeF]

Honeslty, this makes even less sense. If Fiona never met the Inquisition, it would not matter if it was a "second" timeline or not, it would actually be the same timeline, as Fiona would never have left Redcliff meaning that the "original" timeline never happened. Like the Flashpoint event in DC comics.

 

I think it's mostly because people are used to picture alternative timelines as tree branches. It doesn't necessary needs to be that, especially considering that whatever happened only affected Redcliffe. Up until your IQ closed the weird rift, Redcliffe was in its own time bubble.

[Reznore57]

I don't understand time travel really well but I think :

Fiona goes to Val Royeaux to join the Inquisition.(Compared to the templars , she's really friendly because she knows she needs help).

She get back to Redcliffe.

Alexius goes to Redcliffe ,  mess up time , sending everyone back  just after the Conclave explosion.

He spreads rumors the templars are coming to kill all the mages and offers help to Fiona .

 

So I suppose Redcliffe is a case of alternate reality where Fiona never went to Val Royeaux.But it still happened for people outside of Redcliffe.

[MikeJW]

Ok...Fiona goes to VR in the original timeline. Ok that doesnt make sense in itself considering the leader of the mage rebellion leaves her charges to head to the Orlesian capital hoping to meet the Inquisitor who she had no way of knowing would be there at this time, or where, to offer an alliance when she could have sent word to him in Haven. Or hammer out the deals of an aliance in VR but whatever.

 

But...Alexius changes time in Redcliffs loacality so Fiona doesnt go...but she did go..wait, how long would it take to get to VR from Redcliff. Alexius doesnt have a lot of time to change time to stop Fiona from going. I don't get it. He showed up right before the attack but Fiona would have to have left at least a few days prior...anyway, ALexius changes time BUT theres still original timeline Fiona in VR. What happens to original timeline Fiona henceforth known as VR Fiona if she was outside the effect of the time travel? Theres Fiona in Redcliff who never went but theres also VR Fiona who is there and must exist.

 

I hate time travel.

[draken-heart]

At the three above: It makes no sense. Unless the Fiona we meet is not Fiona, or the deal happened AFTER she met the Inquisition in VR, the time magic in redcliff would not have simply affect redcliff.

[BloodyTalon]

See the only time magic I ended up liking was the chronomancy book from the old d20 you couldn't just use time magic freely or to change things on a grand scale, cause they created polar force called the  forces of paradox, and if you started getting to much paradox from things like changing time in an area you would blink out of existance along with anyone near you and history would smooth out and everyone's memory would change.

Time magic without side effects is bad and massive side effects such has the use of magic blinking you out of time or twisting you so much everyone thinks your a freak and reality turns on you has if your a virus. You need counter forces if you do time magic, even then can be  bad.

Sorry for typos

Modifié par BloodyTalon, 22 janvier 2015 - 05:36 .