40 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

No, my Hawke wasn't a blood mage. Her attitude - not that I could ever express any attitude - could be described as "tentative support" for any variant that involves only the mage herself and willling participants. Consequently, she supported Merrill and attempted to help her with the eluvian.

No, my Hawke wasn't "evil". She was a somewhat angry mage revolutionary, but she didn't even support Anders in the end.

 

Regarding Bioware's character development, I can even unterstand the rationale for making Hawke more skeptical because of what she witnessed in Kirkwall. I can also understand how a "blood mage Hawke" could be viewed as a case of gameplay/story segregation since it was never a possible part of DA2's story.

 

However, in no way would she ever have expressed her acquired dislike in such inane platitudes as she does in DAI. "It never ends well", really? That's really as cliché as it can get, the stuff impatient parents tell their children to stop them from asking more questions. Would this impostor then argue that it was blood magic that killed Merril's clan, that that outcome was set in stone as soon as Merrill started, with none of the other participants ever acting anything other than reasonable?

 

Wouldn't it have been enough to make her skeptical, rather than letting her make a global and stupid condemnation? This is like Hawke and Isabela with the "diplomatic" (=condescending and moralizing) option when she returned with the book, only I didn't even have a way to avoid it. Was it too much to ask for a Hawke who was aware of the fact that reality isn't simple, with her father having been a blood mage after all?

 

Yeah, I understand Hawke is an NPC in DAI. The DA team does as it wants, and we players must take it. I can, however, express in the strongest possible way how much I hate this character development. For any returning protagonists that may appear in future games, I have one wish: shelve the inane platitudes!

 

[TK514]

I wouldn't say being forced to use Blood Magic on one occasion and hating every moment of it qualifies Malcom as a Blood Mage.

[ThreeF]

That speech was obnoxious.

[sleeping heart]

That speech was obnoxious.

Yes it was. That is why Hawke is now dead in my game. 

 

And my Hawke was a blood mage which made that speech a bit worse if you ask me.

[fchopin]

That is one reason why our characters should never return as NPC's in new games.

[ThreeF]

Was it too much to ask for a Hawke who was aware of the fact that reality isn't simple, with her father having been a blood mage after all?

This is actually a general problem I'm seeing through all the games, sure we are given choices that are often not black and white, but on overall DA plays with rather simple morality of good and evil. This becomes especially apparent in the dialogue options of each and every PC in the game, this is also probably why Sarcastic Hawke is more popular too, because this particular type while not especially complex goes beyond that. It would be nice if it would go beyond this: a lawful act that sacrifices many innocent lives, but brings a more favorable outcome, an act of kindness that bears personal cost and can backfire, etc. I think the game's better moments are when the morality of what is said and done is not dictated by the game and is left unclear, for the player to judge.

[Ieldra]

This is actually a general problem I'm seeing through all the games, sure we are given choices that are often not black and white, but on overall DA plays with rather simple morality of good and evil. This becomes especially apparent in the dialogue options of each and every PC in the game, this is also probably why Sarcastic Hawke is more popular too, because this particular type while not especially complex goes beyond that. It would be nice if it would go beyond this: a lawful act that sacrifices many innocent lives, a but brings a more favorable outcome, an act of kindness that bears personal cost and can backfire, etc. I think the game's better moments are when the morality of what is said and done is not dictated by the game and is left unclear, for the player to judge.

Absolutely - and actually, I think the DA games in general haven't been too bad in giving me interesting options for decisions with little heavy-handed moralizing, in particular compared with Mass Effect which was excessively bad about this. You couldn't make a pragmatic decision without being hounded by the story to change it or without having a bad outcome attached to it. The DA games never had that "feel-good morality" to the same degree as ME. On the other hand, there are moments like this, when it appears as if the story takes the side of the simplistic, and it becomes all the more annoying for being unexpected. An NPC's voice is not more than that: an in-world opinion. I can accept it as that and not attach further meaning to it. However, it's different if that NPC had been a protagonist before. One would think that the writers respect players' protagonists enough to not force a viewpoint on them that flattens the character in such a way.

 

I actually don't mind that much if I'm forced into some variant of "good". DA's problem is rather more that its story and I disagree about the evilness of certain things, and that makes things difficult at times. Beyond that, what I absolutely can't stand is "simple".

[Dai Grepher]

My diplomatic rogue female Hawke spoke against the Wardens' blood magic, and she seemed pretty on the ball. I don't see a problem here. I have not played DA2 yet, but even I can tell that Hawke is not our character. Hawke is BioWare's character. You just get to tweak the character somewhat.

[Fast Jimmy]

This is why Hawke should never have been brought back as a major part of the game in the first place. Turning PC characters into NPC characters should be the sole providence of PnP sessions, who can accurately play with every nuance the history of the known character.

I'm honestly surprised the choice hasn't resulted in more complaints than this.

[Icy Magebane]

That is one reason why our characters should never return as NPC's in new games.

I think this is the bottom line.  Once Bioware decided to use Hawke as an NPC, the character was no longer ours.  One of the devs (I think it was Gaider, but I'm not 100% sure) even said as much more than once on these forums, so this is the kind of thing I was expecting.  If it helps, maybe the fact that "Varric lied" about Hawke's whereabouts can also extend to "Varric lied" about the specifics of DA2... meaning that each individual playthrough that we experienced is something that "could have been," and that the canon Hawke that eventually showed up as an NPC never touched blood magic.  I guess that still makes the Friendship path with Merrill kind of absurd, but she's not in this game, so it's all good, right? 

[Silcron]

What bugs me about this is that in the keep you can select what type of personality Hawke had, and that is properly shown in DAI. So if they could keep that level of nuance did Hawke really had to turn into a plot device? I mean it's the same as ME3 Geth, screw previous characterization, we need to run this point home.

Still, apart from the blood magic thing Hawke isn't done badly. Maybe that's why there aren't that many complaints.

I mean, the other option is the PC must return is what Lucasarts did to Revan. "Male, lightside Revan who romanced Bastila is the canon, the rest consider alternative universes or something."

Tbh I'm more afraid with the future of the Inquisition or the Divine, it seems the outcomes would be too different for future sequels, so the retcon or making the differences meaningless seems like it's going to happen.

[Panda]

I have this blue blood mage Hawke and it was quite weird to hear him being so mad about blood magic. I guess time between DA2 and DAI made him biggest hypocrite ever XD Oh, well, in the end I headcanoned it as that he hates blood magic and blood mages thus he hates himself, and then he sacrificed himself and died. So I guess I kinda saved the story with that headcanon, pretty tragic though I guess ^^;

[Farangbaa]

ALlowing blood magic to be playable was a mistake anyway. Dunno how it is in DA2, but in DA:O it was ridiculous at times.

'OMG OMG OMG OMG, A BLOOD MAGE'
Said Wynne the Blood mage.

[Uccio]

It was rather hilarious. My rebellious blood mage Hawke who didn´t see anything wrong with blood magic before and embraced it willingly, was suddenly spouting something really weird. And he never had no intention to die. Corypheus is mine? wtf? Corypheus can eat ****, where is the exit. I´m going back to Merrill - should have been my line.

[Darkly Tranquil]

Don't see why they couldn't have put a Pro/Anti Blood Magic Option in the Keep and had a version of the dialogue for each.

[PhroXenGold]

It's kinda odd, because Hawke's attitude was almost spot on for the one I'd used for my first playthrough. His attitude to blood magic is exactly how I had played him. I thought it might've had something to do with the choices I'd made in setting him up in the keep. Then I played through a second time with a completely different Hawke set up in the keep (a BM of course), and...yeah....

[DWareFan]

Or go back to the keep and make Hawke just the opposite of the Hawke you played, male Hawke for female Hawkes, etc.  That way Hawke isn't your Hawke and it's easier to let him die...just saying, gonna save Alistair for sure.

[Winged Silver]

I must say I agree! My first run through Inquisition, I used my diplomatic blood mage Hawke. Imagine my surprise when she started going off about how bad blood magic is like...like okay Hawke calm down you used blood magic and you're not dead....

 

While I wouldn't point to this as evidence for why Bioware should never make use of old PCs as NPCs, I would argue that they need to put a little more thought into the Keep, in terms of recreating a passable likeness to the Hawkes we were given the option to play (if Hawke was always meant to be anti blood magic, then the specialization really shouldn't have been an option in the first place). Like the ability to select Hawke's personality, specializations, and opinion/feelings on 1-3 polarizing topics in Thedas (blood magic, the chantry, etc.). 

 

I'm not against them doing it, I think there's potential for it to be very interesting, but I feel that if they can't do it well, they should probably just focus on other things.

[Dai Grepher]

Here's a thought. Maybe a pro-bloodmagic Hawke is lying. Or maybe that Hawke takes issue with the misuse of bloodmagic.

[In Exile]

No, my Hawke wasn't a blood mage. Her attitude - not that I could ever express any attitude - could be described as "tentative support" for any variant that involves only the mage herself and willling participants. Consequently, she supported Merrill and attempted to help her with the eluvian.

No, my Hawke wasn't "evil". She was a somewhat angry mage revolutionary, but she didn't even support Anders in the end.

 

Regarding Bioware's character development, I can even unterstand the rationale for making Hawke more skeptical because of what she witnessed in Kirkwall. I can also understand how a "blood mage Hawke" could be viewed as a case of gameplay/story segregation since it was never a possible part of DA2's story.

 

However, in no way would she ever have expressed her acquired dislike in such inane platitudes as she does in DAI. "It never ends well", really? That's really as cliché as it can get, the stuff impatient parents tell their children to stop them from asking more questions. Would this impostor then argue that it was blood magic that killed Merril's clan, that that outcome was set in stone as soon as Merrill started, with none of the other participants ever acting anything other than reasonable?

 

Wouldn't it have been enough to make her skeptical, rather than letting her make a global and stupid condemnation? This is like Hawke and Isabela with the "diplomatic" (=condescending and moralizing) option when she returned with the book, only I didn't even have a way to avoid it. Was it too much to ask for a Hawke who was aware of the fact that reality isn't simple, with her father having been a blood mage after all?

 

Yeah, I understand Hawke is an NPC in DAI. The DA team does as it wants, and we players must take it. I can, however, express in the strongest possible way how much I hate this character development. For any returning protagonists that may appear in future games, I have one wish: shelve the inane platitudes!

 

That's not something that was part of DA2, however. While Bioware allowed for the specialization gameplay-wise you never could express a view on blood magic. There are some exceptions that are very tangential - this being related to not freaking out like a frothing nutter over Merrill - but you're not really expressing an approval of BM so much as you are generally responding to the party members negative reaction to BM in those cases. 

 

Bioware makes their characters - as a rule - quite anti-BM. This is why e.g. Anders is very anti-BM despite his views on magic and mages. 

 

Bioware has always been about moralising. It happens almost once per plot in every one of their games. I know later on you say that DA isn't like that, but it most certainly is like that, especially early on. I think the major difference is that you agree with some of the platitudes. The GWs for example are just filled with them. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I quite liked Hawke's statements on Blood Magic, because my Hawke was a blood mage, but she wasn't open about it. Having her openly condemn it worked perfectly for me.

Much as Blood Mage Wynne openly criticised blood magic.

Yes, it's incompatible with am unapologetic blood mage, but BioWare doesn't typically allow such transparent antagonism from its protagonists, so I question why any player would try it.

[Ianamus]

My Hawke was always anti blood mage, but I couldn't get over just how depressing he was. I mean jesus, I understand that DA:2 was pretty miserable but you never acted like that in the actual game.

 

That said I didn't find it a major factor in my enjoyment of the game, as Hawke thankfully left as quickly as he arrived. And the interactions between Cass and Varric that happened as a result more than justified his inclusion for me. 

 

I suppose in the end I didn't feel strongly enough about either DA2 or Hawke to complain. I'm sure thats why few people in general complain about it. 

[Andraste_Reborn]

I quite liked Hawke's statements on Blood Magic, because my Hawke was a blood mage, but she wasn't open about it. Having her openly condemn it worked perfectly for me.

 

Yeah, weirdly enough, my blood mage Hawke is going to be more in-character than my 'canon' Hawke who openly supported Merrill at every opportunity. My blood mage Hawke was always going 'curse those blood mages!' and shaking her fist, then going around the corner and performing some blood magic. She even sided with the Templars and became Viscount.

[Ieldra]

I quite liked Hawke's statements on Blood Magic, because my Hawke was a blood mage, but she wasn't open about it. Having her openly condemn it worked perfectly for me.

Much as Blood Mage Wynne openly criticised blood magic.

Yes, it's incompatible with am unapologetic blood mage, but BioWare doesn't typically allow such transparent antagonism from its protagonists, so I question why any player would try it.

I didn't expect a fully supportive statement. I just wanted something less inane and stupid than "It never works because it's evil". I'm not exactly delighted that Hawke is canonically Andrastian either, but at least she isn't stupid about it. Whatever else they'll make my ex-protagonists doing, I don't do stupid. That's an immediate "not my X any more". Shepard did it in ME3, Hawke in DAI. What the hell is wrong with those writers? Why the heck are they so determined to make our protagonists stupid? As if having half a brain and actually thinking for yourself about what's good or not rather than accepting some preconfigured ideology is somehow undesirable...

[Sylvius the Mad]

I didn't expect a fully supportive statement. I just wanted something less inane and stupid than "It never works because it's evil". I'm not exactly delighted that Hawke is canonically Andrastian either, but at least she isn't stupid about it. Whatever else they'll make my ex-protagonists doing, I don't do stupid. That's an immediate "not my X any more". Shepard did it in ME3, Hawke in DAI. What the hell is wrong with those writers? Why the heck are they so determined to make our protagonists stupid? As if having half a brain and actually thinking for yourself about what's good or not rather than accepting some preconfigured ideology is somehow undesirable...

Hawke is canonically openly Andrastian, which is a different thing.

She can be skeptical all you want; she just doesn't talk about it.

For years, I worked at an organization whose mission I thought foolish. I respected their ideals, but their idealism was hopelessly naïve. But I never said so openly when I was there, because that would have been dumb.