269 réponses à ce sujet

[AshenEndymion]

There is a choice for that.

 

The latter choice is available("screw this, I'm out").  But taking it results in the Inquisitor not leaving and continuing with the conversation....

[leaguer of one]

The latter choice is available("screw this, I'm out").  But taking it results in the Inquisitor not leaving and continuing with the conversation....

Sure, but you do not your discouragement. Darian makes it clear it's less about him being gay and more about him not playing along.

[Monica21]

For the record, here's our resident cultural historian Brother Genitivi on Sexuality in Thedas:

 

 

What I find most interesting is that, despite the lack of open discussion on matters of human sexuality, there is commonality to be found on the subject in all Andrastian lands. Typically, ones sexual habits are considered natural and separate from matters of procreation, and only among the nobility, where procreation involves issues of inheritance and the union of powerful families, is it considered of vital importance. Yet, even there, a noble who has done their duty to the family might be allowed to pursue their own sexual interests without raising eyebrows. The view on indulging lusts with a member of the same gender varies from land to land. In Orlais, it is considered a quirk of character and nothing more. In Ferelden, it is a matter of scandal if done indiscreetly but otherwise nothing noteworthy. In Tevinter, it is considered selfish and deviant behavior among nobles, but actively encouraged with favored slaves. Nowhere is it forbidden, and sex of any kind is only considered worthy of judgement when taken to awful excess or performed in the public eye.

—From In Pursuit of Knowledge: The Travels of a Chantry Scholar by Brother Genitivi

 

If you're playing a human noble, it actually would be within canon to express concern or disbelief that Dorian refuses to help carry on the family name. No, there's really no such thing as homophobia in Thedas so saying, "eww, you're gay" wouldn't be lore-friendly. However, saying something like, "All you have to do is produce an heir and then you can do whatever you want. I don't understand," would actually be within the lore. It wouldn't make you a homophobe, it would just give you the option to say something a noble might be likely to think, if not to say.

 

I have yet to see any kind of reference regarding the Qunari on homosexuality so I'm curious what a lore-friendly response would be.

 

edit: No, I'm not trying to be a jerk or give the option to be a homophobe, but I did literally just read this codex entry today and hadn't seen it posted. If we're going to talk about lore, then let's cite stuff.

[daveliam]

Except that the OP wants to be outright homophobic:

 

"Your gay? Get away from me. Your disgusting." 

"I don't agree with your lifestyle because of such and such"

"I don't believe the Maker or Andraste would agree with your lifestyle or whatever and you shouldn't be that way"

[Monica21]

Except that the OP wants to be outright homophobic:

 

Well, yes. But many of the responses are that expressing any kind of disagreement with Dorian isn't canon, when that's not entirely true. Yeah, you can't be a jerk like Gamlen ("He can't say good morning without lying twice" - heh) but you could stay within canon and express disagreement that he's not doing what his father wants, even if being an outright homophobe wouldn't be canonical.

[TheJediSaint]

Well, yes. But many of the responses are that expressing any kind of disagreement with Dorian isn't canon, when that's not entirely true. Yeah, you can be a jerk like Gamlen ("He can't say good morning without lying twice" - heh) but you could stay within canon and express disagreement that he's not doing what his father wants, even if being an outright homophobe wouldn't be canonical.

 

The Inquisitor actually could express on prejudice towards Dorian, in regards to Dorian being a dirty 'Vint.

[Monica21]

The Inquisitor actually could express on prejudice towards Dorian, in regards to Dorian being a dirty 'Vint.

 

But because he's Tevinter or because he's gay? I mean, that's like me making fun of Canadians, but not caring if they're gay Canadians. (But no seriously, I like Canadians. )

[AshenEndymion]

Sure, but you do not your discouragement. Darian makes it clear it's less about him being gay and more about him not playing along.

 

And you can't ask Dorian(or encourage him) to give up an just play along.

 

By showing up to the tavern, the player is essentially locked into agreeing that Dorian shouldn't be forced into an arranged marriage(and forced to produce an heir)...  Which would be fine, if there were any indication that this could be the case prior to arriving...  Yes, during the sequence, the Inquisitor can try to remain neutral and just say s/he wants to leave, but they don't until the entire sequence runs its course.  The only real choice for the player in the entire sequence is whether or not the Inquisitor encourages Dorian to get on better terms with his father.  And both options require the tacit agreement that the arranged marriage(and "living a lie") is a bad thing...

 

My point is that while, yes, Dorian says that it's all about an arranged marriage(and producing an heir), and that's what the quest is about, the fact that there is no dialogue options for the Inquisitor to say that "producing an heir for the family is important"(or something along those lines) demonstrates, to me, that Bioware seems to think the quest is not actually about the arranged marriage, but about Dorian being gay.  And that would be fine by me, if people would just be honest about it...

[TheJediSaint]

But because he's Tevinter or because he's gay? I mean, that's like me making fun of Canadians, but not caring if they're gay Canadians. (But no seriously, I like Canadians. )

 

Canada is not generally regarded as a evil empire.  

[Monica21]

Canada is not generally regarded as a evil empire.  

 

Are you sure?

[actionhero112]

The message I get from Dragon Age is: it's okay to murder children, practice human sacrifice, support slavery, and endorse genocide, but god forbid you say something homophobic.

 

Or the people behind it don't feel comfortable writing it into their game. 

 

Deal with it. 

[KaiserShep]

Canada is not generally regarded as a evil empire.  

 

They did send Justin Bieber to the US as some kind of evil genetics/thought experiment.

[AresKeith]

Canada is not generally regarded as a evil empire.  

 

 

Are you sure?

They did send Justin Bieber to the US as some kind of evil genetics/thought experiment.

 

^^^ This

[TheJediSaint]

They did send Justin Bieber to the US as some kind of evil genetics/thought experiment.

That just the national equivalent of raking leaves into the neighbor's yard.

[Andraste_Reborn]

One thing to keep in mind is that there's a word budget to consider every time BioWare give the PC a dialogue option - especially if that dialogue option is likely to cause a wildly divergent response from the character you're speaking to.

 

I actually think a 'couldn't you just do your duty and father an heir?' response would have made a lot of sense in that conversation, especially coming from a human noble. But I also think that a qunari Inquisitor should have more opportunities to disagree with Iron Bull's opinion about Tal'Vashoth, and that there should be an option for an angrier reponse to Solas's 'you're a credit to your race!' friendship speech, and also more options for an elf or qunari mage to question Vivienne's assertion that mages need to be in Circles and ... well, I could probably find an infinity of places where I wish the game would give the PC more dialogue choices.

 

Given that response options are always going to be limited, I can see why BIoWare did not prioritise letting the Inquisitor be a jerk during Dorian's personal quest.

[RenAdaar]

They did send Justin Bieber to the US as some kind of evil genetics/thought experiment.

I can assure you we thought you would like our gift.

 

Also no backsies 

[AresKeith]

I can assure you we thought you would like our gift.

 

Also no backsies 

 

We can bypass that by deporting him back to Canada 

[Vordish]

Interesting replies. On the one hand my post has been called "homophobic", among other things...of which I could merely respond that to use the word "homophobic" to describe my points of contention is to express a "phobia" of a different sort; criticism of the criticism of anything homosexual in nature. It is an endless circle and one cannot be objective and claim one is right above the other without arguing in absolutes. Another debate entirely. That being said...

 

The primary objection to my OP is along the lines of "It is against the established lore". The only "lore" that I am aware of is the codex entry previously quoted that is entitled "Sexuality in Thedas". I have also recently learned that a volume was published entitled "The World of Thedas" in which this codex is an excerpt from an article called "The Sex Lives of Everyday Thedosians".

 

Alright. Fine. It is established in previous lore. That point cannot be denied, but the rest of my contentions still stand. Even more so...if your going to use this as the backbone of your argument...then it becomes incredibly subjective as to what is allowed sexually in Thedas that is not condemnable. For instance...the codex entry explicitly states that judgment only resides when its done in the public eye or in "awful excess". The contention is "sex of any kind".

 

As such, if one were careful to avoid subjective "awful excess" and the "public eye"...then this justifies incest, bigamy, polygamy, pedophilia and any other behavior that one could think of in the realm of "sexuality". Besides, how could something be in awful excess if the public is unaware of it in the first place?

 

You wish to judge that the sexual practices(which have also been done in the real world) as not what is being spoken of about here? I could. Its interpretable and Bioware could only clear up the confusion by clarifying that this codex entry was to specifically single out homosexual activity in and of itself. This leads to the question that this "lore" was with the aforementioned intention of introducing the LGBT community into its games in the first place and without any such condemnation from anyone; hence the reason I said it was unfair that it couldn't be condemned by any player throughout DA:I.

 

So...the inclusion of "gay" situations, in this specific context, without condemnation of any sort for either personal or roleplaying reasons, I argue, is a specific intention on Biowares part to present LGBT situations to the public eye and weave the thread to be specifically supportive or "neutral" in all cases.

 

I still am not persuaded that it is fair.

[TheLastArchivist]

We can't have normal dialog between adult characters in a 18+ game...amazing.

 

Yes. People do judge others based on the values passed on by their traditional religious upbringing. 

Yes. Homosexual relationships do disgust some people. And no, there's nothing wrong with it because it works both ways. Homosexuals are also greatly bothered by hetero couples. The problem lies in discriminating one another.

Yes. These things are normal and being an atheist/LGBT defender is no better. There's intolerance and dogmatism from both sides. Just see how both sides demoralize each other to try and invalidate their adversary's beliefs and philosophy.

 

We can't have a normal conversation where someone expresses open dislike for someone's peculiar habit.

 

But we can have a Qunari  saying women don't fight.

We can slay humans as elves in cold blood (DA;O, Dalish origin, deciding the fate of three humans who stumble in the forest).

We can manipulate monsters to slaughter an entire tribe (DA:O, werewolves kill the Dalish.)

We can force a former drug addict to become addicted once more (DA:I, Cullen's lyrium addiction)

We can put a murderous tyrant on the throne and condemn thousands of dwarves to a grim fate (DA:O, defend Bhelen and help Branka build golems.) 

We can handle dangerous amount of poison to an irresponsible smuggler (DA2, Isabela's friend, Martin's quest.)

We can betray and condemn a friend to exile or death (male cousland marry Anora and get rid of Alistair.)

 

 

Among other politically correct actions that in no way are worse than showing disgust for someone's sexual orientation.

 

 

Being the brilliant and sarcastic man he is, I imagine if Dorian were to know the Inquisitor is bothered by this, he'd merely brush aside his observations, like:

 

"Your gay? Get away from me. Your disgusting." 

Ah. And here I thought we could get along well together. Such a shame.

 

"I don't agree with your lifestyle because of such and such"

I could say the same to you, Inquisitor.

I also happen to disagree with some of the things you say and do. But I don't want to start a fight, much less cause you any trouble.

What do you think we try not to get in each other's way then, hm?

I'll do my best not to, er..."offend" you any further with my dazzling looks and charming wit.

 

"I don't believe the Maker or Andraste would agree with your lifestyle or whatever and you shouldn't be that way"

Ah. The religious card. Well played. Except that your Maker would have already smitten me by now if he didn't agree with the way I live.

Sadly, he doesn't seem to care much for your ideas regarding my preferences, really. 

 

 

Dorian would appreciate the Inquisitor's honesty, being so frank and straightforward himself. He wouldn't be upset and depressed for weeks just because the man/woman has problems with his sexual orientation. He's not that unsure of himself. If anything he might even tease the Inquisitor now and then just to unnerve him.

 

If there's anything more threatening, it's veiled hate, jealousy, envy or disgust, not open dislike (so long as you voice it to the other person's face, not behind her back and NEVER take action against her). 

 

The thing people fear the most is to get on each other's way. The more you know what the other dislikes, the more you can prevent yourself from stepping on her toes. That's how so many people from such different backgrounds manage to get along in the Inquisition, I suppose.

 

And lastly, great friendships are sometimes formed after both sides recognize their mutual hate. And why?

Because overtime, you just get used to each other and learn to accept the best in your friend.

 

But until you share the truth, you'll always have that stuck in your throat. And it might come out at the wrong time.

[MACharlie1]

Interesting replies. On the one hand my post has been called "homophobic", among other things...of which I could merely respond that to use the word "homophobic" to describe my points of contention is to express a "phobia" of a different sort; criticism of the criticism of anything homosexual in nature. It is an endless circle and one cannot be objective and claim one is right above the other without arguing in absolutes. Another debate entirely. That being said...

 

The primary objection to my OP is along the lines of "It is against the established lore". The only "lore" that I am aware of is the codex entry previously quoted that is entitled "Sexuality in Thedas". I have also recently learned that a volume was published entitled "The World of Thedas" in which this codex is an excerpt from an article called "The Sex Lives of Everyday Thedosians".

 

Alright. Fine. It is established in previous lore. That point cannot be denied, but the rest of my contentions still stand. Even more so...if your going to use this as the backbone of your argument...then it becomes incredibly subjective as to what is allowed sexually in Thedas that is not condemnable. For instance...the codex entry explicitly states that judgment only resides when its done in the public eye or in "awful excess". The contention is "sex of any kind".

 

As such, if one were careful to avoid subjective "awful excess" and the "public eye"...then this justifies incest, bigamy, polygamy, pedophilia and any other behavior that one could think of in the realm of "sexuality". Besides, how could something be in awful excess if the public is unaware of it in the first place?

 

You wish to judge that the sexual practices(which have also been done in the real world) as not what is being spoken of about here? I could. Its interpretable and Bioware could only clear up the confusion by clarifying that this codex entry was to specifically single out homosexual activity in and of itself. This leads to the question that this "lore" was with the aforementioned intention of introducing the LGBT community into its games in the first place and without any such condemnation from anyone; hence the reason I said it was unfair that it couldn't be condemned by any player throughout DA:I.

 

So...the inclusion of "gay" situations, in this specific context, without condemnation of any sort for either personal or roleplaying reasons, I argue, is a specific intention on Biowares part to present LGBT situations to the public eye and weave the thread to be specifically supportive or "neutral" in all cases.

 

I still am not persuaded that it is fair.

Let me put it this way:

 

PR backlash would be catastrophic for Bioware. 

 

Regardless of lore or anything, giving players options to react negatively to any sort of "type" of person that also exists in our own real world would be a disaster. Imagine if a player was able to be "uncomfortable" with Vivienne. Or be "uncomfortable" with a woman wielding a sword. Those options would get Bioware in shitload of trouble.  

[Nefla]

Not actually true, there are homophobic persons in Thedas, even outside Tevinter. Hawke's uncle was homophobic.

While Thedas is not homophobic, individuals can be,

Gamlen's not homophobic, he was just confused by the fact that his nephew goes around wearing a dress.

[Monica21]

Interesting replies. On the one hand my post has been called "homophobic", among other things...of which I could merely respond that to use the word "homophobic" to describe my points of contention is to express a "phobia" of a different sort; criticism of the criticism of anything homosexual in nature. It is an endless circle and one cannot be objective and claim one is right above the other without arguing in absolutes. Another debate entirely. That being said...

 

The primary objection to my OP is along the lines of "It is against the established lore". The only "lore" that I am aware of is the codex entry previously quoted that is entitled "Sexuality in Thedas". I have also recently learned that a volume was published entitled "The World of Thedas" in which this codex is an excerpt from an article called "The Sex Lives of Everyday Thedosians".

 

Alright. Fine. It is established in previous lore. That point cannot be denied, but the rest of my contentions still stand. Even more so...if your going to use this as the backbone of your argument...then it becomes incredibly subjective as to what is allowed sexually in Thedas that is not condemnable. For instance...the codex entry explicitly states that judgment only resides when its done in the public eye or in "awful excess". The contention is "sex of any kind".

 

As such, if one were careful to avoid subjective "awful excess" and the "public eye"...then this justifies incest, bigamy, polygamy, pedophilia and any other behavior that one could think of in the realm of "sexuality". Besides, how could something be in awful excess if the public is unaware of it in the first place?

 

You wish to judge that the sexual practices(which have also been done in the real world) as not what is being spoken of about here? I could. Its interpretable and Bioware could only clear up the confusion by clarifying that this codex entry was to specifically single out homosexual activity in and of itself. This leads to the question that this "lore" was with the aforementioned intention of introducing the LGBT community into its games in the first place and without any such condemnation from anyone; hence the reason I said it was unfair that it couldn't be condemned by any player throughout DA:I.

 

So...the inclusion of "gay" situations, in this specific context, without condemnation of any sort for either personal or roleplaying reasons, I argue, is a specific intention on Biowares part to present LGBT situations to the public eye and weave the thread to be specifically supportive or "neutral" in all cases.

 

I still am not persuaded that it is fair.

 

Let's be realistic here. The judgment of real world sexual practices is often done with an eye on the Biblical Old Testament. There is no such parallel in the Andrastian Chant, so I suppose if you want to talk about rp reasons to condemn gays, then you'll have to find something else. The codex entry you pointed to does not meet that criteria for in-game condemnation of Dorian's sexuality. At most, all you can really do is ask him what the big deal is with providing an heir.

 

And here I was thinking how nice it would be to have a world where people could just be who they are without religion behind them, and then someone wants to create a reason to be a homophobe.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

Canada is not generally regarded as a evil empire.  

 

We're very sneaky.

 

Are you sure?

 

Shh... 

 

I can assure you we thought you would like our gift.

 

Also no backsies 

 

Yeah... that's it... that's the ticket...

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

So...the inclusion of "gay" situations, in this specific context, without condemnation of any sort for either personal or roleplaying reasons, I argue, is a specific intention on Biowares part to present LGBT situations to the public eye and weave the thread to be specifically supportive or "neutral" in all cases.

 

I still am not persuaded that it is fair.

 

Right... so representing homosexuality, but not condemning it, isn't fair to you. I repeat: No one is required to fairly represent your political views. They cannot represent all people's political views, and in this instance, there was no specific lore reason to do so.

 

of which I could merely respond that to use the word "homophobic" to describe my points of contention is to express a "phobia" of a different sort; criticism of the criticism of anything homosexual in nature. It is an endless circle and one cannot be objective and claim one is right above the other without arguing in absolutes. Another debate entirely.

 

No, not being homophobic does not require any kind of absolute. Being anti-straight requires an absolute, and being anti-gay requires an absolute, but being accepting of both, like most people are, simply requires not being an asshole.

 

 

I kind of hope we're done with people trying to argue that the OP's request is about "role playing options," as opposed to his desire to play a self-insert homophobe. Either way, I think I should probably take my leave of the thread.

 

It was nice to see that 90% of the responses in this one were reasonable. It's always good when it works that way.

[Nefla]

Why can't we be revolted by straight people? When some elven widower tells us about his dead wife, we should be able to say "you're disgusting and I'm going to pee on her grave and then pee on you" and he can't say anything about us romancing Iron Bull because it's not gay if it's a Qunari! But seriously, Dorian's dad went all crazy with the blood magic not because he was gay but because he wouldn't contribute to the lineage. I'd imagine his father would have attempted the same thing if he'd tried to marry a woman who was infertile/below his station/not a mage or from a mage family, etc...so homophobic dialogue options make no sense.