Enjoying a certain degree of tragedy in your fiction doesn't imply a desire to see more of it in real life.
Exactly. By his logic GRRM must want much pain and horror to inflict real life people because he intentionally kills off so many of his characters, and everyone who reads his books or watches the show Game of Thrones based off of them are cruel for enjoying it.
You're splitting hairs now. How is it alright to intentionally seek out a game where you go on killing sprees, but not alright making choices in that game that make the story more tragic?
Never mind that said killing sprees are 99% not started by me, but other people that attack. I have no reason to feel bad that my character is fighting for their lifes. And I can also choose the peaceful solution from time to time during certain confrontations. But don't let me stop you. It's easier to just assume I'm here just for the killing simulator.
Tragedy for the sake of tragedy is never a good justification. More like running out of good ideas for a history. And mind you, I can like a tragic story. But you just try to make things as bleak as possible. Hawke's parents are dead, brother is dead, sister was doomed to a life many consider worse then death. Oh, why don't you shoot Hawke's dog while you're at it? Clearly, it isn't tragic enough.
Poor comparasion. You're talking about writers in a sense you would apply to books and movies. But these are games were you are the one shaping the story. It's up to you to decide how well or terribly things end.
You're making wrongful insinuations about me without preamble. I like tragedy so long as it's done well. Not just "kill everyone I can," which I don't do. And if I overdid it tragedy would become desensitived; perhaps even comical. Bethany becoming a warden is a tragic angle that I like. I could always have just killed her, which debatably would have been even more tragic, but I liked it this way.
But I'm getting tired of talking with someone whose insulting enough to tell me how to play my game, cherry picks what tragedy is acceptable to like, etc.
You're making wrongful insinuations about me without preamble. I like tragedy so long as it's done well. Not just "kill everyone I can," which I don't do. And if I overdid it tragedy would become desensitived; perhaps even comical. Bethany becoming a warden is a tragic angle that I like. I could always have just killed her, which debatably would have been even more tragic, but I liked it this way.
But I'm getting tired of talking with someone whose insulting enough to tell me how to play my game, cherry picks what tragedy is acceptable to like, etc.
By all means. Let's drop this conversation. I surely don't like talking to you.
Objectively speaking, what you want wouldn't work in game.
You either remove the Circle option completely or subject it to a boss battle where losing doesn't lead to loading the last save.
And in that case, being beaten in combat would make Hawke look like a greater failure. The problem no longer is that he didn't try but that he was incapable.
Or you could beat the Templars and stop them from taking Bethany. But again, if that's what you want it makes more sense to remove the option altogether.
You see, there is no point in imposing conditions to how the Circle mage path should be. It all comes down to the fact that you don't like it.
Considering Hawke can kill people with magic upon first reaching the gallows, or kill tons of templars during Act of Mercy without any real repercussions, I could see a scenario where they kill the templars coming after Bethany; resulting in a scenario like her leaving Kirkwall.
If that was an option I might have considered it over making Bethany a warden, but it wasn't. More than likely I'd have brought Bethany into the Deep Roads anyway because the two Hawke sisters were inseparable.
Considering Hawke can kill people with magic upon first reaching the gallows, or kill tons of templars during Act of Mercy without any real repercussions, I could see a scenario where they kill the templars coming after Bethany; resulting in a scenario like her leaving Kirkwall.
If that was an option I might have considered it over making Bethany a warden, but it wasn't. More than likely I'd have brought Bethany into the Deep Roads anyway because the two Hawke sisters were inseparable.
It's really not terribly plausible that Hawke wouldn't take Bethany because the outcome of leaving Bethany behind is very predictable whereas there's no way for Hawke to know how the Deep Roads expedition will turn out. That's one reason why people pick more tragic outcomes in these games, because they find them more plausible.
It's really not terribly plausible that Hawke wouldn't take Bethany because the outcome of leaving Bethany behind is very predictable whereas there's no way for Hawke to know how the Deep Roads expedition will turn out. That's one reason why people pick more tragic outcomes in these games, because they find them more plausible.
Yeah, I find it hard to believe Hawke would leave the sibling behind considering the expedition's importance; Carver especially. But the "dying in the Deep Roads" possibility is not only poorly done but predictable. The way Leandra asks Bethany/Carver to stay behind, they assure her it will be fine, etc. is so cliche of an upcoming death. Couple that with Varric telling Cassandra how Hawke would never have brought the sibling if they knew and you'd be pretty dense to not assume they'd die. Them becoming a Grey Warden though is a nice twist, and a potentially tragic one for Bethany especially. And I didn't even have to kill her off. Her coming to terms with accepting a life she didn't want, such as her reflections in Legacy, were very touching. I do feel the way they implemented the warden part with them popping in here and there, and Carver potentially whining all the while, was kind of silly. In Act 3 they can "pop in" five times; two of them brief cameos. That's another reason I prefer killing Carver while making Bethany a warden. His death may be poorly done, but I like the tragic angle for Hawke. At least Bethany's character as a warden makes the pop in's worth it.
It's really not terribly plausible that Hawke wouldn't take Bethany because the outcome of leaving Bethany behind is very predictable whereas there's no way for Hawke to know how the Deep Roads expedition will turn out. That's one reason why people pick more tragic outcomes in these games, because they find them more plausible.
I don't know, I always thought it was plausible in Bethany's case. Unlike Carver who practically begs to go, she's not that enthused. And the Deep Roads are dangerous and crawling with darkspawn, which killed her twin... I don't think it's unreasonable to think she'd be safer upstairs.
How long is Hawke stuck in the Deep Roads anyway? I could never figure that out.
Bartrand said "a week below the surface", so multiply it at least by 2 and then add some time to and from the entrance. I'd say 3 to 4 weeks sounds plausible.
Bartrand said "a week below the surface", so multiply it at least by 2 and then add some time to and from the entrance. I'd say 3 to 4 weeks sounds plausible.
Yeah I assume the entire trip takes about a month based on what's said
It's really not terribly plausible that Hawke wouldn't take Bethany because the outcome of leaving Bethany behind is very predictable whereas there's no way for Hawke to know how the Deep Roads expedition will turn out. That's one reason why people pick more tragic outcomes in these games, because they find them more plausible.
Yeah normaslly my Hawke's leave Bethany behind but my current Hawke's a bit more gung ho so that's the reason she went this time and of course now Bethany's a GW
Exactly. By his logic GRRM must want much pain and horror to inflict real life people because he intentionally kills off so many of his characters, and everyone who reads his books or watches the show Game of Thrones based off of them are cruel for enjoying it.
Actually, I think GRRM forces his heroes to look weak or as an outcast in some way.. and then turns it on it's head. The dwarf, the fat guy, the bastard, the battered woman. the eunuch, the teen girl, the cripple, etc.. While typical heroic themes, like love and honor, create disaster.
I like it, but I think it's coming from an outside reason of his own.
I've never put her in the Circle.
1. It's not tragic enough.
2. It feels too much like a character write-off.
3. It makes Hawke look like a helpless failure for just letting it happen without a fight.
But my reasons for my rogue Hawke siding with the mages are very similar to yours. Whenever possible she never took a position on mage freedom (like Varric), but when forced to choose she chose not to help murder the mages; partially because of her mage family history. Meredith threatening her made the choice easier.
The split in the narrative would be too great, especially since it happens so early in the game. Fighting Cullen would result in the Templar order descending on Lowtown, Gamlen and Leandra would be either homeless or killed in the struggle and Hawke and Bethany would have to flee the city entirely.
Anyways, my choice is always witty rogue Hawke. I love having the snarky former soldier of King Cailan's army getting her hands dirty in Kirkwall's undercity and climbing her way into the hoity-toity part of town, all the while resenting the Templars for detaining Bethany. Hawke would murder knife every Templar and their pitiful families if Bethany turned up tranquil.
The split in the narrative would be too great, especially since it happens so early in the game. Fighting Cullen would result in the Templar order descending on Lowtown, Gamlen and Leandra would be either homeless or killed in the struggle and Hawke and Bethany would have to flee the city entirely.
Anyways, my choice is always witty rogue Hawke. I love having the snarky former soldier of King Cailan's army getting her hands dirty in Kirkwall's undercity and climbing her way into the hoity-toity part of town, all the while resenting the Templars for detaining Bethany. Hawke would murder knife every Templar and their pitiful families if Bethany turned up tranquil.
Still like my rogue femHawke, but I gotta say I actually like Diplo female mage too... and no romance! She's practically the Divine. It's underrated. Society couldn't help but love mages after seeing one like this. 
While I do love a good rouge, but warrior/rouge never feels right. Mage just fits better with the over all story line for me. Shame, cause I really like Bethany more than Carver,,,
Coming from a family of mages, it makes more sense for Hawke to be one.
Also, Carver is the sibling that needs to live and grow up as a person. Bethany stays the same, so you might as well let her die in the beginning.
You could also just say being from a family of mages makes for a compelling rogue. Who better to learn how to hide, never show their hand, and play loose with the law. This person would be doing it all their lives.
I still think the mage story is the most compelling, but there's this whole other theme of just being a Ferelden refugee making their way in the world. The bulk of the game is more of a Human Commoner story (that DAO lacked). And Kirkwall in particular is a rogue-ish city. No matter how much I play as a mage, the actual moment to moment gameplay feels very Rogue friendly.
A Templar-supporting Mage Hawke was my very first playthrough and I didn't even plan on it. Still my favorite to this day.
I'd like it more if they didn't turn into Viscount. Even Gaider admits it was a screwup (how they managed to overlook it and screw it up, I don't know).
But it was interesting otherwise.
I'd like it more if they didn't turn into Viscount. Even Gaider admits it was a screwup (how they managed to overlook it and screw it up, I don't know).
But it was interesting otherwise.
A mage becoming viscount, you mean? I guess, yeah. I hate that the Templars turn on you no matter what after becoming viscount.
A mage becoming viscount, you mean? I guess, yeah. I hate that the Templars turn on you no matter what after becoming viscount.
Yeah.. it was apparently a mistake.
I just don't understand how they made such a mistake.
Do góry