I dislike it when people blatantly misrepresent what's in the story or what it's about. The worst part is that it doesn't lead us anywhere, really.
... Your point being? It's not like Inquisitor gets it out of nowhere - and it's not like they can just point the mark at something and everything just goes back to normal - nor they're ultimate badasses in either using magic, bow or sword that they show up and trump everything o their path. In fact, they have powerful allies that aid them in their struggles.
....Are you kidding me? Or do you honestly don't understand the meaning of word "immutable"? Neither the word nor the concept of 'immutable' (physical!) laws have little to do with morality in Thedas.
Also.... WTF? You realize that world with strict rules when it comes to magic (where magic can be used or can't be used) are very characteristic of LOW FANTASY SETTINGS????
Also - again - how is teleportation NOT complicated in Thedas????? It's far more complicated in Thedas than it is in TW world.
... Really, right now you're just all over the place It seems you barely know either what DA or TW is about and you confuse fantasy terms with something that exists only in your mind.
Oh god can't we have any fun? I mean that's the point I've been making, DA is rigid, TW is less rigid, so I pull some terms out of wherever and let them fly, make some crazy analogies that haven't been done before, I'm not all ceremony and pomp, you can tell frankly just based on how someone posts.
This kind of livid attitude towards inconsistencies in my descriptions or is untelling but let me just list tvtropes description of low fantasy and give one completely coherent response and then I'm done for now at least.
Mundane Setting: Urban Historical, sparsely supernatural (TW world, it's like countryside of Poland basically, but DA is not super supernatural, although the Deep Roads, blight torn areas and such, make it more complex). Fereldan is basically a Faerun copy-esque which is is pretty intense with the aforementioned aspects, but it's also got countrysides and farmlands. I thought it was interesting how this was integrated in DA: Awakening, which had a number of elements contrasting it with the plight of the lords and so on, although you also spent a fair amount of time chasing demons through tunnels and as such it's hard to say the fantastical hard high fantasy conflicts rubbed off entirely. I must say I did enjoy that expansion a decent amount though.
But that kind of thing is just so commonplace in TW, I mean just running through the fields of TW3 you are constantly beset by lords and ladies, and peasantry and children and their lives, it's intended to make the setting feel more realistic and add flavor through their interactions with them.
Cynicism - Gray Morality, well we discussed this already, I see it as favoring TW.
Human Dominance - Definitely point for TW, Geralt being human, the only thing you can play, there are Dwarves and Elves but they're relegated to the sides mostly, the important kingdoms and so on are all human, the elves and Dwarves and particularly Qunari have a large role at times in DA. Honestly I think this point rather heavily favors TW, because while Elves and Dwarves are somewhat of a wash, DA features a strong Dwarven presence through the deep roads and the Qunari are ominipresent in DA2, while Elves and Dwarves are more common in DA:O. In DA:I, there is more of a human focus, although it's interesting that coincided with bringing back the multiple races and emphasizing the multi-origin approch overall.
Plot Scope - Surivial and tribulations of a few individuals rather than the whole world, that perfectly fits TW with Geralt and Yen and so on and there struggles rather than the fate of a nation or country. The plot of DA tends to mix survival and tribulations with the fate of the whole world, for example in lets say DA:I you are obviously fighting for the fate of the whole world, but you also engage in the minute to minute struggles of people such as Blackwall's redemption arc and so on and so forth.
Heroism - Low fantasy heroes are desperate cynics gripping to their moral compass (see every other TW character) whereas high fantasy are all standing around helping the good guy, not the bad guy. Obviously both series have some of both, but I would say in general most of the characters purposely align themselves with the PC in the DA series (see, DA knight templar captain and mage circle, the Arl of Redcliffe, the Dalish Elves, and of course the Dwarves, all alliances, the same-
So this is why I don't always try to explain everything? It takes awhile right? Anyway, they're all designed strictly to ally with you. In DA2, it's not quite the same because you aren't up against a big bad, but you could argue that the big bad is simply poverty, or some other similar kind of goal, the way the goal is presented is what determines the kind of heroism, not necessarily the goal itself. In this case, it's 100% individual and personal with little inflection one way or another.
Now compare to TW, does anyone ever claim to have the complete moral highground? I don't think so, certaintly not in TW1 where the Knights of the Flaming Rose openly embrace their racist and violent attitudes, they do it as they think for the sake of order, or the bankers in chapter 3 who crave money, or the Scoia'tel who are open guerrilla terrorist fighters, or in TW2 Roche and Blue Stripes are basically described as the same as Iorveth and his screw but for king and country. Letho does not pretend he hasn't done dirty deeds, he knows what he done, but he did it with a clear goal in mind.
In DA, lets take... DA:I, you have the Inquisition itself, whose superiority is considered largely unquestioned, you are the ones saving everyone who can then save the world. The inquisition itself could never be wrong, never have issues, nope.
Methods - Victories achieved by phyiscal combat not magical superiority, i.e. it's not that Geralt has a magic hand ability, he's literally just fighting with potions and limited magical abilities. There is physical combat, although I mean something like DA2, the sheer quantity of magic and power wielded by even the simplest people, I mean you could always see it with the weapons warriors having being enchanted and flashy, everything is really over the top in many respects. I would say there is still a fair amount of physical combat though in DA overall, so I can't say I'm really inclined to push this point too far in favor of one or the other.
Tone - Darker and comedic, ok definitely more even because there's a fair number of jokes in DA, but on the whole I'd have to say I find the humor in TW more generically funny (such as Geralt being pissed leading the goat in that one quest... man that was good). The kind of humor you see in TW is generally grimmer though, the kinds of jokes in say DA2 are more sarcastic and kind of biting whereas TW is more referential and whimsical (like Saskia's quip about owing Geralt a piece of her treasure)
War - High fantasy is good vs evil smackdown between always right and always chaotic evil race (see, darkspawn). In low fantasy, a useless war between tw empires to make their land marginally bigger (Nilfgard and Temeria anyone?) vs of course (Darkspawn/Demons who are definitely chaotic evil etc. vs. the rest). DA2 I've already stated does not strictly involve darkspawn/demons, although interestingly enough it does to a degree by the end since Meredith is infected by the red idol power and the fact that it came from the Deep Roads and as a darkspawn haven removes it somewhat from the realm of humanity (if she had even just stayed human, you could at least have said the final enemy was not necessarily demonic, but it got dragged in anyway). Corphyeus is also not strictly speaking human since while he was human he's corrupted by old gods (and this is sort of magical thing in a sense? Yes?)
All points I see as favoring TW in low fantasy, DA in high fantasy, and preferring low fantasy myself, that's why I more or less prefer TW.
Retour en haut
