527 réponses à ce sujet

[SinisterSquash]

Well in that case, the Inquisitor is your guy/gal!

 

Spoiler

Sith Inquisitor that is

 

You know I tried to rp many of my empire characters as lightside, but still felt evil and dirty. 

[CardButton]

My ideal situation would be new protagonist with uncontrolled Inquisitor.

I'm happy for my Inquisitors to become NPCs because it opens doors for more complex (potentially adversarial) relationships with them. When I get new information about a character's behavior, I tend to adjust my headcanons, rather than rejecting their new behavior as OOC. For example, if I see bloodmage!Hawke railing about the evils of blood magic, I assume they're either deep undercover, had a nasty wake-up call with their own blood magic in the years after DA2, or have Tevinter-esque views on what "counts" as blood magic. I never feel as if their blood magic got retconned.

But I realize that's not everyone's style of play. So I'd also be fine with small sections controlling the Inquisitor (if they cameo at all). Emphasis on small. Much as I love all my past heroes, I enjoy having a new perspective for each new game. Thedas is more interesting to me than any one person.

Hmm... I might be OK with this if I weren't so afraid that the Inquisitor would get the same treatment as NPC Hawke did in Inquisiton.  I even chose a Funny Hawke on my DAKeep and the only funny thing I got from him was the mourning story I got from Varric after I left Hawke in the Fade.  Hawke you were good for one thing! Being snarky at the most inappropriate times, what happened to that?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

How are most of the origins foreign from Ferelden? Do you mean that Orzammar and Dalish culture are outside of Ferelden culture? In that case, only half of the origins are "foreign" of Ferelden, and all still originate within the borders of that nation.

The Mage origin has you in the Circle for so much of your life you don't even remember life outside the walls, meaning the entire outside world is foreign to you and you only know how life in the Circle works. And the City Elf is similar since you have never left the Alienage, so you only know how things in the Alienage work. That's 5 of the 6 Origins in DAO having you as a foreigner to how Ferelden works. 

[Arvaarad]

Hmm... I might be OK with this if I weren't so afraid that the Inquisitor would get the same treatment as NPC Hawke did in Inquisiton. I even chose a Funny Hawke on my DAKeep and the only funny thing I got from him was the mourning story I got from Varric after I left Hawke in the Fade. Hawke you were good for one thing! Being snarky at the most inappropriate times, what happened to that?

Purple!Hawke = Best Hawke, it's true. Though angry Hawke is surprisingly entertaining as well.

To me, it seemed like Inquisition Hawke was more like a normal person, free from the exaggerated larger-than-life personality that Varric wrote into them. Or maybe the same person, but just older. Further away from all the stress and tragedy that caused the inappropriate humor (aka "coping mechanism") to appear in the first place.

[vbibbi]

You do realize that the "player" you were quoting is me right? Also, maybe JUST MAYBE it is possible to want closure to a romance AND have reasonable arguments for wanting the Inquisitor to come back? Nothing is more annoying than an ad hominem argument. Wanting to find closure to a romance is a reasonable request regardless and there is nothing irrational about it.

 

Bioware ends game with cliffhanger to get people invested in the storyline/next game.

 

Vbibbi: Players are irrational for wanting emotional closure.

 

I'm sorry if I came across that way. I do not mean that Solas romancers' opinions are invalid or less valid than others, nor that that would be the only reason people have to want to continue the Inquisitor as PC. While wanting emotional closure is understandable and valid, it's not a reason why the Inquisitor should be the PC in the next game. It's a bias the player has to wanting to continue the Inquisitor's story, whereas the narrative as Bioware has set it up, in my opinion, shows that the Inquisitor will be a background player in the next game.

 

Hmm... I might be OK with this if I weren't so afraid that the Inquisitor would get the same treatment as NPC Hawke did in Inquisiton.  I even chose a Funny Hawke on my DAKeep and the only funny thing I got from him was the mourning story I got from Varric after I left Hawke in the Fade.  Hawke you were good for one thing! Being snarky at the most inappropriate times, what happened to that?

 

Yes, I was very disappointed in how Hawke was presented, and would hope that the Inquisitor would be better presented in DA4. I don't even care about Hawke's stance on blood magic as I never played one. It just seemed like all three preset personalities came across as the same. It would have been very easy to have three sets of dialogue reflecting different personality, but everything sounded the same when talking with Hawke.

 

The Mage origin has you in the Circle for so much of your life you don't even remember life outside the walls, meaning the entire outside world is foreign to you and you only know how life in the Circle works. And the City Elf is similar since you have never left the Alienage, so you only know how things in the Alienage work. That's 5 of the 6 Origins in DAO having you as a foreigner to how Ferelden works. 

So...Ferelden culture is defined as humans living outside of the Circle. Elves living in the capital city are not Ferelden because they're in an alienage?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

So...Ferelden culture is defined as humans living outside of the Circle. Elves living in the capital city are not Ferelden because they're in an alienage?

The Circle operates on its own set of rules. Multiple times it is said that in the Circle it's as if the rest of the world doesn't exist. Much like how say a religious convent in a nation operates on different rules than that nation. 

As for the City Elf, no the humans who see the elves as subhuman would not teach them stuff like that. Most humans don't teach them anything other than how they are below them and how to serve them. 

 

While they are not foreign to the nation, they are foreign to the culture. And that's what Bioware likes, because that way it makes sense for the protagonist to ask the questions they ask since the world they are in is new to them, just like it is for the player.

[Eivuwan]

I'm sorry if I came across that way. I do not mean that Solas romancers' opinions are invalid or less valid than others, nor that that would be the only reason people have to want to continue the Inquisitor as PC. While wanting emotional closure is understandable and valid, it's not a reason why the Inquisitor should be the PC in the next game. It's a bias the player has to wanting to continue the Inquisitor's story, whereas the narrative as Bioware has set it up, in my opinion, shows that the Inquisitor will be a background player in the next game.

 

This is an RPG, not a math problem, not a logic puzzle. An RPG is meant to evoke emotions. Therefore, wanting closure for a romance or closure to a cliffhanger is a perfectly valid argument for including the Inquisitor as the PC in the next game. It may not be the most important argument, but it is a valid one.

[vbibbi]

This is an RPG, not a math problem, not a logic puzzle. An RPG is meant to evoke emotions. Therefore, wanting closure for a romance or closure to a cliffhanger is a perfectly valid argument for including the Inquisitor as the PC in the next game. It may not be the most important argument, but it is a valid one.

I would argue otherwise. Those players who had an antagonistic relationships with Solas or an indifferent one, so are their worldstates less valid than those who romanced or friended him? You're saying that because you had a positive relationship with him, that you should get closure with him, and the only way to do so is have your character be the PC. If my Inquisitor had a negative relationship with Solas, I will still be forced to play them again as PC to accommodate those who want personal closure?

 

To me, it sounds like you're saying people who want the Inquisitor to return for personal reasons should trump those who don't want the Inquisitor to return, or are indifferent to their return, or to new players.

[leaguer of one]

This is an RPG, not a math problem, not a logic puzzle. An RPG is meant to evoke emotions. Therefore, wanting closure for a romance or closure to a cliffhanger is a perfectly valid argument for including the Inquisitor as the PC in the next game. It may not be the most important argument, but it is a valid one.

No it's not. All that can be done with out the quis being the lead.

[vbibbi]

The Circle operates on its own set of rules. Multiple times it is said that in the Circle it's as if the rest of the world doesn't exist. Much like how say a religious convent in a nation operates on different rules than that nation. 

As for the City Elf, no the humans who see the elves as subhuman would not teach them stuff like that. Most humans don't teach them anything other than how they are below them and how to serve them. 

 

While they are not foreign to the nation, they are foreign to the culture. And that's what Bioware likes, because that way it makes sense for the protagonist to ask the questions they ask since the world they are in is new to them, just like it is for the player.

Elves in the alienage don't live in a bubble; they have to work outside of the alienage and will be exposed to the wider human culture. It's not something that humans have to "teach" them, it's something that happens whenever you step outside.

[Eivuwan]

I would argue otherwise. Those players who had an antagonistic relationships with Solas or an indifferent one, so are their worldstates less valid than those who romanced or friended him? You're saying that because you had a positive relationship with him, that you should get closure with him, and the only way to do so is have your character be the PC. If my Inquisitor had a negative relationship with Solas, I will still be forced to play them again as PC to accommodate those who want personal closure?

 

To me, it sounds like you're saying people who want the Inquisitor to return for personal reasons should trump those who don't want the Inquisitor to return, or are indifferent to their return, or to new players.

 

First, a lot of people want the Inquisitor to be PC because they hate Solas so much that they want to kill him with the Inquisitor. Second, I can also say that you're saying that people who want a new PC should trump over those who want the Inquisitor. New players probably aren't invested in either option so that's irrelevant. New players can get a generic worldstate as a background with a brief explanation of what happened in the last game. I also think Bioware purposefully tried to get people invested in the Solas/Inquisitor relationship through the Trespasser DLC. Therefore, they are responsible for the emotions they evoke and should provide closure. Otherwise, it's kind of like dangling a carrot in front of a rabbit's nose just to snatch it away while "giggling madly and hugging himself in glee."

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Elves in the alienage don't live in a bubble; they have to work outside of the alienage and will be exposed to the wider human culture. It's not something that humans have to "teach" them, it's something that happens whenever you step outside.

So the Elves in the Alienage know how to deal with Dwarven and Human politics for example? Or the full extent of the relationship of the Chantry, Templars, and Circle? A lot of them don't even believe the Dalish Elves are real or even how they became City Elves.

 

You can disagree all you want, but you're wrong according to Bioware.

[leaguer of one]

 

As for the City Elf, no the humans who see the elves as subhuman would not teach them stuff like that. Most humans don't teach them anything other than how they are below them and how to serve them. 

 

Not exactly. Most human are as poor as the elves in fereldin. Though it's not a close relationship, it's mostly just indifferent. The real issue is with the nobles and city elves. Remember most crime in fereldin is normally over looked and solved with street justice. That would mean conflict with poor humans and poor elves are over looked unless it becomes a riot. Meaning if the human killed the elf or the elf killed the human no one would do anything about it one way or another. And issue with a noble human and a poor elf would end with the noble trampling on the elf with the same result. no one would do anything about it. now if an elf kill a noble human, the elf would get arrested and punished....but that's the same would happen if a poor human killed a noble.

 

The biggest thing over looked in dao is that both poor humans and poor elves were treated horribly under the rule of Howe, only elves were sold as slaves as well.

Elves in fereldin have way more freedoms then other elves in other places.....It just they still have issue with noble human no matter where they go.

[leaguer of one]

So the Elves in the Alienage know how to deal with Dwarven and Human politics for example? Or the full extent of the relationship of the Chantry, Templars, and Circle? A lot of them don't even believe the Dalish Elves are real or even how they became City Elves.

 

You can disagree all you want, but you're wrong according to Bioware.

1. Most humans don't deal with Dwarven politics.

2. only the educated elves deal with human politics....which ironically only educated humans do as well.

3. The chantry and the templer issues have nothing to do with fereldin. 

4. No common human or noble human out side the chantry deal with circle issues at all.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Not exactly. Most human are as poor as the elves in fereldin. Though it's not a close relationship, it's mostly just indifferent. The real issue is with the nobles and city elves. Remember most crime in fereldin is normally over looked and solved with street justice. That would mean conflict with poor humans and poor elves are over looked unless it becomes a riot. Meaning if the human killed the elf or the elf killed the human no one would do anything about it one way or another. And issue with a noble human and a poor elf would end with the noble trampling on the elf with the same result. no one would do anything about it. now if an elf kill a noble human, the elf would get arrested and punished....but that's the same would happen if a poor human killed a noble.

 

The biggest thing over looked in dao is that both poor humans and poor elves were treated horribly under the rule of Howe, only elves were sold as slaves as well.

Elves in fereldin have way more freedoms then other elves in other places.....It just they still have issue with noble human no matter where they go.

Fair enough. I was saying essentially that, but you expressed it better than I did. If Human Commoner was an Origin option, I'd say the same thing about the nation as a whole being foreign to them since most commoners in medieval times only knew the world around their village, the rest of the world being unknown to them with the exception of outsiders delivering news. 

 

1. Most humans don't deal with Dwarven politics.

2. only the educated elves deal with human politics....which ironically only educated humans do as well.

3. The chantry and the templer issues have nothing to do with fereldin. 

4. No common human or noble human out side the chantry deal with circle issues at all.

I am listing things that from the Origins provided are foreign to the protagonist. There are exceptions yes, but we aren't them for the most part. At best we are able to handle one area and that's because we are from there.

[leaguer of one]

 

I am listing things that from the Origins provided are foreign to the protagonist. There are exceptions yes, but we aren't them for the most part. At best we are able to handle one area and that's because we are from there.

I understand that but you still no getting my point. Most commoners, elf or human, would not deal with any of what you listed regardless. Regardless, only the educated take part in politic at all regardless of race in fereldin. Chantry and circles stuff are chanty and circle stuff and fereldin politics rarely deal with it.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I understand that but you still no getting my point. Most commoners, elf or human, would not deal with any of what you listed regardless. Regardless, only the educated take part in politic at all regardless of race in fereldin. Chantry and circles stuff are chanty and circle stuff and fereldin politics rarely deal with it.

And earlier in my reply to you I said that if Human Commoner was an Origin option I would be saying the same thing as I have about the other Origins that are foreign to the game setting.

[vbibbi]

So the Elves in the Alienage know how to deal with Dwarven and Human politics for example? Or the full extent of the relationship of the Chantry, Templars, and Circle? A lot of them don't even believe the Dalish Elves are real or even how they became City Elves.

 

You can disagree all you want, but you're wrong according to Bioware.

The only "Fereldan" origin according to you is the second most prominent noble family in the country, so of course they are going to have better knowledge of international politics, religion and its politics in society, and more esoteric lore (Dalish). So the only true Fereldans are the nobility?

 

I don't know what country you live in or your origins and I will not make assumptions. I currently live in the United States, and from my viewpoint, whether a citizen lives in an urban area in the Northeast, on a Texas border town close to Mexico, or in rural Wyoming, they are all American. Yes, they have different opinions, life experiences, and outlooks on life, but they are considered American.

[Arvaarad]

One thing that really confuses me: what do people mean when they talk about "closure" with respect to relationships?

Interpersonal relationships (whether friendly, romantic, or antagonistic) are constantly shifting and evolving, so the idea of closure seems antithetical to what a relationship is? The only time when a relationship has a well-defined ending is when the people involved in it die.

I guess I don't understand what distinguishes a loose-end relationship from any other continuing relationship.

[Nefla]

 

You know I tried to rp many of my empire characters as lightside, but still felt evil and dirty. 

I usually give each one different motivations and they end up as a mixture, but I do have a 100% LS inquisitor (in the picture) and warrior and I love them to pieces I think my most ruthless character is my Cathar trooper, but I dunno it suits her.

[TammieAZ]

Oh please . Did you see that ending in trespasser ? The inquisitor or former inquisitor (in my case ) will return .

[Ieldra]

Oh please . Did you see that ending in trespasser ? The inquisitor or former inquisitor (in my case ) will return .

Yes, we are all aware of Trespasser's ending, and that's one of the reasons I don't want the Inquisitor back as the protagonist. Any other role is ok.

[Ieldra]

One thing that really confuses me: what do people mean when they talk about "closure" with respect to relationships?

Interpersonal relationships (whether friendly, romantic, or antagonistic) are constantly shifting and evolving, so the idea of closure seems antithetical to what a relationship is? The only time when a relationship has a well-defined ending is when the people involved in it die.

I guess I don't understand what distinguishes a loose-end relationship from any other continuing relationship.

Bolded for emphasis. That's what I've always said. The only final closure is death. As long as characters are alive, it's always possible to ask "what happened then"? For the same reason, I often propose that people stop asking, lest the writers listen too closely and make the characters die.

 

Having said that, with Trespasser the Inquisitor/Solas romance screams for some kind of continuance. After the original ending, it had ended in a defined state of death (of the romance, not the characters of course), but Trespasser re-opened the story between them. It should be, however, a story we watch, or a story we may be able to influence from the outside with the next protagonist, rather than being one of the participants. I see the choice at the end of Trespasser as a guideline from the player to the writers, as for how they should write her as an NPC in scenes related to Solas.

[Abyss108]

I would argue otherwise. Those players who had an antagonistic relationships with Solas or an indifferent one, so are their worldstates less valid than those who romanced or friended him? You're saying that because you had a positive relationship with him, that you should get closure with him, and the only way to do so is have your character be the PC. If my Inquisitor had a negative relationship with Solas, I will still be forced to play them again as PC to accommodate those who want personal closure?

 

To me, it sounds like you're saying people who want the Inquisitor to return for personal reasons should trump those who don't want the Inquisitor to return, or are indifferent to their return, or to new players.

 

Antagonistic Inquisitors swore to kill Solas. They were manipulated by him for a year. He destroyed their arm, and then told them to their face that he was going to kill them. Solas himself refuses to tell the Inquisitor what his plans are because that would be giving the Inquisitor a weapon to use against him. Everything in that scene says the Inquisitor is going to stop Solas. None of that requires a positive relationship.

[Xetykins]

A small cameo of the inquisitor even just to have closure specially for Solasmancers is ok. Also having the inquisitor back as protagonist brings complications. Fans would want their LI with them on the new game. And since there are at least 6 or 7 romancable characters in DAI.... ..then we can just forget getting fresh new companions. It will be DAI ;02.