1659 réponses à ce sujet

[leaguer of one]

Still, end of the day one of the major themes of DAI was the importance of the established institutions as a source of stability. Off the top of my head, Dorian's the only character who explicitly suggests that the Chantry is a relic that's best discarded, and Solas encourages Sera to use the Red Jenny organization to overthrow the nobility, but pretty much everyone else hammers in the importance of the Chantry and the Orlesian throne as pillars of authority that hold the whole system together, and how their decline would cause far more harm than good.

 

Even Solas spares the Inquisitor's life under the reasoning that the Inquisition, and by extension, the Inquisitor, has become an institution of stability. Of course they have other motivations if the Inquisitor was a good friend or lover, but for an antagonistic Inquisitor, there's really no reason not to kill them beyond what was stated.

 

The only real exception to this would be the Grey Warden organization, which the game tries it's damnedest to make you think is a relic from a past age, and that their "victory at any cost" mentality is more damaging than it's worth. The only companion who really supports them is Blackwall and that's based on his personal idolization of them. Vivienne and Dorian mock them, Solas hates them, Cassandra damns them with faint praise, and even Sera, who was in Denerim during the Blight, is wary of them. I don't recall Bull having much of an opinion either way, though obviously the demons freaked him out, and Cole is disgusted with their methods. 

 

I think a lot of the Warden stuff is less pro-change and more Bioware turning on their own creation, given that Last Flight was largely geared towards deconstructing the Wardens as an organization. 

 

Sorry, got off on a Warden tangent there because I love the Warden's and Bioware's war against them is really grating on my nerves. Point being, whatever change we can affect, DAI is very much a pro-establishment game. I want DA4 to at the very least, give us the option to be very anti-establishment. 

First of all dao is made to deconstruct the warden. anyone who played dao can tell you the wardens are not as ideal as history makes them out to be. You got only one idealist and a new recruit that will do anything from abandoning villages to siding with a cult if they have to. Last flight only added more to what the wardens are not comfermed it.

[In Exile]

DAO doesn't just deconstruct Wardens. It shows them to be incompetent egomaniacs whose actions actively risk dooming Thedas during the blight. All they have going for them is good publicity.

Everything Duncan does is borderline insanity and actively risks the safety of all Thedas either for no apparent purpose or for the sake of the Warden's compulsive need to keep really important information secret.

[CardButton]

Still, end of the day one of the major themes of DAI was the importance of the established institutions as a source of stability. Off the top of my head, Dorian's the only character who explicitly suggests that the Chantry is a relic that's best discarded, and Solas encourages Sera to use the Red Jenny organization to overthrow the nobility, but pretty much everyone else hammers in the importance of the Chantry and the Orlesian throne as pillars of authority that hold the whole system together, and how their decline would cause far more harm than good.

 

Even Solas spares the Inquisitor's life under the reasoning that the Inquisition, and by extension, the Inquisitor, has become an institution of stability. Of course they have other motivations if the Inquisitor was a good friend or lover, but for an antagonistic Inquisitor, there's really no reason not to kill them beyond what was stated.

 

The only real exception to this would be the Grey Warden organization, which the game tries it's damnedest to make you think is a relic from a past age, and that their "victory at any cost" mentality is more damaging than it's worth. The only companion who really supports them is Blackwall and that's based on his personal idolization of them. Vivienne and Dorian mock them, Solas hates them, Cassandra damns them with faint praise, and even Sera, who was in Denerim during the Blight, is wary of them. I don't recall Bull having much of an opinion either way, though obviously the demons freaked him out, and Cole is disgusted with their methods. 

 

I think a lot of the Warden stuff is less pro-change and more Bioware turning on their own creation, given that Last Flight was largely geared towards deconstructing the Wardens as an organization. 

 

Sorry, got off on a Warden tangent there because I love the Warden's and Bioware's war against them is really grating on my nerves. Point being, whatever change we can affect, DAI is very much a pro-establishment game. I want DA4 to at the very least, give us the option to be very anti-establishment. 

 

My only thing is, the Anti-Establishment still needs to eventually become the Establishment for it to create lasting change.  They'll need laws, the ability to protect themselves during and after the transition of the country and the ability to expunge those that don't agree with their change, or remain a threat to it. They also need to be able to handle any ramifications of the changes they make, especially if they are fighting against LONG Established norms (being anti-slavery for example). To top it all off (especially in the case of Tevinter) the character would need to realize that the more radical the changes they are attempting to make the more weakened the country will be in the short term, which leaves them open to attack from external forces (Qunari).  

 

Let's say you get rid of the slavery in Tevinter, then the Anti-Establishment character would have to deal with the catastrophic damage to the nation's economy that would result from it and the widespread poverty that would assuredly follow.  If your anti-mage only leadership, you would then have to compete with the very foundations of the nation itself and even if you succeeded you would lose the support of many of the Mages within the country (the countries biggest military and technological asset).  For an Anti-Establishment character to work and not be an Anarchist (which is not a hero) they would have to constantly worry about these things and therefore be concerned ultimately with how to bring back stability as quickly as possible when they succeed ... which would mean your character would almost be more inhibited and structured than one who just wanted to bring stability.

[Dean_the_Young]

DAO doesn't just deconstruct Wardens. It shows them to be incompetent egomaniacs whose actions actively risk dooming Thedas during the blight. All they have going for them is good publicity.

Everything Duncan does is borderline insanity and actively risks the safety of all Thedas either for no apparent purpose or for the sake of the Warden's compulsive need to keep really important information secret.

 

That's more than a slight exageration.

 

In DAO, Thedas was never credibly at stake. The Blights haven't been a credible world-ender since the First Blight, and while unquestionably significant they were also manageable. The means to victory was known, international coordination established, national mobilizations well under-way, and no major international crisis distracting attention. If the Blight overwhelmed Ferelden, the rest of Thedas is already about as prepared as they can be to fight it, and every reason to expect success.

 

What was at stake in DAO was the fate of Ferelden as a Kingdom- and that was due to Ferelden's own politics rather than the Wardens. The Wardens did not cause Loghaine to refuse assistance from Orlais. The Wardens did not trigger the Dwarven Succession Crisis. The Wardens did not make the Dalish mess up. The Wardens did not trigger the Civil War. It's rather unclear how exposing the Warden secrets would have resolved any of these problems.

 

Yes, the Wardens kept secret their means of destroying the ArchDemon, and this is a bad thing- but that was irrelevant to why Ferelden almost fell. Loghaine's civil war caused that. Even if Loghain hadn't blamed and blacklisted the Wardens, the civil war would have continued regardless, and Loghain's paranoia would have prevented foreign reinforcements from assisting. Loghain thought he could beat the Blight on his own: even if he knew he needed the Wardens, he'd just compensate to 'could beat the Blight on his own, with wardens at hand.' And it's the civil war that brings Ferelden's fate to hinging on a single major battle- a battle which even more Wardens wouldn't have guaranteed a victory in.

 

 

I'm ambivalent about the Wardens mostly- neither hot nor cold- but even their secrecy makes sense, even if it's selfish and self-serving. But even so, it's wasn't the cause, or even a necessity, for Ferelden's near-fall.

[Gwydden]

My only thing is, the Anti-Establishment still needs to eventually become the Establishment for it to create lasting change. 

Not necessarily. The person to kickstart change doesn't have to be the one to implement it. The question then becomes what kind of revolutionary our PC would end up being. Are they a Spartacus, who will only create the conditions for other people to make their own choices? Or more of a Caesar, who will take over and force reform down the elite's throat? Both are interesting, but I would rather play a character who gives others freedom to do with as they please rather than forcing change.

[In Exile]

That's more than a slight exageration.

 

In DAO, Thedas was never credibly at stake. The Blights haven't been a credible world-ender since the First Blight, and while unquestionably significant they were also manageable. The means to victory was known, international coordination established, national mobilizations well under-way, and no major international crisis distracting attention. If the Blight overwhelmed Ferelden, the rest of Thedas is already about as prepared as they can be to fight it, and every reason to expect success.

 

What was at stake in DAO was the fate of Ferelden as a Kingdom- and that was due to Ferelden's own politics rather than the Wardens. The Wardens did not cause Loghaine to refuse assistance from Orlais. The Wardens did not trigger the Dwarven Succession Crisis. The Wardens did not make the Dalish mess up. The Wardens did not trigger the Civil War. It's rather unclear how exposing the Warden secrets would have resolved any of these problems.

 

Yes, the Wardens kept secret their means of destroying the ArchDemon, and this is a bad thing- but that was irrelevant to why Ferelden almost fell. Loghaine's civil war caused that. Even if Loghain hadn't blamed and blacklisted the Wardens, the civil war would have continued regardless, and Loghain's paranoia would have prevented foreign reinforcements from assisting. Loghain thought he could beat the Blight on his own: even if he knew he needed the Wardens, he'd just compensate to 'could beat the Blight on his own, with wardens at hand.' And it's the civil war that brings Ferelden's fate to hinging on a single major battle- a battle which even more Wardens wouldn't have guaranteed a victory in.

 

 

I'm ambivalent about the Wardens mostly- neither hot nor cold- but even their secrecy makes sense, even if it's selfish and self-serving. But even so, it's wasn't the cause, or even a necessity, for Ferelden's near-fall.

 

You're thinking about it from the wrong perspective. It's not about the fact that, eventually, the blights were stopped. It's not even the secrecy. It's that the GW strategy is almost always borderline suicidal insanity. At least in the games. 

 

It's about what stopped them: Grey Wardens. They're not just soldiers - they're an incredibly valuable and limited resource, the only means by which an archdemon can die and a blight can, at least temporarily, cease. As a strategic asset, they're incredibly valuable: every dead Grey Warden not replaced substantially impairs the chance to stop the AD - they're arrows in a quiver. 

 

In DA:O, Duncan adopts a number of roles in perspective. The first is recruiter. Among other people, he recruits Ser Jory, someone so obviously unqualified to be a Grey Warden it's actually kind of terrifying from a people management perspective. He then straight up murders that Jory, in front of recruits, apparently for the lulz. 

 

Let's review Duncan's strategic decision. He knows - as an incontrovertible fact - that this is a blight. There's no doubt, because GWs can sense the AD. Yet he makes no actual effort to convey this to anyone reputable in Ferelden. Cailan is obviously an idiot. Despite the fact that the GWs can actively perform secretive magic rituals in conjunction with the Circle, not even a mild attempt at "we have magic that can detect the archdemon" is attempted. 

 

Then the strategy he signs on to - the Grey Wardes, the single most valuable resource in all of Thedas, whose lives are immesurable in worth compared to the meatshields that sorround them - is to be placed with his entire force in the vanguard. A vanguard that's in a low valley, a kill zone, with no means to reach the flying dive bomber known as the AD. 

 

It's not about Ferelden. Strategically, Ferelden is an irrelevant backwater. It's about managing the war effort against the darkspawn, which Duncan is awful at doing. It's the same thing we see with Sophia Dryden, and what we see with Clarel in DA:I. The GWs have one job - which is not to choke on their own blood long enough to zerg rush the AD - and yet somehow do everything possible to fail at it.

 

It's not really about keeping the fact that they're magical AD killers secret, though even that is stupid. It's that they do everything in their power to waste their lives on idiotic and self-destructive causes.

 

I mean, look at Riordan. His master plan for slowing down the AD was to hit a bullet with another bullet. He just straight up committed suicide and bumbled his way towards injuring the AD.  

[Ryzaki]

Sorry, got off on a Warden tangent there because I love the Warden's and Bioware's war against them is really grating on my nerves. Point being, whatever change we can affect, DAI is very much a pro-establishment game. I want DA4 to at the very least, give us the option to be very anti-establishment. 

 

Bull's pro wardens. "I don't know if we can judge the only people who can stop blights."

 

Also the Wardens were always idiots. This was clear in DAO. Our PC (as a new recruit no less) not being an idiot doesn't save the rest of the organization.

[Nixou]

You got only one idealist and a new recruit that will do anything from abandoning villages to siding with a cult if they have to

 

 

There's a slight problem with your "the new recruit will commit the most heinous acts if these are deemed necessary" reasoning:

 

• Sacrificing the Mages: Why? All of Uldred's followers have been either killed or already turned into abomination, and using the Litany of Adralla barely slows down the fight: why wasting an asset when the effort to save them is so minimal?
• Abandoning Redclife? And losing the bastion of one of Ferelden most powerful family at a time when one's desperate for allies?
• Sacrificing Connor with Blood Magic? Why when you got a whole Circle deeply indebted to you?
• Corrupting the Ashes? And antagonizing several followers who already demonstrated their usefulness for an untrustworthy group of cultists who until a few minutes prior where doing their very best to slaughter your group?
• Abandoning the City Elves at a time when the priority is accumulating as much evidence against Loghain as possible before the Landsmeet?

 

Dragon Age Origins has the same problem as too many Bioware games: the choices that provide the greater benefits are often the "Nice" choices: "Evil" choices are too often stupid choices and any Warden endowed with a modicum of foresight and political acumen will for the most part make the same decision as a goody-two-shoes Warden -even if they happen to be a sadistic brute who toyed with Caladrius like a cat with a mouse- because that's where they interest lies.

 

Of course that doesn't mean your reading of the Grey Wardens as an ambivalent and very questionable organization is wrong, but Origins itself did a rather poor job portraying it. Until Legacy the unsavory aspects of the Wardens were either merely hinted at in the games or confined to the supplementary material.

 

***

 

In DA:O, Duncan adopts a number of roles in perspective. The first is recruiter. Among other people, he recruits Ser Jory, someone so obviously unqualified to be a Grey Warden it's actually kind of terrifying from a people management perspective. He then straight up murders that Jory, in front of recruits, apparently for the lulz.

 

 

Who knows: perhaps if he had been the first to drink Jory would have survived the Joining and revealed himself as an adequate Warden.

 

Cailan is obviously an idiot.

 

 

Cailan was most definitely not an idiot:

Elric Maraigne confirmed that Cailan knew he wouldn't win the battle at Ostagar: his bravado was only for show so his troops wouldn't despair in what was essentially an attempt to do as much damage as possible to the Horde's vanguard and give Ferelden the time to mobilize, attempt designed in urgency because his first plan, asking Orlais for support and mounting a joint campaign, had been shot down by his own Marshal who was the one foolishly mixing the personal with the political.

[Former_Fiend]

 

Cailan was most definitely not an idiot:

Elric Maraigne confirmed that Cailan knew he wouldn't win the battle at Ostagar: his bravado was only for show so his troops wouldn't despair in what was essentially an attempt to do as much damage as possible to the Horde's vanguard and give Ferelden the time to mobilize, attempt designed in urgency because his first plan, asking Orlais for support and mounting a joint campaign, had been shot down by his own Marshal who was the one foolishly mixing the personal with the political.

 

 

That is actually pretty stupid, all things considered. First off he's the king; he can overrule Loghain and bring in the Orlesians if he pleases. Secondly he's insisting on using Orlesians for help instead of waiting for Eamon and Howe's armies which could be of significant aid. And even then his strategy involves rushing out to meet the darkspawn vanguard in open battle instead of forming a defensive bulwark and getting them to break their line on his forces. Granted that wouldn't have worked either due to the sheer numbers of the darkspawn but if his goal is to buy time, he should be around to buy time. Of course the wisest move would have been to just sound the retreat, regroup at a better position. 

 

That plan also fully justifies Loghain's retreat, because if Cailen is going into this thinking he's going to lose no matter what, then Loghain going ahead with his plan would have resulted in the loss of the whole army at Ostagar instead of just half of, for astonishingly little gain. 

[Former_Fiend]

Bull's pro wardens. "I don't know if we can judge the only people who can stop blights."

 

Also the Wardens were always idiots. This was clear in DAO. Our PC (as a new recruit no less) not being an idiot doesn't save the rest of the organization.

 

I don't have a problem with the Wardens being a flawed organization. I'd have more problem with them being flawless.

 

I just think Bioware's going too far in the other direction trying to drive that point home, and I think no small part of that - but not all of it - was to shill the Inquisition as the new, invaluable organization that people look to for hope and protection.

 

And I hate the Inquisition with a passion.

[Heimdall]

Honestly, I never really think to blame Cailan for that because all I see when I watch the Ostagar sequence is Bioware's total lack of understanding of military tactics

[diaspora2k5]

How... how were the wardens idiots in DAO? The ferelden ones dying was on Cailan and Loghain. The Orlesian ones didn't enter Ferelden by force since that could have led to a larger clusterfk. Unless you're referring to Dryden but that was 200 years ago. If nothing else, they're the most competent organization in Thedas, even Weisshaupt was questioning why Clarel went dark and were sending agents in to find out what was going on.

[Eivuwan]

 

I don't have a problem with the Wardens being a flawed organization. I'd have more problem with them being flawless.

 

I just think Bioware's going too far in the other direction trying to drive that point home, and I think no small part of that - but not all of it - was to shill the Inquisition as the new, invaluable organization that people look to for hope and protection.

 

And I hate the Inquisition with a passion.

 

Well Trespasser basically reduced the Inquisition to yet another flawed organization.

[Ryzaki]

 

I don't have a problem with the Wardens being a flawed organization. I'd have more problem with them being flawless.

 

I just think Bioware's going too far in the other direction trying to drive that point home, and I think no small part of that - but not all of it - was to shill the Inquisition as the new, invaluable organization that people look to for hope and protection.

 

And I hate the Inquisition with a passion.

 

But they weren't even competent. That's my issue. BW didn't go too far in the other direction. They were always in that direction.

 

As for the Inquisition. We got booted as soon as our purpose was served so I'm not sure why you hated it so much

[Former_Fiend]

Well Trespasser basically reduced the Inquisition to yet another flawed organization.

 

And yet, for some reason, it's the necessary one, according to Solas.

 

The wardens at least had something that made them legitimately necessary, though apparently it turns out that's doing more harm than good, but I've already gone on at length about that quite a few pages back.

 

The Inquisition, without the Inquisitor and their mark, is just a bunch of spies, diplomats, and soldiers with no real purpose beyond 'maintain the status quo'. 

[Former_Fiend]

But they weren't even competent. That's my issue. BW didn't go too far in the other direction. They were always in that direction.

 

As for the Inquisition. We got booted as soon as our purpose was served so I'm not sure why you hated it so much

 

The Wardens have had one job to do and they have done it, successfully, five times now. I don't see that as incompetence. I see a few hiccups and stumbles along the way. 

 

And the fact that the whole thing got leashed and turned into an attack dog for the Chantry is just more reason for me to hate the Inquisition, not less. 

[Ryzaki]

The Wardens have had one job to do and they have done it, successfully, five times now. I don't see that as incompetence. I see a few hiccups and stumbles along the way. 

 

And the fact that the whole thing got leashed and turned into an attack dog for the Chantry is just more reason for me to hate the Inquisition, not less. 

 

Well perspectives I guess.

 

??? You can choose to disband. If your Inqusition got turned into an attack dog for the Chantry it's because you allowed it to become one. That's your fault. 

[Former_Fiend]

Well perspectives I guess.

 

??? You can choose to disband. If your Inqusition got turned into an attack dog for the Chantry it's because you allowed it to become one. That's your fault. 

 

I haven't played Trespasser. PS3 owner, got shafted. My own fault for not sticking with the times.

 

I have been told in this thread that just because we disband the Inquisition doesn't mean it stops existing. If I recall I was using the fact that the Inquisition might not exist anymore to argue against the idea that a new protagonist would be an agent of the Inquisition and I had that contradicted. 

[Ryzaki]

I haven't played Trespasser. PS3 owner, got shafted. My own fault for not sticking with the times.

 

I have been told in this thread that just because we disband the Inquisition doesn't mean it stops existing. If I recall I was using the fact that the Inquisition might not exist anymore to argue against the idea that a new protagonist would be an agent of the Inquisition and I had that contradicted. 

 

ewww you played Inquisition on PS3. My sympathies bro. (Messing with you But by god that must've been...an experience.)

 

No you go underground but you're not working for the Chantry in that case. You "disbanded" officially and no longer exist "officially". You pretty much become a black ops organization. You certainly don't work for the Chantry. You only work for the chantry if you hand yourself over to the Divine.

[Nixou]

ewww you played Inquisition on PS3. My sympathies bro. (Messing with you   But by god that must've been...an experience.)

 

 

The PS3 version of Inquisition is perfectly serviceable. Fewer glitches and freezes compared to PS3 ME2 and Origins, too.

[Eivuwan]

I haven't played Trespasser. PS3 owner, got shafted. My own fault for not sticking with the times.

 

I have been told in this thread that just because we disband the Inquisition doesn't mean it stops existing. If I recall I was using the fact that the Inquisition might not exist anymore to argue against the idea that a new protagonist would be an agent of the Inquisition and I had that contradicted. 

 

No, I think if you disband, you disband. If the new protagonist is not the Inquisitor, then he/she won't be an agent of the Inquisition. He/she can still be an agent of the ex-Inquisitor's small group of Solas hunters.

[Ryzaki]

 

The PS3 version of Inquisition is perfectly serviceable. Fewer glitches and freezes compared to PS3 ME2 and Origins, too.

 

 

Really? I heard it was really ugly looking.

[NoForgiveness]

Really? I heard it was really ugly looking.

not an actual spoiler.

Spoiler

[Ryzaki]

Mostly the hair shine main. That kills me. I remember when that patch gave me that crap. I almost went bananas.

[BansheeOwnage]

I haven't played Trespasser. PS3 owner, got shafted. My own fault for not sticking with the times.

 

I have been told in this thread that just because we disband the Inquisition doesn't mean it stops existing. If I recall I was using the fact that the Inquisition might not exist anymore to argue against the idea that a new protagonist would be an agent of the Inquisition and I had that contradicted. 

Well, we'll see how it's handled in DA4, but the disbanded Inquisition basically makes you like The Warden: In charge of a group of random people trying to achieve a singular goal, not really an organization.

 

No, I think if you disband, you disband. If the new protagonist is not the Inquisitor, then he/she won't be an agent of the Inquisition. He/she can still be an agent of the ex-Inquisitor's small group of Solas hunters.

No, it's clear that "disbanding" is only an official cover. You end up doing the exact same thing, just as an independent force instead of a chantry-lead one. The Keep makes it clear that the effective difference between the two in regards to the next game will be how many resources you have versus the likelihood of being infiltrated by spies. Of course, if you disband, you'd also expect more agency.