479 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

I'm really curious how it went from "sex for procreation purposes only" to "sex whenever you have the urge" for example.

When was the qunari sex ever stated to be "for procreation purposes only" in DAO/DA2? There's arranged procreation but it doesn't mean there's no sex allowed outside of that purpose. (as long as it doesn't end in procreation, I'd presume) IB's account of 'organized service' they have going for these 'outside of that purpose' cases is actually something I've been expecting as part of the system, tbh.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

 

FTFY

Not really. Tevinter's cultural idea of it mirrors the rest of Thedas' cultural idea of it. 

 

 

When was the qunari sex ever stated to be "for procreation purposes only" in DAO/DA2? There's arranged procreation but it doesn't mean there's no sex allowed outside of that purpose. (as long as it doesn't end in procreation, I'd presume) IB's account of 'organized service' they have going for these 'outside of that purpose' cases is actually something I've been expecting as part of the system, tbh.

The devs talked about the Qun a bit on the old forums, including their view on sex. 

[daveliam]

Not really. Tevinter's cultural idea of it mirrors the rest of Thedas' cultural idea of it. 

 

I don't think this is the case at all.  The conflict (I'd say that it's not a "villain" theme) is around the fact that Dorian won't perform culturally and that it's bringing shame and, if there's no heir, potentially ending their noble lineage.  Given that Tevinter is an aristocracy, Halward Pavus sees this as an issue of critical importance.  Culturally, the Tevinter nobility does require marriage as part of solidifying relationships between houses.  So, given that Dorian refuses to get married and produce an heir, his father turns his back on his morals and resorts to blood magic to 'change' Dorian's stance on it. 

 

If Tevinter had the same view as Orzammar, marriage would never come into question.  The issue would have been framed solely as 'producing an heir'.  My canon Warden is an Aeducan who, despite being gay, sleeps with a Noble Hunter in the Origin quests in order to secure an heir.  He doesn't need to marry her because, if the child is a boy, she and the child become part of the House.  Marriage is only an issue because in Tevinter, marriage is viewed as part of the deal in order to keep the power within the noble families.

[Kalshane]

The games have also established that the Qunari don't place any significance on the bodies of the Qun's followers. There's several instances where the Qunari are dismissive of someone's physical remains and in DA2 there is a quest to recover the blades of Qunari warriors but the quest-giver tells you their bodies are insignificant. I don't see much of a stretch from that mindset to "This person has the biological from of a woman, but serves the function of the Qun as a man and behaves as a man, therefore they are a man."

 

We also haven't seen the other side of it: what happens under the Qun to someone who identifies as female, but who has the strongest potential to be a warrior? Are they forced to take on the role of a male? It seems highly possible.

 

I also don't think Iron Bull being likable/sympathetic automatically makes the Qun so. Especially given that before his personal quest, he's halfway to Tal-Vashoth even if he doesn't acknowledge it. (At least not directly. When you first talk to him in Haven he tells you he submitted himself for re-education and got assigned to go undercover in southern Thedas instead.)

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I don't think this is the case at all.  The conflict (I'd say that it's not a "villain" theme) is around the fact that Dorian won't perform culturally and that it's bringing shame and, if there's no heir, potentially ending their noble lineage.  Given that Tevinter is an aristocracy, Halward Pavus sees this as an issue of critical importance.  Culturally, the Tevinter nobility does require marriage as part of solidifying relationships between houses.  So, given that Dorian refuses to get married and produce an heir, his father turns his back on his morals and resorts to blood magic to 'change' Dorian's stance on it. 

 

If Tevinter had the same view as Orzammar, marriage would never come into question.  The issue would have been framed solely as 'producing an heir'.  My canon Warden is an Aeducan who, despite being gay, sleeps with a Noble Hunter in the Origin quests in order to secure an heir.  He doesn't need to marry her because, if the child is a boy, she and the child become part of the House.  Marriage is only an issue because in Tevinter, marriage is viewed as part of the deal in order to keep the power within the noble families.

I was referring to the other human societies when I said the rest of Thedas. All of the human nations have the same mindset when it comes to homosexual nobles: It is fine as long as you still do your duty to your house. 

[Wulfram]

The main annoyance for me with the presentation of the qunari is the lack of decent options to disagree with it. Both in DAI and DA2.

[daveliam]

I was referring to the other human societies when I said the rest of Thedas. All of the human nations have the same mindset when it comes to homosexual nobles: It is fine as long as you still do your duty to your house.

 

Still doesn't seem to me that marriage is a 'villain theme' in his story.  You've said it yourself.  It's about duty to house/family, not marriage.  Marriage just happens to be one of those duties.  

 

I've also said before that I wish they would just avoid over RL tie-ins in general and stick to the made up stuff.   

 

So then no more humans either?  No more classes/castes in societies?  No more religion?  No more war?  No more heterosexual relationships? 

 

Those are all RL tie-ins as well.  Where do you draw the line? 

[Qunquistador]

 It's like I've said in other threads - you can give Fenris to slavers because he's an elf.  If he was a black man, there is no way that would be in the game

 

 

What if he was a black elf?...Please don't answer that.

[TheOgre]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the problem here is one of your own manufacturing.

 

So, was sten incorrect?

 

I'm sorry if that question seems wrong but his argument was logical. We had an example from Sten on what Qunari culture was like, but then we have IB implying something else. 

 

The response I quoted seemed more like an attack, or a means of striking down the speaker instead of the argument.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Still doesn't seem to me that marriage is a 'villain theme' in his story.  You've said it yourself.  It's about duty to house/family, not marriage.  Marriage just happens to be one of those duties.  

You just agreed to my argument. Nobles have duties to their house/family, marriage being one. Dorian doesn't want to marry, thus marriage is the contentious issue in his personal quest thus the 'villain theme' since it is supported by Dorian's father, the villain of that quest.

 

 

The main annoyance for me with the presentation of the qunari is the lack of decent options to disagree with it. Both in DAI and DA2.

I agree that is a major annoyance as well. The only time I can recall where you can really be against it is in Mark of the Assassin when you talk to Tallis while in a cell. 

[Ieldra]

I think the issue is that past Bioware games have mostly focused on prejudice between made up races and religions.  Or else on historical classes (noble/commoner) that haven't had significant meaning in the west for 200 years.  Because these groups are either fictional or no longer part of contentious modern day society, the devs are free to do pretty much whatever without much fear of backlash.

 

DAI is the first Bioware game that's actively started tackling contemporary issues, mainly in the form of gay rights and transgenderism.  Because these are sensitive, modern topics, the devs don't have the same leeway to do whatever with them.  It's like I've said in other threads - you can give Fenris to slavers because he's an elf.  If he was a black man, there is no way that would be in the game.  They get cautious about topics with RL tie-ins because of this sensitivity and it can come off as whitewashed.

 

I've also said before that I wish they would just avoid over RL tie-ins in general and stick to the made up stuff.   

I agree. There are enough unavoidable RL parallels because of the main themes of the story. They shouldn't add more. The problem is, however, that human characters need to have a skin color, and romanceable characters need to have a sexual orientation, so these issues come up on their own, or are inevitably brought up by fans, and then there's the fact that being inclusive actually is desirable, and that in a fictional world with many cultures, it is possible to include many different types of people without damaging the integrity of the world. It's hard to stop once you start down that road, but IMO they should stop when any further change would turn their world into an utopia with regard to any one particular issue. I think it's at that limit now.  

[daveliam]

You just agreed to my argument. Nobles have duties to their house/family, marriage being one. Dorian doesn't want to marry, thus marriage is the contentious issue in his personal quest thus the 'villain theme' since it is supported by Dorian's father, the villain of that quest.

 

 

In my opinion, you are putting way too much emphasis on marriage in this situation.  Here's how I see it:

 

Immediate concern - Halward Pavus betrays his morals by resorting to blood magic to 'change' Dorian; this is what Dorian's primary issue is

Secondary concern - Halward feels the need to betray his morals because Dorian is refusing to 'play the societal role' that Tevinter values, thus endangering the future of the Pavus House

Tertiary concern - Dorian will not 'play the role' and enter into an arranged marriage in order to solidify political alliances and produce an heir; this is partially informed by his sexuality

 

So to me, the central conflict (I don't think 'villain theme' is the right term) is around his father's betrayal of his values.  This is informed by Dorian's rebellion, which is in turn, informed by his refusal to marry and, ultimately, his sexuality.  But marriage is not central to this story at all, in my opinion.  It's just one tertiary aspect of it.

[Majestic Jazz]

I would draw the line at inserting actual politicized classes of people who are currently involved in some kind of contentious debate about their rights.

Vivienne is a black woman, but she has pretty much nothing in common with "black people" culturally, economically, or otherwise in RL. She's not a stand-in for modern black people's political situation. She's just a woman with brown skin who is defined by conflicts inside of Thedas - conflicts with the same themes as general conflicts in the real world, but none specifically the same in theme and form.

Why do you say that Vivi has nothing in common with black people? Because she does not live up to a sterotypical ideal of black people or black women?

And not all blacks in America are impoverished or anything like that. I am a MBA Student, ROTC Cadet and future US Army Officer with straight finances and a good head on my shoulders.....does that mean that I do not have anything "in common" with blacks?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

In my opinion, you are putting way too much emphasis on marriage in this situation.  Here's how I see it:

 

Immediate concern - Halward Pavus betrays his morals by resorting to blood magic to 'change' Dorian; this is what Dorian's primary issue is

Secondary concern - Halward feels the need to betray his morals because Dorian is refusing to 'play the societal role' that Tevinter values, thus endangering the future of the Pavus House

Tertiary concern - Dorian will not 'play the role' and enter into an arranged marriage in order to solidify political alliances and produce an heir; this is partially informed by his sexuality

 

So to me, the central conflict (I don't think 'villain theme' is the right term) is around his father's betrayal of his values.  This is informed by Dorian's rebellion, which is in turn, informed by his refusal to marry and, ultimately, his sexuality.  But marriage is not central to this story at all, in my opinion.  It's just one tertiary aspect of it.

I disagree. It, or rather Dorian's refusal to do it, was the catalyst that set your immediate and secondary concerns into motion. It is not just a tertiary aspect. 

 

But this thread is about the Qun, so we should probably stop this tangent. There are other threads we can discuss this and be on topic. 

[Steelcan]

I'm curious about why Tevinter doesn't use adoption into powerful families.

 

Japan and Anciet Rome/Byzantium are the two most well known examples of this, where an adult was adopted into a family in order to continue the family line, in Japan it usually took the form of keeping damily businesses alive, in Rome and Byzantium it usually related with dynastic health and succession, that'd be something interesting to explore if we ever go to Tevinter.

[Ieldra]

I'm curious about why Tevinter doesn't use adoption into powerful families.

 

Japan and Anciet Rome/Byzantium are the two most well known examples of this, where an adult was adopted into a family in order to continue the family line, in Japan it usually took the form of keeping damily businesses alive, in Rome and Byzantium it usually related with dynastic health and succession, that'd be something interesting to explore if we ever go to Tevinter.

In Tevinter, it's all about the magical bloodlines. Adoption will continue the family, but not the magic. One solution would be "just get the girl with child, then go your own way", and then the child gets adopted by the family, freeing the girl to go her own way as well. As it is now, appearances must be kept up so that wouldn't be accepted, but I think that attitude might be easier to change.

[Qunquistador]

Why do you say that Vivi has nothing in common with black people? Because she does not live up to a sterotypical ideal of black people or black women?

And not all blacks in America are impoverished or anything like that. I am a MBA Student, ROTC Cadet and future US Army Officer with straight finances and a good head on my shoulders.....does that mean that I do not have anything "in common" with blacks?

Oy, you probably don't want an answer to that question, as I'm sure it's just as ridiculous as OP's other terribly misguided attempt to use black people to make a point about the game. Personally I think Viv has a great deal in common with Toni Childs from the show Girlfriends 

[Steelcan]

In Tevinter, it's all about the magical bloodlines. Adoption will continue the family, but not the magic. One solution would be "just get the girl with child, then go your own way". As it is now, appearances must be kept up so that wouldn't be accepted, but I think that attitude might be easier to change.

but why not adopt in a mage from another family, say a family has three mage children, another has none, money changes hands, perhaps some business deals, off to the Senate, get it approved, congrats a mage to continue the line.

[Dai Grepher]

If she were physically a female and mentally a female then she wouldn't have been able to become a warrior, because only males are warriors. The fact that she can fight as well as a man means that she's a man, because the alternative is that the Qun is wrong about the differences between males and females and that's unacceptable. That's the logic that the Qun is operating by. It might contradict what you see to be the truth but that doesn't mean that it contradicts what the Qun sees to be the truth. 

 

But the female warrior does not present herself to the Tamsserans as a male, she simply presents as a warrior. Now, either the Tamsserans will recognize her biological truth that she is female and rule that she cannot be a warrior, or they will make an exception for her so she can be a warrior. But to create some loophole that defines a female as a male? That contradicts what the Qun states about being what you are.

 

Now, I have known since Origins that the Qun is a lie. So if the new storyline is that the Tamssarans redefine a female as male in order to assign her as a warrior, then so be it. This will just be another example of how the Qun is a lie. But I tend to give the Qun the benefit of the doubt, since all we have here is The Iron Bull's claim, and The Iron Bull is basically a tal-vashoth who survives under the Qun. He's not a credible source. Compare that to someone like Sten/Arishok who eats, breathes, and lives the Qun. I'll believe Sten/Arishok over Hissrad (which means liar) any day.
 

I think the actual lore of Dragon Age indicates that all female children are never assigned warrior roles by the Tamssarans. They are set on their course from an early age. The Tamssarans identify females based on their physical traits. So this is logical. The only exceptions are those they capture, meaning, adult females of other races. If they capture a human female warrior, and that female accepts the Qun, she is logically assigned something other than warrior. It is illogical to assign her the opposite gender in order to allow her to continue being a warrior.

 

Keep in mind, this is the same culture that will not allow a baker to be a warrior, even if he is male. His title of "baker" prevents him from being a warrior. So why wouldn't physical fact prevent a female from being considered a warrior under the Qun?

 

Again, if the Tamssarans are creating a loophole because the founder of the Qun declared out of ignorance that females cannot be warriors, then fine. They contradict other parts of the Qun, but whatever. Them redefining a female as a male will just be another example of why the Qun is a lie. But, in this case, it isn't a problem created from MY OWN manufacturing. It's a problem created out David Gaider's, because none of this was made clear in any of the games.

[Ieldra]

but why not adopt in a mage from another family, say a family has three mage children, another has none, money changes hands, perhaps some business deals, off to the Senate, get it approved, congrats a mage to continue the line.

Too expensive. Also, there may always be solutions once you set "let your children go their own way" as sacrosanct, but when has that ever been true, in Tevinter or elsewhere? In the real world and for much of human history, such things have been a primary obligation for the next generation, and in some parts of the world they still are.

[Majestic Jazz]

She doesn't have anything in common with black people's stereotypical political and economic situations, no. This very idea, of boiling classes of people down into some kind of rough aggregate and inserting "the issues" they face into the game is precisely what I'm saying *shouldn't* be in the game.

I'm also saying that "black people" in Thedas doesn't mean the same thing as "black people" in RL as a cultural designation. I'm not attempting to provide a set in stone definition of what "being black" means in RL. I'm only pointing out that the things a lot of people use to define "black culture" in RL, which comes from shared cultural, political, and economic experiences, don't apply in Thedas because Thedas has a completely different history.

Vivienne is just a woman with brown skin, and that matters not a wit as a qualifier as far as the game is concerned. Or at least as far as the game has presented so far.

*Edit* She is great from a representation point of view. She's *not* a political stand-in for actual modern debates. This is what I'm getting at.

Ok, I can buy that. I just think your problem was the wording. You made it seem like to have something in common with a race is to fall into a sterotype of that race. It is like saying that a black guy "talks white" because he talks proper so to speak.....which is subtly suggesting that blacks dont talk proper but whites do.

In my book, if you are black than you have EVERYTHING in common with blacks from shared history to how society potientially percieves you. You can be educated or ignorant, you can be Democrate or Republican, talk proper or not talk proper, listen to classical more or listen to rap more, invest money into an IRA or into car rims.

I accept your explanation but please dont think that if one does fall into a racial sterotype does not mean that one does not still share a racial connection with the said race. Sera might not consider herself an "Elf" and avoids elven history and culture all together....but she still has a lot in common with elves. You may say she "acts human" but do you believe the human bigots of Thedas will treat Sera like a human because she doesnt flow elven beliefs? NO! Why? Because she is an Elf. Get it?

Blacks arent a monolithic culture.