334 réponses à ce sujet

[Maiden Ty One]

I was really surprised Bioware made one of their characters' romances an S&M romance in their latest game. I've been wanting them to do something like this for ages, but never thought they'd do it in a million years. They also did it in a mature and responsible way - they don't grossly misrepresent S&M relationships as far as I can see.

 

Only thing is, while it's great that it's in there, it kind of sucks that your player character is limited to the 'submissive' role. I understand why they did it this way but I'd like to request that in future Bioware games, if we're going to have S&M romances optional, we are given the opportunity to be the 'dominant' one in the relationship (I liked Bull, but I really wanted him to call my Inquisitor 'Mistress' rather than 'Kadan' ).

 

I was dying for something like this in Mass Effect, as my Shepard pretty much is a dominatrix anyway, lol.

 

So I'm thinking Mass Effect 4 (or whatever it will end up being called), if we could be the dominant partner in an S&M relationship, that'd be awesome.

[DaemionMoadrin]

I didn't play through Bull's romance myself, instead I looked up the youtube videos of it. 

 

BioWare got it pretty much wrong. There was lack of communication, it didn't adhere to SSC and Bull only explained how things are supposed to work after the fact. Which is generally bad. It didn't get any better when Bull breaks off the relationship if you don't fully agree with his way. 

 

Honestly, this is almost as bad as 50 Shades of Grey. 

 

Btw... I wouldn't call it a S&M relationship, that's not what it was about. BDSM or kinky would be a better fit. 

 

Soooo... they tried but still managed to misrepresent it. 

[Octarin]

Yet one more reason Iron Bull makes me puke. 

[vertigomez]

Bull scores 10/10, completely amazing in every conceivable way. Hnnnng.

However, I get where you're coming from, OP. Bull's not a sub, but maybe in the next game, we'll have someone who is.

[TheOgre]

Yet one more reason Iron Bull makes me puke. 

 

His character, and the other characters that have come from Qunari lands are rather lively for how de-personalized the Qun forces people to be. 

 

things I liked about him...  Beefy guy, powerful looking, ALIEN, at least in the body. His face was rather humanized. Funny guy, and some cool moments where he had you play as a random soldier, not the herald or anything, to get to know the soldiers who fight for you. 

 

But his romance part? I'd kick him to the curb if I ever played a female inquisitor and he told me that's how it'll be. Bah.

[Octarin]

His character, and the other characters that have come from Qunari lands are rather lively for how de-personalized the Qun forces people to be. 

 

things I liked about him...  Beefy guy, powerful looking, ALIEN, at least in the body. His face was rather humanized. Funny guy, and some cool moments where he had you play as a random soldier, not the herald or anything, to get to know the soldiers who fight for you. 

 

But his romance part? I'd kick him to the curb if I ever played a female inquisitor and he told me that's how it'll be. Bah.

 

I am trying immensely hard to find something likeable about that character. Starting from his horrible looks, nothing like the Qunari we knew, and nothing of their demeanour and depth. He's shallow, he's cheap, he's tacky, he's trashy, he's vulgar. And I could put up with vulgar if it didn't have all the rest escorting it. If I had some viable choice I'd leave him where he is, without me, but the Qunari alliance and the war table missions he unlocks are very helpful. I generally go through all his quests thinking "you f@ckin idiot..." Anyway, there's probably a reason why the devs decided to dish the utterly majestic Sten/Arishok look-&-style to adopt Mr. Trash and Smash. I can't see what that can possibly be, but there's bound to be one.

[Aulis Vaara]

I always cringe when I hear someone call it S&M. Anyone who's actually interested should know better.

[In Exile]

I am trying immensely hard to find something likeable about that character. Starting from his horrible looks, nothing like the Qunari we knew, and nothing of their demeanour and depth. He's shallow, he's cheap, he's tacky, he's trashy, he's vulgar. And I could put up with vulgar if it didn't have all the rest escorting it. If I had some viable choice I'd leave him where he is, without me, but the Qunari alliance and the war table missions he unlocks are very helpful. I generally go through all his quests thinking "you f@ckin idiot..." Anyway, there's probably a reason why the devs decided to dish the utterly majestic Sten/Arishok look-&-style to adopt Mr. Trash and Smash. I can't see what that can possibly be, but there's bound to be one.

Bioware likes to undercut character archetypes. Varric is the anti-dwarf for example (no beard, uses a bow...)

The IB is just Bioware doing that to their own created race. More importantly, it's to show how close the IB is to a Tal-Vasoth. For all his talk of the Qun, he's not very eager for them to come back or for him to go back.

[Octarin]

Bioware likes to undercut character archetypes. Varric is the anti-dwarf for example (no beard, uses a bow...)

The IB is just Bioware doing that to their own created race. More importantly, it's to show how close the IB is to a Tal-Vasoth. For all his talk of the Qun, he's not very eager for them to come back or for him to go back.

 

None of that is making me like that trash any better. Even his "company" is a joke. A bunch of castaway losers led by a bigger loser. Oh, how grand. Nah, I'm just not an Iron Bull fan, and the funny thing is, the Inquisition Qunari was the reason I was MOST excited before release. 

 

Edit: The only one I actually like from amongst that lot is Krem, and I like him extremely much. I just WISH that Krem was the companion instead of Bull. But, no, the singlemost likeable character, and we have to kill him. What fun.

[DaemionMoadrin]

It doesn't really matter for the romance if Iron Bull is a proper Qunari or not. There are some who like him a lot, there are some who can't stand him. Fine.

 

What matters is that IB makes a really bad dominant. Either the writers didn't know any better and just added that part in because Fifty Shades of Grey is so popular or they did so on purpose because ... reason? Maybe you are supposed to tell him to **** off? I don't know.

 

He doesn't compromise, he insists on doing things his way ... all the while he acts almost submissive around Vivienne. That part made me smile, actually.

 

So I don't know what the intent here was but it seems IB is a poser who has no clue what he's doing and it's your own fault for going along with it.

 

I don't know what the mainstream thinks how BDSM actually works but there are some basics that shouldn't surprise anyone. Like, asking for consent first, not after. Or not simply telling your partner what they should feel and that they'll get used to it or such nonsense. All that possessive behaviour is kind of degrading, too. And not in the good way.

[Panda]

I really like that BW made Iron Bull's romance BDSM, it spices things up and brings something new and exciting to romance table. I have heard some players say it's not perfect representation of BDSM relationship, but I still like Weekes take on that.

[Fredward]

It was a nice shot but that was only 'great' S&M if 50 Shades is your measuring stick.

[Octarin]

I really like that BW made Iron Bull's romance BDSM, it spices things up and brings something new and exciting to romance table. I have heard some players say it's not perfect representation of BDSM relationship, but I still like Weekes take on that.

 

Enforcing something isn't BDSM. At the very base of it, BDSM is ALWAYS consensual. Therefore, telling your mate "you'll do this whether you like it or not and whether you've agreed that I will be telling you what to do" is a long ways away from BDSM. I let it slip before, cause nobody made much point of it, but you did, and it kinda sticks out now. IB's behaviour, if that's how it is, is not BDSM, he's just being a f@cking @sshole. And having people think that this attitude is what a Dominant is like is seriously counter-productive to both BDSM and vanilla relationships. Boundaries always need to be set, regardless the "scene". Boundaries means mutual respect. 

[Panda]

Enforcing something isn't BDSM. At the very base of it, BDSM is ALWAYS consensual. Therefore, telling your mate "you'll do this whether you like it or not and whether you've agreed that I will be telling you what to do" is a long ways away from BDSM. I let it slip before, cause nobody made much point of it, but you did, and it kinda sticks out now. IB's behaviour, if that's how it is, is not BDSM, he's just being a f@cking @sshole. And having people think that this attitude is what a Dominant is like is seriously counter-productive to both BDSM and vanilla relationships. Boundaries always need to be set, regardless the "scene". Boundaries means mutual respect. 

 

I don't see Iron Bull's romance being like that and I think there is respect and consent.

[DaemionMoadrin]

I really like that BW made Iron Bull's romance BDSM, it spices things up and brings something new and exciting to romance table. I have heard some players say it's not perfect representation of BDSM relationship, but I still like Weekes take on that.

 

I could live with "not perfect" ... because that's realistic. I'd be happy with "not perfect".

 

What I don't like much is it being wrong and that's a word I use rarely in that context. What two adults do with each other is their business and as long as it works for them, no one gets to say anything about it.

 

The problem in DA:I is that it isn't something that only affects two people and even then IB kind of dropped the ball. Here the relationship represents a non-standard relationship dynamic and for most players it will be one of their first experiences of that kind... so maybe we should get a consensual one? Something not ripe for abuse?

 

I'd love to tell that stuff like that doesn't happen in RL, but sadly it does and it almost always ends in tears. Or worse. Often worse, actually.

[DaemionMoadrin]

I don't see Iron Bull's romance being like that and I think there is respect and consent.

 

Eh... no. He outright tells you that he manipulated you and only informs you of what it was about the day after. How can you make an informed decision and give your consent if you have no idea what's going to happen?

[WildOrchid]

all the while he acts almost submissive around Vivienne. That part made me smile, actually.

 

Most likely because she reminds him of a qunari tamassran... from the dominant attitude, pose and 'horns'. And tamassrans are... scary and qunari respect them.

The fact that Bull acts as a 'yes man' around Viv has nothing to do with anything sexual, but respect tbh.

 

 

 

But yeah i'll agree how he's bad in dom/sub play, i've heard a lot of ppl who know about BDSM rules and they disapprove of Bull's actions.

[Octarin]

Eh... no. He outright tells you that he manipulated you and only informs you of what it was about the day after. How can you make an informed decision and give your consent if you have no idea what's going to happen?

 

Deception is never OK. We really need to start pointing this out as a society. Deception isn't cool, isn't adventurous, isn't funny. Deception is hurtful and dishonest. In any background and situation, not only BDSM, but for everyone. Some people get into the BDSM scene precisely because there are far fewer chances for deception, because things have been "contracted out mutually" from the very beggining, something we hardly ever do in "normal" relationships. But when someone has been broken, disrespected, cheated, lied to, deceived, humiliated, ridiculed in a "normal" relationship setting, they are prone to wanting clear-cut boundaries and safelocks in their next endeavour. 

[Panda]

Eh... no. He outright tells you that he manipulated you and only informs you of what it was about the day after. How can you make an informed decision and give your consent if you have no idea what's going to happen?

 

He asks your consent for sex before it and later explains what it means if you want to romance him and keep having sex with him. I don't see anything non-consentual about the romance.

[vertigomez]

Hahahahaha oh lawd, topic's barely started and we're already at "Bull's a rapist! I know because somebody told me that once!!1"

Dude asks for the PC's consent over and over and over. If you're not down for the kind of sex he's into, you can say no. You have MULTIPLE opportunities to do so. Bull's not gonna change his predilections just for you, and if he was a sub nobody would give two craps that he wasn't interested in switching it up. But oh no, Bull's a top, time to question his motives!

I'm just gonna leave this here and go on my merry way: Riding the Bull - Kink and Dragon Age: Inquisition.

[DaemionMoadrin]

Most likely because she reminds him of a qunari tamassran... from the dominant attitude, pose and 'horns'. And tamassrans are... scary and qunari respect them.

The fact that Bull acts as a 'yes man' around Viv has nothing to do with anything sexual, but respect tbh.

 

But yeah i'll agree how he's bad in dom/sub play, i've heard a lot of ppl who know about BDSM rules and they disapprove of Bull's actions.

 

The thing is... BDSM is fluid. There are no rules or rituals or conventions you need to adhere to, nothing of that is necessary. Nothing except the underlying SSC/RACK which is the foundation of those relationships.

 

So, fluid... what I mean with that is that it can mean different things for different people. It doesn't have to be sexual. It doesn't even have to be a relationship. I know submissive people who clean the house of a dominant two times a week and that's all they want to be happy.

 

What it means to IB is something only he knows and open to interpretation for us. Although I agree with you, it's probably just banter.

[Octarin]

He asks your consent for sex before it and later explains what it means if you want to romance him and keep having sex with him. I don't see anything non-consentual about the romance.

 

 

Hahahahaha oh lawd, topic's barely started and we're already at "Bull's a rapist! I know because somebody told me that once!!1"

Dude asks for the PC's consent over and over and over. If you're not down for the kind of sex he's into, you can say no. You have MULTIPLE opportunities to do so. Bull's not gonna change his predilections just for you, and if he was a sub nobody would give two craps that he wasn't interested in switching it up. But oh no, Bull's a top, time to question his motives!

I'm just gonna leave this here and go on my merry way: Riding the Bull - Kink and Dragon Age: Inquisition.

 

Please tell me you don't seriously equate sex with romance. No, really, please. Cause I was under the impression I was conversing with a grown-up. That goes for the next commenter as well, I included him up there. Well, no wonder there are women out there complaining about how men always equate sex with romance... I thought they were exaggerating, but, wow. All I can say is: wow. Speechless. 

 

No words.     

[Panda]

Please tell me you don't seriously equate sex with romance. No, really, please. Cause I was under the impression I was conversing with a grown-up. That goes for the next commenter as well, I included him up there. Well, no wonder there are women out there complaining about how men always equate sex with romance... I thought they were exaggerating, but, wow. All I can say is: wow. Speechless. 

 

No words.     

 

No idea where this is coming from

[TheOgre]

Hmm.. I didn't leap to noncon.. I went to the part where it's "my way or the highway". It's disturbing that people would consider this S&M. It seemed more like "I will do what I want whenever I want, if you don't like it, tough like i'm outta here".

[vertigomez]

Please tell me you don't seriously equate sex with romance. No, really, please. Cause I was under the impression I was conversing with a grown-up. That goes for the next commenter as well, I included him up there. Well, no wonder there are women out there complaining about how men always equate sex with romance... I thought they were exaggerating, but, wow. All I can say is: wow. Speechless. 
 
No words.     

For the record, I'm not a dude.

Also: what are you even talking about?