102 réponses à ce sujet

[Tyloric]

I don't really understand this complaint about it being "forced". To be clear, I have not played through it (but I have watched most of it on YouTube), but my understanding is that Bull gives you an "out" before things get seriously BDSM-ey. In effect, he says, "I like this kind of thing. I like you. I'd like to like both of you at once, but if you're not into it I'll understand and we can go our separate ways."

 

To me, this isn't about a group that needs representation (although it is really nice to see it portrayed as anything but super negative in media), it's about your companions and LI's gaining more depth and detail, and feeling more like real people. Sometimes you're going to find someone who's into BDSM and isn't interested, and, in fact, couldn't be happy, in a relationship that doesn't include it. 

I just don't like decisions about my character being made for me. 

[Malthier]

I wholeheartedly support making it optional. People who complain about a lack of "kink representation" can get what they want, and people who prefer vanilla or no/delayed sex at all can also get what they want. Optional things are the best of both worlds.

 

For the record If I were going to complain about representation, I'd ask for more black characters. This topic is about an appreciation of content. Not representation

[Seraphim24]

Personally I thought Solas seemed like the guy most interested in BDSM to me, Iron Bull being one of the last that would seem to be that way. The guy definitely doesn't have an issue taking control it seems to me.

[Andraste_Reborn]

Personally I thought Solas seemed like the guy most interested into BDSM to me, Iron Bull being one of the last that would seem to be that way. The guy definitely doesn't have an issue taking control it seems to me.

 

... I assume you haven't played his romance? He's explicitly into topping the Inquisitor.

[Seraphim24]

... I assume you haven't played his romance? He's explicitly into topping the Inquisitor.

 

Oh no I haven't, I thought it was just Iron Bull, yeah that sounds about right to me.

[Lady Artifice]

It is just Iron Bull. Iron Bull lays out the rules for his role as a dominant in the relationship, Solas never touches upon any such topic. 

 

... I assume you haven't played his romance? He's explicitly into topping the Inquisitor.

 

He's just laying bait so he can turn the discussion towards his philosophy and theorizing. 

[Seraphim24]

It is just Iron Bull. Iron Bull lays out the rules for his role as a dominant in the relationship, Solas never touches upon any such topic. 

 

 

He's just laying bait so he can turn the discussion towards his philosophy and theorizing. 

 

Actually I just think Solas seems more like someone that would be into BDSM than IB, that's literally all I had to say on the matter.

[Andraste_Reborn]

Sorry, I obviously worded that poorly - I meant that to read 'but Iron Bull canonically tops the Inquistor!' in response to Kefka's statement that it didn't seem like he'd be into BDSM.

 

I have no opinion one way or another about Solas' toppiness or lack thereof.

[FadelessRipley]

My concern about showcasing a more precise sexual identities (outside of Hetero, ******, and Bi) is that I can see "vanilla" getting hedged out in favor of "co-opting" the gay and straight options for other sexualities. You see this already with Iron Bull and Josephine as a BDSM and asexual/chaste relationship (respecitvely) essentially "taking up" two of the options. Now, if you are playing a Gay male PC but you aren't into BDSM.... well better hope you like Dorian. The same goes for Josephine, who I've seen both straight guys and lesbians express disappointment in her romance arc not having any overt indication of sexual expression, but who is our only "other option". 

I've never done Bull's romance, but I've watched parts of it. I was surprised by the direction it took. BDSM is something I'm pretty aware of from friends of mine, but not a personal preference (well, at least I don't think so. Maybe some of my preferences count, who knows?  ). People I know who are into it vary from purely bedroom fun to full blown "lifestyle" (sorry, that word is terrible, I know!!) in that it influences all aspects of their lives. That latter part is something I really don't get at all - but hey, if it's truly consensual and not harming anyone involved, then who am I to judge? 

 

I guess the only "issue" I can see with Bull's romance arc is the fact it is 'forced' on the player, and also you're pigeonholed into the submissive role. The reason I quoted your post is because I'd share the same thoughts on getting very precise with sexual identities/preferences as well, given that there are a finite number of romance options. I always go for female same sex romances, so Inquisition is probably the most limited RPG with those options that I've played. Sera, while I grew to like her, was just not a good fit for my Inquisitor. Josephine's romance was actually pretty sweet, but I see how the Disney quality wouldn't have impressed everyone. Personally, I would have liked some sort of more overt scene by the end - however given Josephine's character and personality, I think the lack of sex scene fitted the story. I imagine she'd be the type to maintain propriety for as long as possible and have a pretty long courtship. And, similar to the IB romance, it's pretty cool that a different type of romance arc was available. Not all romance arcs need overtly sexual content - but of course if some do have it to some extent (Sera, Dorian, Cassandra), then the other players might feel annoyed. The specific options taken in IB and Josephine's romances do cause a bit of an issue with choices for players.

[The Antagonist]

We need a cuckold relationship now and the other guy should have a BBC

[RevilFox]

I just don't like decisions about my character being made for me. 

Can someone explain this to me? As I said, I haven't played through the romance, and I'm at work so I can't very well watch it on YouTube right now. What decision was made for you?

[FadelessRipley]

Can someone explain this to me? As I said, I haven't played through the romance, and I'm at work so I can't very well watch it on YouTube right now. What decision was made for you?

I haven't either but from what I've seen (with Fem IQ, didn't watch male and don't know if it differs) it's quite clear that Bull is the dominant one in their dynamic. 

[andy6915]

So why do some people complain about Bull but not about Isabella? She's into BDSM and is also always the dominant one.
 
Anders: Sometimes, I think you have the right idea.
 
Isabela: Handcuffs, whipped cream, always be on top?

 

 

Restraints and always on top? Sounds exactly like Bull. But for some reason, no one ever complained about her. Is it because she's a woman and thus not as threatening or intimidating as a 7 foot tall wall of muscle with massive horns, so no one thought of her as being able to truly be dominant like they think he could be? Hell, there's even a bit of a food fetish in there.

[Super Drone]

Different Audience maybe? Dunno about lesbian women, but there's plenty of guys I know who wouldn't say no to an attractive girl who wanted to get rough with them even if it's not their personal thing. Genuine enthusiasm is worth the sacrifice.

[RevilFox]

I haven't either but from what I've seen (with Fem IQ, didn't watch male and don't know if it differs) it's quite clear that Bull is the dominant one in their dynamic. 

Okay, but that doesn't really make any decisions for the PC. Does the real BDSM stuff start before you have the talk and the "rules" are laid out?

[Grieving Natashina]

Okay, but that doesn't really make any decisions for the PC. Does the real BDSM stuff start before you have the talk and the "rules" are laid out?

Nope.  The most that happens is him pinning your arms to the wall after he mentions Riding the Bull.  You have to flirt with him at least once after he says the Bull line in order for him to start setting the rules.  Flirt again and he'll pin your arms to the wall, asking you if you're really sure you want this.  Flirt for the final time and then it fades to black.  You get a total of three chances to say no during this exchange, including one after he pins your arms (the last one, amusingly enough, has the heartbroken option by you saying the safety word he just gave you.)  

 

If the player is uncomfortable, then it's all good and they can back out right then and there.  He takes a breakup very well, and doesn't get all mopey about it.  You can also break it off anytime before the "lock" (after his personal quest,) and he completely understands.

 

Source: I have done the Bull romance from start to finish twice now.  I've also seen footage of folks turning down the Bull at various points, and noting Bull's reaction.

[RevilFox]

Nope.  The most that happens is him pinning your arms to the wall after he mentions Riding the Bull.  You have to flirt with him at least once after he says the Bull line in order for him to start setting the rules.  Flirt again and he'll pin your arms to the wall, asking you if you're really sure you want this.  You get a total of three chances to say no during this exchange, including one after he pins your arms (the last one, amusingly enough, has the heartbroken option you saying the safety word he just gave you.)  

 

If the player is uncomfortable, then it's all good and they can back out right then and there.  He takes a breakup very well, and doesn't get all mopey about it.  You can also break it off anytime before the "lock" (after his personal quest,) and he completely understands.

Thanks. That's how I understood the entire thing, but people keep saying they didn't like that they have decisions made for them or that it's not okay for the game to force you to be submissive. Which I agree would be problematic, but if the game tells you what's going on and then gives you an out, or multiple outs, then I really don't understand the issue that people have with this romance.

[Grieving Natashina]

Thanks. That's how I understood the entire thing, but people keep saying they didn't like that they have decisions made for them or that it's not okay for the game to force you to be submissive. Which I agree would be problematic, but if the game tells you what's going on and then gives you an out, or multiple outs, then I really don't understand the issue that people have with this romance.

The main problem, as far as I can tell, is that Bull straight up tells you if you do this, he's going to be the dom.  I can attest to this.  He makes it clear that this is strictly for the bedroom, but he's going to be the dominate one for those occasions.  There is some players that would have preferred to choose between being a top or a bottom, and feel like Bull the writers made the decision to be a bottom for them.

 

It doesn't bother me, but that's where they are coming from.

[(Disgusted noise.)]

I just don't like decisions about my character being made for me. 

 

This.

 

Can someone explain this to me? As I said, I haven't played through the romance, and I'm at work so I can't very well watch it on YouTube right now. What decision was made for you?

 

Bull's romance leaves zero room for headcanoning. There is no, "Well they do it like that sometimes because my Inquisitor is willing to be a good partner in bed and play into someone's kinks, but then the next time my Inquisitor gets his/her needs met." Iron Bull tells you flat out that you have sex with him exactly how he wants every time and if you bring up changing that dynamic he tells you tought ****. Which leads you to either have to not romance Bull or play with a character that someone else has decided is sexually submissive one hundred percent of the time and is satisfied by that. Bull himself also does some serious arm chair psychology about what makes your Inquisitor tick if you agree to sleep with him, and there's no way to disagree with him about it. 

 

So why do some people complain about Bull but not about Isabella? She's into BDSM and is also always the dominant one.
 
Anders: Sometimes, I think you have the right idea.
 
Isabela: Handcuffs, whipped cream, always be on top?

 

 

Restraints and always on top? Sounds exactly like Bull. But for some reason, no one ever complained about her. Is it because she's a woman and thus not as threatening or intimidating as a 7 foot tall wall of muscle with massive horns, so no one thought of her as being able to truly be dominant like they think he could be? Hell, there's even a bit of a food fetish in there.

 

1. She doesn't say she there always has to be handcuffs.

2. Being on top isn't the same thing as being "a top." Isabela is referring to a sexual position rather than a sexual dynamic or activity.

3. It only comes up once, unlike with Bull, and it's hard to tell how much of it serious, if any, and how much of it is Isabela joking.

[Tyloric]

<snippity snap>

 

Thank you. I'd actually been thinking up a way to properly word my response and not sound like an idiot, and you did it more eloquently than I would have.

[RevilFox]

Bull only wants a BDSM relationship in the bedroom, and is only interested if he's in charge. He isn't interested in being submissive, nor is he interested in a non-BDSM sexual relationship. If your PC is okay with this, then that says that they're either okay with playing the submissive or they actually are submissive when it comes to sex. If your PC is not okay with this, then it says that they're not okay being sexually submissive, either because they have no interest in BDSM sexual relationship or because they want a BDSM sexual relationship but want to be dominant. Which Bull isn't okay with.

 

In the latter case, you two aren't sexually compatible and thus can't be in a relationship. So unless the complaint is, "Man, I really wish Iron Bull was different because I'd like to romance him", then I don't understand the complaint. And for the record, MY complaint is, "Man, I really wish Iron Bull was female and otherwise exactly the same", so it's not like I don't understand that type of complaint. But I still don't get the complaint that the game makes decisions for you.

[CDR Aedan Cousland]

For the record If I were going to complain about representation, I'd ask for more black characters. This topic is about an appreciation of content. Not representation

 

And I never implied otherwise--or not intentionally, at least. My comment was about how great optional things are. I'd just recalled seeing someone else in another thread mention some notion of "BDSM representation," or something to the effect of that. I found it idiotic, personally, but that's just me.

 

Sorry for the late response; can hardly be bothered to check back here regularly anymore.

[Pasquale1234]

More role-playing in a role-playing game?

Sounds good to me.

[Sui Causa]

Iron Bull's romance leaves plenty of room for head cannoning that your character is not a submissive. After the first night, you tell Iron Bull it didn't work for you, you're not willing to sub, and you end it. Bam. You got to role play your totally not submissive character, no choices were taken from you whatsoever.

 

If you choose to role play a submissive character, you eagerly spam the "PLZ AGAIN" option and bask in the amazingness that is Iron Bull being delicious dom.

 

It's a win win for everyone!

[BraveVesperia]

So why do some people complain about Bull but not about Isabella? She's into BDSM and is also always the dominant one.
 
Anders: Sometimes, I think you have the right idea.
 
Isabela: Handcuffs, whipped cream, always be on top?

 

 

Restraints and always on top? Sounds exactly like Bull. But for some reason, no one ever complained about her. Is it because she's a woman and thus not as threatening or intimidating as a 7 foot tall wall of muscle with massive horns, so no one thought of her as being able to truly be dominant like they think he could be? Hell, there's even a bit of a food fetish in there.

I imagine that's because it's just a random line in banter. It has no impact at all on her romance story (I'd completely forgotten it until you just mentioned that now), whereas BDSM is very clearly in Bull's romance. Plus, it's Isabela, so we don't even know how serious she's being with that comment.