824 réponses à ce sujet

[AresKeith]

And so we get characters like Vivienne and Sera who are narrative dead weight. Writers have put all effort into banter and forgotten how little it matters. 

 

I like how you constantly focus on Vivienne and Sera

[Heidirs]

I agree there's more to Vivienne's character than meets the eye. And I can understand that people enjoy her in that everyone has different tastes. I just can't stand her. But I like these discussion threads so I can see other people's points of view. I keep hoping to understand Vivienne better and I want to like her character. She's the first Dragon Age companion that I've ever considered not worth recruiting - and I don't like that. There were plenty of other characters like Morrigan and Anders (in DA2) and even Fenris that drove me up the friggin' wall, but I still find them worth while to the point that I want them around even if they annoy me. It bothers me that I can't find any such worth in Vivienne. I feel like I should.

[BabyPuncher]

I like how you constantly focus on Vivienne and Sera

 

Why would that be a problem? They're the worst offenders and pretty shining examples of how not to do this sort of thing. I suppose you might lump in Varric as well, but he's too docile to have anyone actively dislike him.

[daveliam]

I agree there's more to Vivienne's character than meets the eye. And I can understand that people enjoy her in that everyone has different tastes. I just can't stand her. But I like these discussion threads so I can see other people's points of view. I keep hoping to understand Vivienne better and I want to like her character. She's the first Dragon Age companion that I've ever considered not worth recruiting - and I don't like that. There were plenty of other characters like Morrigan and Anders (in DA2) and even Fenris that drove me up the friggin' wall, but I still find them worth while to the point that I want them around even if they annoy me. It bothers me that I can't find any such worth in Vivienne. I feel like I should.

Try doing a playthrough where you support a more conservative reform of the Circle, support her bid for Divine, and give her the white wyvern heart without questioning her motivations. You'll see a softer, more genuinely warm side to her. Perhaps that will help you see both sides of the character.

[AresKeith]

Why would that be a problem? They're the worst offenders. I suppose you might lump in Varric as well, but he's too docile to have anyone actively dislike him.

 

So they're the worst offenders because those two are the most disliked?

[ThreeF]

Why would that be a problem? They're the worst offenders. I suppose you might lump in Varric as well, but he's too docile to have anyone actively dislike him.

How about Blackwall whom I want to gag 90% of the time he is around? What merit Bull has when his personal quest and the whole Qunari involvement can be easily ignored? At least Varric and Vivienne have some connection to the plot. The game can exist even if you don't recruit anyone extra.

[Heidirs]

Try doing a playthrough where you support a more conservative reform of the Circle, support her bid for Divine, and give her the white wyvern heart without questioning her motivations. You'll see a softer, more genuinely warm side to her. Perhaps that will help you see both sides of the character.

 

I have been going through in my current play through and purposely raising her approval. She's nicer to me in greetings and whatnot, but that's not doing too much in changing how I view her.

[BabyPuncher]

So they're the worst offenders because those two are the most disliked?

 

They're the worst offenders because they're the worst offenders. No one else has a 'personal quest' as lame as Sera's or Vivienne's. Being unlikeable on top of that doesn't help matters.

 

But you are right in that other characters, such as Varric, are not much better.

[BabyPuncher]

How about Blackwall whom I want to gag 90% of the time he is around? What merit Bull has when his personal quest and the whole Qunari involvement can be easily ignored? At least Varric and Vivienne have some connection to the plot. The game can exist even if you don't recruit anyone extra.

 

Ignorable or not, both Blackwall and Bull had personal quests that attempted to introduce conflicts to their characters. Both of those quests turned out rather mediocre, but mediocre is still a hell of a lot better than nothing. Which is what Sera and Vivienne had. And yeah, pretty much Varric too.

 

And in any case, you can't divide the story up into 'crucial to the central plot and therefore important' and 'non-crucial to the central plot and therefore unimportant.'

[daveliam]

They're the worst offenders because they're the worst offenders. No one else has a 'personal quest' as lame as Sera's or Vivienne's. Being unlikeable on top of that doesn't help matters.

But you are right in that other characters, such as Varric, are not much better.

Solas' personal quests are total garbage. They add absolutely nothing to his character development or the plot for the game. His and Sera's are the worst in my opinion. Cullen's and Blackwall's are the best. Everyone else is about the same (more or less) in the middle.

[ThreeF]

I agree there's more to Vivienne's character than meets the eye. And I can understand that people enjoy her in that everyone has different tastes. I just can't stand her. But I like these discussion threads so I can see other people's points of view. I keep hoping to understand Vivienne better and I want to like her character. She's the first Dragon Age companion that I've ever considered not worth recruiting - and I don't like that. There were plenty of other characters like Morrigan and Anders (in DA2) and even Fenris that drove me up the friggin' wall, but I still find them worth while to the point that I want them around even if they annoy me. It bothers me that I can't find any such worth in Vivienne. I feel like I should.

I think it's perfectly  fine to dislike a character for what they are, it doesn't diminishes them as characters. I dislike Blackwall's persistence to preach, but I also find the way he is written interesting. There are some things I find disagreeable with Bull's personality too. We can't like everyone, but I rather dislike a character for their personality than find them uninteresting because of the way they are written.

 

 

Ignorable or not, both Blackwall and Bull had personal quests that attempted to introduce conflicts to their characters. Both of those quests turned out rather mediocre, but mediocre is still a hell of a lot better than nothing. Which is what Sera and Vivienne had. And yeah, pretty much Varric too.

 

And in any case, you can't divide the story up into 'crucial to the central plot and therefore important' and 'non-crucial to the central plot and therefore unimportant.'

Dave pretty much covered me in his post above, as long as companion are written as optional side quest these problems will exist. Bull's quest was not mediocre it was pretty bad, forced, done very fast and then forgotten.

 

To me the only quest that really worked was Cullen's and even that one could have been explored a bit more in an aftermath (it is, but only if you are in romance with him).

[LOLandStuff]

Solas' personal quests are total garbage. They add absolutely nothing to his character development or the plot for the game. His and Sera's are the worst in my opinion. Cullen's and Blackwall's are the best. Everyone else is about the same (more or less) in the middle.

 

No wonder Blackwall was asking Solas such childish questions. I'm sure there was more going on between Solas and that spirit that looked female.
 

[BabyPuncher]

Dave, pretty much covered me in his post above, as long as companion are written as optional side quest these problems will exist. Bull's quest was not mediocre it was pretty bad, forced, done very fast and then forgotten.

 

To me the only quest that really worked was Cullen's and even that one could have been explored a bit more in an aftermath (it is, but only if you are in romance with him).

 

The Mass Effect series did basically the same thing and managed to have optional loyalty missions that had strong, compelling, well-written content people enjoyed. Not all of it, obviously, but I think most people would agree that there were a lot of things done well there.

[Heidirs]

Solas' personal quests are total garbage. They add absolutely nothing to his character development or the plot for the game. His and Sera's are the worst in my opinion. Cullen's and Blackwall's are the best. Everyone else is about the same (more or less) in the middle.

 

Solas' personal quest at least brings into question how we've previously understood demons - that they may actually be corrupted spirits and corrupted because we purposely pulled them through. It opens up a whole dialogue on how spirits and demons should be approached and dealt with.

 

Sera's quest shows how far she's willing to go to protect her contacts and the underdogs... but you kind of get that when you first meet her. The one interesting aspect of that quest, however, is that when Sera attacks the noble, she throws her knife at him and misses. At first, I couldn't understand how a rouge could have missed so badly, but I realized afterwards that she missed on purpose so he'd pick it up. She wasn't willing to kill an unarmed man. no matter how much she despised him. She needed to give him the opportunity to fight back. Perhaps a slight detail, but one I found worthwhile.

 

Though, really, I think the most important "quest" for Sera is her scene involving cookies on the roof. Sadly, it's one a lot of players don't get to see. But that one really adds a lot to her character, I think.

 

Vivienne's quest shows that she's capable of loving someone, which in and of itself adds something to character. But you can't talk to her about it afterwards. She just tells you she doesn't want to discuss it, which further closes her character off. I found that disappointing. It could have been an opportunity to bond with her, and then it doesn't happen. So we get this brief glimpse into her character and then nothing comes of it. I found that pretty frustrating. 

[LobselVith8]

I can't remember the exact dialogue but Vivienne was responding to the Inquisitor insinuating that his/her people do not consider magic a danger.

Actially, the Inquisitor's point was about the absense of templars among the Dalish, not about magic itself. Even Merrill says that magic is dangerous; she simply doesn't think its sufficient cause to subjugate mages into Chantry controlled Circles. A view that is shared by the Dalish, who view magic as a "gift of the Creators".

Vivienne is merely pointing out that this isn't true and that the Dalish (and the Vashoth) can be just as cruel.

Except that's not her point, nor does it address the Inquisitor's point about not needing the templars.

Sure she generalizes with the worst examples but for the dalish at least there is one of those examples living in Skyhold and her wider point is still correct. Even in the nicer clans they will only have like about three mages specifically because of the dangers of magic.

Except the Inquisitor says this wasn't the case with his clan, and Zathrian's clan had three mages already then they invited Aneirin to join them.

A first hand account from a victim of such treatment is not "hearsay" and what Vivienne said doesn't actually conflict with the Inquisitors first hand knowledge.

Vivienne addressing what she's heard makes it heresay, and she refutes the Inquisitor correcting her based on what she's heard. In other words, she thinks she knows more about the Dalish than a Dalish elf because of what she's heard from others, which is absurd.

Vivienne is right the Dalish do take the dangers of magic just as seriously as anyone else and they take measures to protect themselves from it.

Vivienne isn't right; she can't even tolerate being corrected about heresay when she's speaking to someone who lived their entire life among the Dalish.

[Heidirs]

I think it's perfectly  fine to dislike a character for what they are, it doesn't diminishes them as characters. I dislike Blackwall's persistence to preach, but I also find the way he is written interesting. There are some things I find disagreeable with Bull's personality too. We can't like everyone, but I rather dislike a character for their personality than find them uninteresting because of the way they are written.

 

I agree I don't have to like her. I wanted to punch Anders through most of DA2. But I need to find her interesting. I need to see some point or worth in having her around. And I don't get that like I do with every other character.

[daveliam]

Vivienne's quest shows that she's capable of loving someone, which in and of itself adds something to character. But you can't talk to her about it afterwards. She just tells you she doesn't want to discuss it, which further closes her character off. I found that disappointing. It could have been an opportunity to bond with her, and then it doesn't happen. So we get this brief glimpse into her character and then nothing comes of it. I found that pretty frustrating.

I wonder if this is locked to her approval rating. Because I've never had her shut me down afterwards. She always talks to me about how she met him, how they fell in love across a ballroom floor, how much she'll miss him, and how much work she has to do to arrange his funeral (including making sure to reach out to his sister and son, which sets up the next cutscene where they visit Skyhold). At that point you can tell her that you will help in anyway and she tells you that she appreciates it but she can handle it. I think she gets a HUGE amount of character development in the four cutscenes involved in her personal quest.

[Heidirs]

Actially, the Inquisitor's point was about the absense of templars among the Dalish, not about magic itself. Even Merrill says that magic is dangerous; she simply doesn't think its sufficient cause to subjugate mages into Chantry controlled Circles. A view that is shared by the Dalish, who view magic as a "gift of the Creators".

Except that's not her point, nor does it address the Inquisitor's point about not needing the templars.

Except the Inquisitor says this wasn't the case with his clan, and Zathrian's clan had three mages already then they invited Aneirin to join them.

Vivienne addressing what she's heard makes it heresay, and she refutes the Inquisitor correcting her based on what she's heard. In other words, she thinks she knows more about the Dalish than a Dalish elf because of what she's heard from others, which is absurd.

Vivienne isn't right; she can't even tolerate being corrected about heresay when she's speaking to someone who lived their entire life among the Dalish.

 

It is generally accepted that the Dalish take steps to make sure they don't have too many mages in one place. They usually only have two or three per clan, and if they end up with more, they try to find another clan to send them to. I believe this is explained both by the First in Origins and by Merrill in DA2. This just illustrates Vivienne's point that the Dalish recognize the danger of magic just as the Chantry does. A few singular clans might accept more, some might accept fewer or force extra mages into exile, but that doesn't change the general concept.

[Heidirs]

I wonder if this is locked to her approval rating. Because I've never had her shut me down afterwards. She always talks to me about how she met him, how they fell in love across a ballroom floor, how much she'll miss him, and how much work she has to do to arrange his funeral (including making sure to reach out to his sister and son, which sets up the next cutscene where they visit Skyhold). At that point you can tell her that you will help in anyway and she tells you that she appreciates it but she can handle it. I think she gets a HUGE amount of character development in the four cutscenes involved in her personal quest.

 

It must be locked via approval because I had her mention via dialogue how they fell in love and something about the funeral, but I never got any extra cutscenes. She just trails off in talking and says she doesn't want to discuss it anymore. I think I offered to help her, though... not sure. I'm working more on her approval this time around, so we'll see what happens.

 

I agree that could add a lot to her character if there is more there than what I go the first time.

[ThreeF]

The Mass Effect series did basically the same thing and managed to have optional loyalty missions that had strong, compelling, well-written content people enjoyed. Not all of it, obviously, but I think most people would agree that there were a lot of things done well there.

Can't comment on that, since it's been a while and I don't remember how they were connected to everything, I have this vague impression that the missions (at least in ME2) were better connected and therefore the story on overall had better flow. I remember not liking  the way loyalty played into consequences, though.

[LobselVith8]

I agree, Cullen is generally a nice guy who's trying to do the right thing. I wasn't trying to imply that Vivienne was hated solely on liking Circles -- what I meant was that she likes Circles, and she bitchily and cleverly defends her position. I do think "you'd do it to one of your own!" adds a little extra fuel to the fire.

I think Vivienne comes across as childish when she can't maintain her composure when others express differing opinions. She comes across as incredibly petty and immature.

I just did the Iron Bull bit, he said "Dalish clans can't have too many mages" unless I totally misheard. That ... seemed to be explaining Dalish clans in general to me.

Except, as the protagonist says, it's a mistake to think all the clans operate in the same way as Minaeve's clan (or the mercenary Dalish's clan). If there really was a three mage limit followed by every single clan, Aneirin wouldn't have been accepted into Zathrian's clan when they already had Lanaya and Elora.

As for knowing about the Dalish ... some clans did kick their extra mages out, some didn't. Imo that wasn't handled well by Bioware because the codex entries you're quoting go directly against what others -- and even your inquisitor -- can say about their experiences.

The Inquisitor can say his clan didn't kick out "extra mages", and can say others don't as well. In fact, there's no evidence this is even done by most of the clans.

Anyway, the fact that not all Dalish clans didn't kick out their extra mages doesn't mean it didn't happen often enough for outsiders to know of the practice. I just replayed that part. If you tell her extra mages got sent to other clans, she simply asks what happens if there aren't any clans with room for more?

It's already covered by the Inquisitor saying they don't kick them out, and we see at least one example of this with Aneirin.

Sure, she's pointing out that they get cut loose -- which we have evidence sometimes happens. I'm just not seeing the "knows more than the Dalish inquisitor" thing, unless you're talking about a different convo.

Vivienne ignoring the Inquisitor's retort to make the same claim she initially did - despite the protagonist correcting her - is precisely an example where she acts like she knows more about the Dalish than the elven Inquisitor.

I think people have every right to dislike Vivienne as she stands, and I can easily see why she'd rub some people the wrong way. What I find puzzling is when people take factually incorrect stands about why she sucks.

Saying that people who disagree with you about Vivienne are wrong isn't exactly conducive to promoting honest discussion about her.

[Sarielle]

The Inquisitor can say his clan didn't kick out "extra mages", and can say others don't as well. In fact, there's no evidence this is even done by most of the clans.


It's already covered by the Inquisitor saying they don't kick them out, and we see at least one example of this with Aneirin.


Vivienne ignoring the Inquisitor's retort to make the same claim she initially did - despite the protagonist correcting her - is precisely an example where she acts like she knows more about the Dalish than the elven Inquisitor.


Saying that people who disagree with you about Vivienne are wrong isn't exactly conducive to promoting honest discussion about her.

 

 

OK. Let's start on what we agree with

 

1) Not all Dalish clans (including potentially the Quizzy's, depending on your answer) kick out extra mages. Some send them to other clans.

2) Some do kick out extra mages. (Minaeve and potentially the Quizzy's, depending on your answer. If you acknowledge your clan does kick them out, Quiz responds with something along the lines of "At least they die free.")

 

... But neither of those things changes Vivienne's question about "What happens if there isn't another clan to send them to?" Your Inquisitor doesn't answer. He/she doesn't say, "Well, we keep them anyway" or offer whatever other solution they use. No, they fall silent. All evidence we have suggests that in this case, extra mages are sent off. Ergo, Vivienne doesn't act like she knows more about the Dalish than the Quiz. She just points out a harsh truth that all societies, even those with "free" mages, have their way of protecting non-mages.

 

There's plenty of room to discuss what we think Vivi's motivations are, whether she's completely self-interested or motivated by a greater good, etc. There is not, as you say, room for "honest discussion" when people's "facts" are straight up incorrect. EDIT: It's like if you said "Well Vivienne doesn't understand because she always had it easy, blah blah" when banter with Cole explicitly reveals this isn't true.

 

 

Party banter is not character development.

 

 

Maybe not development, but it does definitely flesh them out. And if you never take them along, you'll never get remotely the whole picture (as you said later). I don't think that's a problem, though. It's motivation to take different characters, even ones you disagree with/dislike.

[LobselVith8]

OK. Let's start on what we agree with

1) Not all Dalish clans (including potentially the Quizzy's, depending on your answer) kick out extra mages. Some send them to other clans.
2) Some do kick out extra mages. (Minaeve and potentially the Quizzy's, depending on your answer. If you acknowledge your clan does kick them out, Quiz responds with something along the lines of "At least they die free.")

... But neither of those things changes Vivienne's question about "What happens if there isn't another clan to send them to?" Your Inquisitor doesn't answer. He/she doesn't say, "Well, we keep them anyway" or offer whatever other solution they use. No, they fall silent. All evidence we have suggests that in this case, extra mages are sent off. Ergo, Vivienne doesn't act like she knows more about the Dalish than the Quiz. She just points out a harsh truth that all societies, even those with "free" mages, have their way of protecting non-mages.

The Inquisitor isn't given an opportunity to answer because Vivienne talks over the main character to continue her spiel, not because the protagonist falls silent.

And Aneirin is already an example that an extra mage isn't necessarily kicked out, so I don't see why you keep repeating the same spiel despite the protagonist also saying that there are clans who don't kick out any additional mages.

As to why some clans do this, Merrill already addressed that part of the reason why the Dalish are nomadic is because of the templars, who hunt down apostates. We also know the Dales was a sovereign kingdom with free mages.

There's plenty of room to discuss what we think Vivi's motivations are, whether she's completely self-interested or motivated by a greater good, etc. There is not, as you say, room for "honest discussion" when people's "facts" are straight up incorrect.

Or when people use incorrect information to paint Vivienne as "correct".

[Heidirs]

The Inquisitor isn't given an opportunity to answer because Vivienne talks over the main character to continue her spiel, not because the protagonist falls silent.

 

I think you are projecting some of your roleplay over the facts of the game. Vivienne's dialogue does not run over the dialogue of the main character. Vivienne speaks, the Inquisitor speaks, then Vivienne voices her approval or disapproval. Then the conversation moves on. The game does not provide an opportunity of the conversation to be continued. 

[Akkos]

 

Giving background information is of course an important part of writing a character, Vivienne's game playing skills fell flat in Halamshiral in that she should have been far more relevant to that quest. I dunno why the devs didn't just make it so she attended no matter what even if that meant not as a party member. Other than that though we do see her abilities being shown in the game on several occasions.  

 

I think making her role relevant in Halamshiral will prove her being more power-hungry like these "rats" thinks.....   It will make her more "political-driven" getting involved in something that won't benefit her stance as a mage, her urge to restore the circle and her lover, Duke Bastien as the head of the council (My guess - everybody in Halamshiral knew she is mistress to a noble and being a mage) . 

 

Say you want Celene assasinated, her getting involved will mean she helped the Inquisitor get Celene assassinated.    That's how I see It... I don't know you guys.

 

I'm happy she was less involved in this quest, but her presence in the quest is satisfying as you see how she read people's movement in The Game. And she was worried about Cole  at the same time. She even spot Florianne being missing throughout the whole quest.