1268 réponses à ce sujet

[Bugsie]

Oh for sure, I should have clarified that I was talking about the blue stuff. Both canon and Samson AU, the commanders would be on blue lyrium.

 

I imagine trying to get off red lyrium being something like grain alcohol, or someone abusing multiple substances. The fact red lyrium is blighted, is hot (if you notice the snow around red lyrium is melted in Emprise du Lion, and Samson says wearing the armor is like being on fire), and without the proper "care" (Imshael the gardener), will start growing on you and killing you, makes it a whooooole different beast.

 

What do you think your Inquisitor did with Samson's red lyrium addiction if he's given to Cullen or Dagna? Would they continue giving him red lyrium? Do you think he could be weaned back onto "safer" blue lyrium and eventually off of it? Would your Inquisitor be ok with him using a normal dosage of blue lyrium?

Depending on the inquistor - I'd either have him exiled, and this would pose several outcomes for his character, one would be he goes cold turkey and succeeds, two, he goes cold turkey and dies, three he finds another source of lyrium, and depending on whether its red or blue how that goes.

 

Or if my inqusiitor has him serve Cullen or Dagna, I'd like to think he could be weaned back on to the blue, then off all together if the possiblity presented itself.  I don't think I could keep him on red, that would be too much like animal experimentation to me.  Some might think he doesn't deserve more than that, but I'm not one of them.

 

My regard for Samson (and Calpernia) is that he (they) are not so much villains but more those who were on the losing side.  History belonging to the victors and all that guff.

[Xilizhra]

I don't think that Cullen would have taken Samson's place. He's too idealistic for that. Samson does have good qualities, but idealism isn't one of them; he's bitter and cynical even in compassion. I'm sure that if Cullen hadn't been approached by the Inquisition, he'd have stood and fought against the red corruption, and eventually died for it.

 

Samson might have made it into the Inquisition, but to be honest, I don't think he'd have all that much time left before he started to hit the "retirement" stage of templar life; lyrium-induced dementia. Isn't he fairly old?

[Bugsie]

Mid to late forties was what the developers said from memory.

[SmilesJA]

 

My regard for Samson (and Calpernia) is that he (they) are not so much villains but more those who were on the losing side.  History belonging to the victors and all that guff.

 

While I agree with you in regards to Calpernia. I'd say with Samson, he's more of a victim than a villain, especially if you consider what Cullen told you and his encounters in DA2.

[Catwall]

Mid to late forties was what the developers said from memory.

Yup. This post from the writer of Samson and Calpernia confirms it.

[Rannah]

While I agree with you in regards to Calpernia. I'd say with Samson, he's more of a victim than a villain, especially if you consider what Cullen told you and his encounters in DA2.

 

I partially agree with it. Both Samson and Calpernia are victims to Corypheus. That thing twisted their ideals and their willingness to make the necessary steps to help their ideal become reality. But in the process they both became villains due to Corypheus' corruption. They both went too far. This is more noticeable when you side with the mages (you get Samson's questline and the red templars as main force of Cory) and you see the twisted "borthers and sisters" of the templar order.

 

I was thinking: just how far must someone go to become a villain? And if we turn the table and Cory would have won, would both Samson and Calpernia be heroes?

[Tigrae]

I was thinking: just how far must someone go to become a villain?

 

It's all perspective. I think it depends on the person doing the judging. If this series has taught us anything, it's that everyone has different "breaking points" as to what they think is "going too far".

 

The thing is, these characters do things where you can (or might/might not) understand why they've done something, or made a choice, but at some point they make a choice that you just can't follow, or you sit back and think "at what cost?"

 

I can do that with Samson: I can see what he was trying to do, I can see his goal, I can understand his motivations. He saw a problem, and he saw one way to fix it, and he took it. I can see him trying to make the best of a very shitty situation, but "at what cost?"

 

I was with Logain up until those Tevinter slavers showed up for the Denerim elves, that was my "too far" - now he's a villain to me. Selling elves into slavery was my "at what cost?" moment.

 

It's the same thing you could do with your heroes, too. The choices your Warden makes, sure you sided with Branka for making Golems, but at what cost?

[Tigrae]

Those are excellent questions. The other day, I was pondering how did Samson manage to withstand his forced withdrawal if he was condemned to prison.

Remaining in jail without his regular dosage could eventually kill him.

I can't imagine a worse fate than dying of pain. He might even try suicide just to avoid it altogether.

 

(Btw, this would make for an excellent one-shot, if anyone is in the mood.

Try to imagine Samson reliving all the most important moments of his life in the minutes before he departed from this world...and then being -perhaps- rescued in the last minute by either Cullen, Dagna or the Inquisitor herself...)

 

If you turn this into a one-shot - please share it with us!

 

I think this scenario really depends on the Inquisitor that condemned him. Not giving him his lyrium is basically killing him, without having to actually say "I killed him". There was a really great Commander Samson AU fic where he snuck in some lyrium to Red Templar General Cullen, to save him.

 

I'd like to think that as easily as Cullen writes off Samson, he'd bring him some lyrium if he heard him howling from the cells, he knows that pain and it's probably even worse on the red stuff. Or maybe he doesn't - Cullen shouldered his own recovery, surely Samson can do the same? "Just one more night, old friend. You've almost made it another day," until the day he doesn't hear Samson wailing for mercy and finds out his body finally gave out sometime in the night, or like you posed, he killed himself.

[Rannah]

It's all perspective. I think it depends on the person doing the judging. If this series has taught us anything, it's that everyone has different "breaking points" as to what they think is "going too far".

 

Indeed. And this is what Bioware did very good with these 2 characters in DA:I imo. Many of us sees them villains from the beginning, but others can see their motivations, can even sympathise and agree with them until a certain point, when the "cost" is considered too high.

 

(Loghain was kind of ultimate evil in my first DA:O playthrough - my breaking point was when he left the battle of Ostagar:)  ).

[SmilesJA]

 

(Loghain was kind of ultimate evil in my first DA:O playthrough - my breaking point was when he left the battle of Ostagar:)  ).

 

I felt that Bioware handled the moral greyness of Samson better than they did with Loghain.

[Rannah]

I felt that Bioware handled the moral greyness of Samson better than they did with Loghain.

 

Yes:). I think because in DA2 we could see Samson as a relatively positive character (ok, he was an addict already, but we know how he was expelled from the order and that he helped mages to leave Kirkwall), and "evil" Samson appeared later in the series. We could see more of him being a better man, and thus we judge him a little differently, as we know more of him.

 

On the other hand, Loghain wasn't a very charming person even at the beginning of DA:O. And his story was published in the book - Stolen Throne, Calling - only, so many players did not have a chance to understand his motives and driving principles.

 

Edit: forgot to mention the other book, thanks Tigrae!

Modifié par Rannah, 26 février 2015 - 05:45 .

[Tigrae]

I felt that Bioware handled the moral greyness of Samson better than they did with Loghain.

 

I think Loghain suffered from his backstory and motivations being in The Stolen Throne and The Calling and not in-game. I very plainly saw him as a "villain" in DA:O, but I hadn't read those books yet. After reading them, I could understand why he'd be so terrified of The Grey Wardens being in league with Orlais. With Samson, we were lucky enough to experience his story in-game.

 

I have to say, though, Loghain still being around and kicking sort of gives me hope that we could see a redemption arc for Samson? I understand not everyone has to have one, but now I'm afraid putting that in writing means I've just jinxed the poor bastard.

 

*OPRAH VOICE*

YOU GET A REDEMPTION ARC! AND YOU GET A REDEMPTION ARC! AND YOU GET A REDEMPTION ARC!

[Bugsie]

I didn't think much of Loghain in game, but given a wider perspective on him helped me see why so many seemed to like him, and how I came to appreciate him.  We really only got a snippet of his hatred for Orlais in the game and it really wasn't big enough a motivator for me to want to save him in a playthrough ( something I have yet to do in a game and have only done it through the keep.)

 

I think Samson isn't really fleshed out nearly enough but the snippets we see are far more nuanced IMHO.

 

I heard someone say that Samson, lacks a degree of moral agency, perhaps through his addiction and binding with Corypheus, because if he didn't he would truly be a monster.  Neither he or Calpernia are mindless evil villains, their motivations suspect, yes, but not truly evil.

[Tigrae]

I heard someone say that Samson, lacks a degree of moral agency, perhaps through his addiction and binding with Corypheus, because if he didn't he would truly be a monster.  Neither he or Calpernia are mindless evil villains, their motivations suspect, yes, but not truly evil.

 

Yes, exactly! Mindlessly evil villains are boring, it's much more exciting to see these people who you can sympathize (or even empathize) with. It's easy to just make someone who's all of the opposite characteristics of the hero, but what if that villain was a person trying to get to a good place, and somewhere along the line, it all gets twisted or out of hand?

[Tigrae]

More Samson in the Samson thread

 

 

[Source]

[Bugsie]

That's nice, but I think I prefer smarmy, sneering, sourpuss Samson.

[Tigrae]

More Samson in the Samson thread:

 

 

[Source]

 

(This is fan art, this is not from the Keep.)

[Bugsie]

Oh - is that from the keep?  I haven't been there since setting up for a next playthrough (about a month ago I think).

[Tigrae]

Oh - is that from the keep?  I haven't been there since setting up for a next playthrough (about a month ago I think).

 

Oh oops, nope - just fan art. I can dream, though. I edited the original post so no one gets confused, hopefully.

[Bugsie]

Oh LOL, haaa yeah, got the heart behind it means a LI I'm guessing.

 

Ahhh what could have been.

[TheLastArchivist]

Samson romance tile

 

 

 

source

 

Sorry, girls. Didn't see it was posted previously on the thread.

My bad.

[SmilesJA]

I felt that Bioware handled the moral greyness of Samson better than they did with Loghain.

 

To expand, I was disgusted at Logain's actions during Origins. You've just fought an army of Darkspawn and they're beginning to slowly invade Ferelden. There may not be an Archdemon sure, but to ignore the Darkspawn and focus all of your efforts on a probable Orlais takeover is ludicrous. For most of the game he's had an intense paranoia about whether or not Orlais was going to invade, he caused a small civil war between the nobles, he poisoned Arl Eamon and sold the Alienage Elves his own people as SLAVES to the Teventer Empire, all so Loghain can focus on Orlais. I kept asking myself: Why Orlais? Okay they've taken over Ferelden for almost a century, but with the Darkspawn slowly coming on their doorstep and ignore it while tearing a country apart to prepare yourself  for an invasion that may or may not happen is ridiculous.

 

It was clear that Loghain was more of a soldier than a politician, and I was fed up with what he did Ferelden I executed him (though I wished an imprisonment option was available.) Loghain just screamed "evil" to me that I didn't want to hear his side. I thought Bioware failed at making Loghain into a sympathetic villain in the game. The fact we needed a book to understand his motivations for his hatred for Orlais just made it worse. It just doesn't strike me as good writing to rely on a book to get what made Loghain so paranoid about Orlais that he was going to let Ferelden fall to the Darkspawn. The books should be used as a complement to characters, rather than to explain their whole backstory.  At least with Samson we saw the moral ambiguity from DA2.

[Tigrae]

Samson romance tile

 

 

 

source

 

Sorry, girls. Didn't see it was posted previously on the thread.

My bad.

 

Art so nice we posted it twice! The thirst is strong in this thread.

[Bugsie]

A mighty thirst indeed.

[SmilesJA]

A mighty thirst indeed.

 

A mighty thirst?