135 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

This is about the type of protagonist you prefer.

 

I've been thinking about this ever since Trespasser came out and I discovered just how much I hated my Inquisitor's being brought back to normal and losing their cool magical extra. Meanwhile, Hawke was more or less a badass normal and I was very much ok with that. So, what was it that made this ok in one case but not in the other? What kind of protagonist appealed to me most? And I was interested in how others think about this.

 

In order to answer the question in the title, some definitions:

 

(1) Badass Normal....strictly spoken, is a badass character without superpowers in a world where superpowers are relatively common. Magic should qualify as superpowers, so on Thedas, this would be a non-mage with no other special powers. For this thread though, I'm inclined to include mages in the "normal" category, simply because they're just too common in the plots and playing them is just as normal as playing a warrior or rogue.

 

Example: Hawke. Hawke is undeniably badass, but has no special powers like the Warden or the Inquisitor. Nor is Hawke object of a true prophecy or chosen by the gods or something similar.

 

(2) Special Snowflake: in the strict sense, a person with a set of unlikely attributes, making the probability that someone just happens to accumulate all of them in one person approach zero. Here, I'm using it as a term for a person who's unique, either by some unique superpower nobody else has, or nobody else has ever had in history, or unique by virtue of being chosen by the gods, or by fate, or the object of a true prophecy (rather than one people just happen to believe).

 

Example: The Inquisitor. The Inquisitor is almost defined by the Mark, enabling a set of superpowers such as walking into the Fade physically or influencing Fade rifts, something no one else can do. The Inquisitor is NOT a chosen one, for all that people believe it, since it's 100% a matter of faith, but the Inquisitor is unique.

 

(3) In-Between: This type of character is definitely not normal, but any powers they have are either not unique, not plot-critical or both. This category covers a pretty wide range, so if you prefer this, please qualify where the borders lie, where character get too "boringly normal" or "too boringly superpowered" in your opinion.

 

Example: The Warden. The Warden's powers are plot-critical, since the Archdemon can only be killed by a Warden, but there are hundreds of Wardens who can do it, not just you. Still, in both powers and privileges a Warden is distinct from a normal person, even if you're a mage.

 

So....where do you stand, what kind of protagonist do you prefer?

 

Here's my account:

 

(1) I like all of my DA protagonists rather well, since of all the possible subtypes in the aforementioned categories, they all avoid the only one I don't like: the true Chosen One. I don't like it because it is important for me that my characters can choose their own fate, pushed and pulled only by the circumstances of the plot, and not by the will of a god or a teleological history created by a prophecy. 

 

(2) Considering my impression of DA2, I have no problem playing a badass normal, and I actually prefer to start without any unique powers. It's also very much OK if I never acquire unique powers in the course of the story. I was perfectly fine with Hawke's power level from the start to the end of DA2, except for being unable to thwart Tallis. However, *IF* I acquire special powers, I absolutely hate to lose them. Why? Because doing that at the end of a story sends the message that I should appreciate being brought back to normal, and that's something I can't stand. Having special powers is desirable, damn it! It can cause problems, yes, but don't tell me I should like losing them. I do NOT like it, and you can't make an anvil heavy enough to make me accept the message that only normal is good. Even worse if there's a suggestion that some powers are legitimately restricted to deities. Do that, and you'll feel the loathing seep out of my posts.

 

(3) In this like in so much else, I like my Wardens best. They're exactly at that "in-between" position that makes them a believable critical plot element (really, heroic determination alone should NEVER be enough) but neither so important nor so uber-powerful that I can't imagine them to walk away intact after their task is done. Bonus points for an ending that actually makes them walk away intact with their LI depending on your choice. The normal people of Thedas - those who never knew them - may see the Warden and Morrigan as figures out of legend. I like being such a person. For the powers of the world, however, they're not very relevant unless they choose to involve themselves, and they're not powerful enough to be regarded as a threat by the powers that be - or by the writers for unbalancing future plots - by simply existing, unlike an intact Inquisitor would've been. The caveat of the previous paragraph still counts: if I play such a person and they acquire unique powers, I'd still hate to lose them for much the same reasons.

[9TailsFox]

I am tired of bioware larger than life hero who save world universe. I prefer someone like Hawke. And I would take Kirkwall over all Inquisition deserts.

[Iakus]

I prefer playing the Badass Normal.  I liked my Shepards best in ME1, when they were simply highly trained marines, rather than the undead cyborg/Space Jesus of the latter two games

 

I prefer my protagonists to be people who were simply at the right place at the right time and did what had to be done.  I'm also willing to take on a certain degree of "special snowflake-ness" if it's something the protagonist takes on with the intention of defeating the Big Bad.  Tracking down the Infinity +1 Sword, learning the Ultimate Spell for slaying the Dragon, etc.  I dislike being a Chosen One because it takes away the sense of free will.  If I am meant to triumph over the Evil Overlord, then it means I have no choice in the matter, I can't simply walk away.  I don't like the idea of predestination.

 

Edit:  Even my devout Andrastrian Trevelyan bridled at the thought that he was "meant" to be the Herald of Andraste, and expressed doubt that this was so.

 

As for giving up the specialness, honestly it depends on what it is.  I had no problem losing the Mark in DAI.  Yes, it's made the Inquisitor unique, but it's only really good for closing rifts.  Or perhaps exploring the Fade.  But I had no particular desire to do so, and once all the rifts are closed, it was only useful as a nite-lite(and Cassandra would complain it was keeping her awake  )

 

My Wardens would of course give up the taint if they could.  Sure they grant some nice darkspawn-hunting powers, but it dramatically cuts down on one's life expectancy.   Bioware managed to find the one reason that I think really made sense for the Warden to disappear:  Finding a way to stop the Calling.

 

Now for my Shepards, I think it's more complicated.  I mean yeah he'd probably give back the Lazarus Project upgrades if he could.  But they're kinda keeping him alive so he'll be hanging onto them  .

[Reznore57]

I tend to prefer your random guy to be honest ...not that I don't enjoy the special snowflake syndrome once in a while ,  being Dragonborn in Skyrim was pretty fun for example.

But I have a soft spot for playing the "average" person , I really liked the Courier in FONV who was a normal dude who just stumble on something bad , or Hawke ...I also like the type of companions it attracts , also "average" people.

Now of course when I say "average" we know this isn't true , but we weren't chilling with the left and right hand of the Divine in DA2 ...we had a slave , a smelly apostate , a Dalish kicked out of her clan , a pirate queen without her ship etc..

[Dabrikishaw]

I have no preference between the 3 types offered. My dislike of Hawke comes from the story of Dragon Age ][ rather than Hawke being normal compared to the Warden and Inquisitor.

[Ashaantha]

Bad-ass normal will always be my favourite. And some random citizen who stumbled into the wrong city or situation while trying to just live their lives.

[Nefla]

No special powers, no chosen one status, just someone more realistically struggling and fighting to survive and accomplish their goal.

[Abyss108]

I'm OK with any as long as they are done well.

 

I think my personal favourite would be a snowflate, but where the snowflakyness gives way more detriments than positives. For example, Trespasser anchor (killing you, out of control, loss of an arm...), as opposed to main game anchor (awesome superpower that only looks like an issue for the first few hours).

 

Being completely normal, but forced into the plot in some other way is better than having another superpower with no downsides.

[katerinafm]

I don't like special snowflake characters I think. I didn't like that the inquisitor became super powerful and worshiped no matter what because of the special mark on their hand for example.

 

I think the one I like the most is the 'in-between' type of characters, or at least in the context of the DA games, the Warden. The Warden became 'special' despite not having unique abilities because they did what must be done and were only 'special' in that their character managed to solve the surrounding problems in order to save the world.

 

I like Hawke, but sometimes I find the 'badass normal' type of characters that just so HAPPEN to stumble into every single thing that goes wrong to be, well, cheesy and unrealistic.

[BraveVesperia]

I like all three. I think it depends on how the thing is handled. I'm less keen on the 'special snowflake' type, but I liked the idea of being a Dragonborn in Skyrim. I only got into the idea of the Inquisitor having the Anchor in Trespasser. Probably because that's the first time it felt significant in their life. Considering they have such a world-shaking and dangerous tool at their disposal, it rarely felt like a 'big thing'. The fact they use it to walk physically in the Fade is barely discussed!

 

I adored how normal Hawke was. It makes them more relatable. However, they also need a reason to be considered important. Hawke is more of a 'Failure Hero' imo. That's their thing as a protag, not being a badass normal hero. Shepard is a better example in ME1, because they happen to become important through their mission, discoveries and whatnot. Their abilities and background are pretty normal. Even becoming a Spectre doesn't really affect that.

 

Ultimately, I think I prefer someone 'in between' like the Warden or Geralt from The Witcher. You have some kind of abilities that set you apart, maybe belong to a unique faction. But you aren't the only one of your kind. It gives you a bond to others like you, affects the way other people treat you, opens up unique story possibilities.

[Ieldra]

I prefer playing the Badass Normal.  I liked my Shepards best in ME1, when they were simply highly trained marines, rather than the undead cyborg/Space Jesus of the latter two games

 

I prefer my protagonists to be people who were simply at the right place at the right time and did what had to be done.  I'm also willing to take on a certain degree of "special snowflake-ness" if it's something the protagonist takes on with the intention of defeating the Big Bad.  Tracking down the Infinity +1 Sword, learning the Ultimate Spell for slaying the Dragon, etc.  I dislike being a Chosen One because it takes away the sense of free will.  If I am meant to triumph over the Evil Overlord, then it means I have no choice in the matter, I can't simply walk away.  I don't like the idea of predestination.

 

Edit:  Even my devout Andrastrian Trevelyan bridled at the thought that he was "meant" to be the Herald of Andraste, and expressed doubt that this was so.

 

As for giving up the specialness, honestly it depends on what it is.  I had no problem losing the Mark in DAI.  Yes, it's made the Inquisitor unique, but it's only really good for closing rifts.  Or perhaps exploring the Fade.  But I had no particular desire to do so, and once all the rifts are closed, it was only useful as a nite-lite(and Cassandra would complain it was keeping her awake  )

 

My Wardens would of course give up the taint if they could.  Sure they grant some nice darkspawn-hunting powers, but it dramatically cuts down on one's life expectancy.   Bioware managed to find the one reason that I think really made sense for the Warden to disappear:  Finding a way to stop the Calling.

 

Now for my Shepards, I think it's more complicated.  I mean yeah he'd probably give back the Lazarus Project upgrades if he could.  But they're kinda keeping him alive so he'll be hanging onto them  .

Very interesting. Thinking about the Warden, that's one of the rare cases where I wouldn't mind losing the special powers, since all in all the package is more of a curse than a gift. And I agree that finding a cure for the Calling makes perfect sense and I'm very glad they made the Warden do that.

 

But Shepard? You'd really give the Lazarus upgrades away? Incomprehensible What about the Cipher? I could never want to give that away.

[Iakus]

 

But Shepard? You'd really give the Lazarus upgrades away? Incomprehensible What about the Cipher? I could never want to give that away.

Sure.  My Shepards are just people.  Humans.  No need to be superhuman.  They'd totally rip them out to be examined by the Alliance or the Council.  If it didn't mean being killed or crippled in the process, of course.

 

The Cipher...Hmm...I'd Probably want to hold onto that.  It has little practical purpose.  But it would be nice to be able to read and understand Prothean.  But I still wouldn't be heartbroken if Shepard lost it.

[ComedicSociopathy]

The fact that any of the Dragon Age protagonists can survive half the stuff they encounter with only three companions at the side basically makes them a special snowflake already. But, yeah, I see the point of this thread. Badass normal is the preferred state of the protagonist to me. The only problem with that is that means that guys like Hawke should probably be dead whenever they step into the Deep Roads or confront a blood mage that uses mind control on them.  

[Orian Tabris]

I really don't have a problem with whatever sort of a person the protagonist is, all that matters is that they aren't there because the writers said so. Sadly, the Inquisitor suffers from this, as they just happened to pass by, and just happened to try and catch the orb, when any number of people could have stumbled upon Coryphenus, the Grey Wardens and the Divine (since we aren't shown how the Conclave got to that point, and we aren't shown why the would-be Inquisitor is the one person there).

[Wulfram]

Badass Normal is simply the most special snowflake of the lot. Other characters need reasons for how and why they can do what they do, the Badass Normal is just that Badass.

It doesn't matter very much to me. We'll be some flavour of super-hero anyway. Some sort of obvious specialness may be necessary to give plausibility to an elf hero, if the plot requires they be treated with respect relatively early on.

[Iakus]

Badass Normal is simply the most special snowflake of the lot. Other characters need reasons for how and why they can do what they do, the Badass Normal is just that Badass.

It doesn't matter very much to me. We'll be some flavour of super-hero anyway. Some sort of obvious specialness may be necessary to give plausibility to an elf hero, if the plot requires they be treated with respect relatively early on.

Well, yeah every protagonist is going to be a "special snowflake" by virtue of being the Player Character.

 

But a Badass Normal, or even an Empowered Badass Normal tends to not rely on being special.  They have to rely more on wits or preparedness than just muscling their way through a problem.  They're more... relatable.  

[Wulfram]

Well, yeah every protagonist is going to be a "special snowflake" by virtue of being the Player Character.
 
But a Badass Normal, or even an Empowered Badass Normal tends to not rely on being special.  They have to rely more on wits or preparedness than just muscling their way through a problem.  They're more... relatable.

Their plot aided wits and preparedness amount to superpowers, usually.

Plus, DA protagonists are going to be relying on their ability to stab High Dragons and Pride Demons and so forth to death, that's how the game works.

edit: As far as relatability goes, the sort of incredibly super-intelligent master of combat that a "Badass Normal" is generally seems less relatable to me than "bloke who stumbled on special powers". Though to an extent that's irrelevant to Bioware games, because our protagonist tends to be both.

[Ieldra]

Well, yeah every protagonist is going to be a "special snowflake" by virtue of being the Player Character.

 

But a Badass Normal, or even an Empowered Badass Normal tends to not rely on being special.  They have to rely more on wits or preparedness than just muscling their way through a problem.  They're more... relatable.  

Not by default. You can combine both to a really impressive effect. Have you read the Mistborn novels by Brandon Anderson? Mistborn powers are superpowers, but they have clearly defined limits (though things get a little out of hand in the later books), and using them in a clever way and being prepared makes the difference in a number of important fights.

 

Of course, if you want to do that as a maker of games, you have to design the rules of your superpowers carefully, and then stick to them. Bioware has a very bad record in the latter. Retcons for plot convenience, intended player reception and real-world representation issues are all over the place. Bioware makes some of the most interesting worlds in gaming, but over time the worldbuilding tends to deteriorate. Sometimes critically - see ME3. 

[vbibbi]

Badass normal all the way. Story wise, it's actually unrealistic for me that special snowflakes are allowed to be the protagonist in the middle of all of the action. If Shepard died after getting the cipher, the Alliance would have no way of understanding the Reaper threat. More likely is they would try to find some way of extracting the information from Shepard and studying it, like how the scientist in Leviathan is doing.

 

Similarly, if the Herald dies out in the field, then the Inquisition has NO WAY of closing rifts, let alone the Breach. So especially before becoming Inquisitor, why would Cass and the advisors allow the Herald to fight bears and assault a bandit fortress? Realistically they would keep the Herald somewhere secure, surrounded by guards, and wheel them out to close rifts once all of the demons had been dealt with. There would be special cases like the cult in the Hinterlands, where it would be better to show the Herald's ability to gain converts. But the case of special snowflakes means that if they're the only person with a special ability, those in charge are going to make damn well sure that special ability is protected and being used as THEY want it to be used.

[Ashagar]

Hmm it depends on the sort of game though. I like characters with a firm sense of honor and duty complete with the conflicts that brings and who don't take the easiest paths, I also have fondness for tales of redemption of characters and organizations. I think the biggest thing though is the character should fit the game which the inquisitor does to a point where the warden or Hawke would be comically bad fits.

 

My biggest regret about Inquisition is the game seems tailored made to play a character like a Seeker with its heavy themes of faith, investigations and dark magic which are bread and butter for seekers but you never get to play one.

[Korva]

I can work with all three, though it partly depends on the story and setting. Since I like to have a personal tie to what's going on and tend to let the premise of a game shape my character choice to a degree, the level of "specialness" I prefer in a character relates directly to how heavily influenced by mystical or other supernatural themes the story is.

 

That said, Bioware really doesn't do the "special snowflake" well at all, especially in Dragon Age, because they traditionally don't let the protagonists be real characters, and in this franchise it's explicitly all about Thedas the NPCs anyway. It's hard to feel the "specialness" when there are very few RP options to explore and express how anything including the special gimmick (being treated as a divine champion, having the Anchor, being Force Sensitive or a child of a god, etc.) affects my character. It's ever harder when writer's fiat destroys most everything my character worked for in the name of minimizing inconvenient player impact on future games. I'd rather play a sickly peasant shepherd whose greatest heroic is pulling a travelling trader from a swamp hole than get another Trespasser-style whiplash.

 

What I'd actually like to see more is characters who don't just stumble randomly into the game or are passively being maneuvered into it as someone's else pawn but who deliberately choose a dangerous duty. Rising to the occasion is one thing, but it's gotten a bit old. I'd enjoy playing a character who walks into it with eyes wide open.

[Aren]

In between.

[Emerald Rift]

Like most posters, I will go for Badass Normal like Hawke. I loved playing as Hawke as a rogue (made her more normal I suppose). I did also like the fact some events were out of Hawke's control like in real life.

[Iakus]

Not by default. You can combine both to a really impressive effect. Have you read the Mistborn novels by Brandon Anderson? Mistborn powers are superpowers, but they have clearly defined limits (though things get a little out of hand in the later books), and using them in a clever way and being prepared makes the difference in a number of important fights.

 

Of course, if you want to do that as a maker of games, you have to design the rules of your superpowers carefully, and then stick to them. Bioware has a very bad record in the latter. Retcons for plot convenience, intended player reception and real-world representation issues are all over the place. Bioware makes some of the most interesting worlds in gaming, but over time the worldbuilding tends to deteriorate. Sometimes critically - see ME3. 

Read them, loved them.  Sanderson is a master of worldbuilding and magic systems.

 

Heck one of his "Rules is "Limitations>Powers"  What magic can do is not so interesting to a story as what it can't do.  It's the weaknesses that have to be compensated for or circumvented that make things interesting.

 

And example would be Superman.  Yeah bullets bounce off him, he can crush a lump of coal into a diamond, and he can set things on fire just by looking at them.  But is that really what makes him interesting?  Or is it his kind nature, which villains tend to exploit?  His struggles to maintain his Clark Kent identity?  His vulnerability to kryptonite or magic?  Watching him nab bank robbers who can't hope to stop him would get dull after a short time.

 

Which goes to why I kinda prefer Badass Normals.  They have more limits.  More "human"  Sure other types of characters have limitations (like the aforementioned superman) but in the end, it's the limitations that make them more identifiable.  I would identify more with a marine who, however talented, is still human, than I do an undead cyborg.

[Korva]

My biggest regret about Inquisition is the game seems tailored made to play a character like a Seeker with its heavy themes of faith, investigations and dark magic which are bread and butter for seekers but you never get to play one.

 

I'm with you all the way on honorable and dutybond characters, as well as redemption stories and protagonists who truly fit the story ... that's why I let the (apparent) premise of a game influence what I play. And yeah, I really wish my Inquisitor could have been a Seeker, that would have been perfect. Honestly, Cassandra strikes me as the almost perfect protagonist for this game ... sometimes much moreso than the player character.

 

@Iakus: I don't care so much for "feeling human", but your point about limitations is maybe similar to my preference for "special powers" that come with a price: risk of corruption, a duty one can't forsake, the need for constant discipline and reflection, and so on. I enjoyed playing a Jedi in KotOR, but I was hugely disappointed that their philosophy and the effects of the Force on those who are sensitive to it basically played no role at all except for some shallow platitudes and scripted visions. When such "specialness" amounts to little more than a few k3wl p0werz and a magic glowstick, the most interesting parts are missing. Sure, it's fun to wave that glowstick around, but really feeling like a Jedi would have required so much more.