Her father will mention about the armor when Lady Aeducan meet him
Well cool. I played it long ago.. I should try again.
The only thing I regret on Aeducan is siding with Harrowmont pretty much kills your House, as the Lady. At least male got the noble hunters. :\
Well cool. I played it long ago.. I should try again.
The only thing I regret on Aeducan is siding with Harrowmont pretty much kills your House, as the Lady. At least male got the noble hunters. :\
I don't remember if you need specific dialogue option for the king to mention about the armor
I always side with Bhelen, as Aeducan it is because, well he's her brother, maybe he's bad and scheming, but i don't want anyone to be on the throne other than Aeducan, and it's Orzamar's shitty politic anyway. As a Commoner, Harrowmont is just not compelling since he's a traditionalist who want to secure shitty caste system.
Qis,My female brand warden also sides with Bhelen only because Rica can advance in life and get away from Dust Town.. Rikku loves her sister to much to side with Harrowmount.
Rikku is the only name I use for my brand warden since it closely matches Rica..
Bhelen is definitely the choice for me as a commoner. I'm just iffy with Aeducan. Lady Aeducan in particular is the most depressing character to me. More than the Dalish... I feel like I should give them some small amount of justice.
I know Harrowmont isn't the better choice, but in the game itself, you never see that. So I still try to roleplay it.
Harrowmont's bad endings were dropped from the canon anyway. So he's perfectly fine as a king. He's probably about to die anyway. So Orzammar will elect a new ruler who will probably be a Bhelen clone so BioWare can funnel yet more varied paths into one plot.
Harrowmont's bad endings were dropped from the canon anyway. So he's perfectly fine as a king. He's probably about to die anyway. So Orzammar will elect a new ruler who will probably be a Bhelen clone so BioWare can funnel yet more varied paths into one plot.
What happens in later games is irrelevant to the outcomes of this one.
I think the fact that so many people just keep getting offended by my posts and trying to prove how I'm wrong about the Couslands being depicted as "too perfect" by explaining how they're just perfect enough (essentially: "They're not 'too perfect!' They're just the perfect amount of perfect!" or "The game never says they're "perfect"! There... might have been one flawed member of the family in their thousand years of being universally praised by everyone in the setting, but we just don't know about it yet because everyone in the setting is too busy singing their praises!") just proves I'm right.
I mean, really. Everyone's totally fine with everyone in the game constantly singing their praises, but try to point out how unlikely it is that everyone in that universe would completely adore these people (especially since other characters in similar situations had to deal with a realistic balance of virtues and flaws, praise and disdain, benefits and drawbacks, etc) and suddenly there's a flood of defensive posts justifying how everyone in the setting completely worships them.
You do realize politics kills all Cousland but two.
Yeah, once. After a thousand years of literally everyone else in the world kissing the ground they walked on and never once trying to take any of their lands, titles, or resources.
Howe is literally the first and only person in the history of Ferelden (which spans over a thousand years) to ever try to encroach on the Cousland's "rightful" lands, titles and property, even though the nature of Ferelden politics (described here and here) makes it clear that nobles squabble and land-grab and try to one-up each other all the time. In a thousand years no one ever once got jealous of or wanted to take anything from the Couslands until Howe, who also happens to be an irredeemably evil monster in man's skin who's universally reviled by everyone else.
People are just hating on the Couslands because they work hard and reap the benefits.
Everyone else in this universe works hard too, yet they reap weeds as well as benefits, whereas the Couslands reap nothing but benefits.
For example, the Ferelden Grey Wardens also sided against the tyrannical King Arland two hundred years ago, yet they alone bore the brunt of taking the losing side (losing their reputation and status, getting labeled and banished as traitors, and still bearing the stigma to this day), whereas the Couslands didn't lose any of their reputation or status despite also being on the losing side of that war. If the Wardens lost face for siding against Arland, the Couslands should have too. But because they're author's darlings, they don't have to deal with any of that. They get all the in-universe praise of "Oh, what heroes! They sided against a tyrant!" but none of the in-universe shame or scorn that comes with siding against a monarch. (Essentially, "They sided against the king? What traitors!")
Eleanor was sinking Orlais war vessels with her own ship when she was 15.
Yeah, with Daddy's money and resources. Her father had been a sort of privateer, right? A bann who also did some raiding on the side? That means he bought and paid for all her training, weapons, ships, and crew. She's a textbook example of "Never a Self-Made Woman"; everywhere she got in life was from the assistance of a prominent male relative who both inspired and paved the way for her. She had all the advantages of her father's wealth and status and resources going for her.
Now, if she's been a nobody commoner who started off with little but amassed a ship and inspired the loyalty of a crew of strangers and then made a reputation for herself as a seafaring threat like, say, Isabela, I could respect her a lot more.
Meanwhile, Adaia was a nobody commoner city elf who actually had society working against her since elves are legally forbidden from owning weapons, and elves get constantly get arrested, tortured and purged for even raising a hand against humans. Yet, with nothing but a single ancestral dagger and her own gumption, somehow managed to become a great enough fighter that Duncan really wanted to make her a Grey Warden, and only relented because there was no Blight at the time.
Adaia might have been murdered in the past, but then Eleanor was murdered in the present. So much for that.
It is a good "Mary Sue" for me, it is because they are representing the good side nobles, we have irredemeable bad one that is Howe. The hatred on Howe will be less meaningful if the Cousland is no better than Howe isn't it?
And we also have not so good nobles of other race, the Dwarves. So Cousland being the only "Mary Sue" is fine by me, it will be boring if Cousland is no better than any power grabing, double crossing, and scheming nobles already existing in the game.
Let Cousland be Cousland as they are, don't change them into the same level as any nobles in DA universe, let them be "Mary Sue", let them be the example of "there are still better uncorrupted nobles in the world not like any other"
Or the writers could have instead realistically balanced the virtues and flaws of all noble families so that other not-so-nice nobles can have redeeming qualities and the Couslands have some negative qualities, instead of the current set-up where everyone is flawed and everyone does mean things except the Couslands.
Or, if they have to have the Couslands be perfect Mary Sues (because every author has a darling), they could have balanced this by having other "perfect" characters besides the Couslands, rather than the Couslands being the only ones who are both flawless and universally adored by all their peers.
But no. They alone are always nice and always virtuous and always above those little petty things that literally every other noble does. Literally every other noble in the setting plays at politics and power-grabbing and racism and classism to at least some extent... In fact, they have to. The Dwarf Noble Origin reveals that dwarven nobles have to play at cut-throat politics because if they don't, they'll get killed. The Amaranthine trials in Awakening reveals that Ferelden nobles constantly engage in petty squabbling and constantly try to take land and status from each other; but never the Couslands?
I'm sorry, but that's not believable for this setting. Why is it that all noble families from all times and places occasionally get jealous of and try to one-up each other, but never the Couslands? Why is it that every other noble family has to occasionally deal with other noble families trying to take from them or screw them over--but somehow, magically, no noble in the history of Ferelden before Howe ever once got jealous of nor wanted to take something from the Couslands, therefor the Couslands never had to deal with any political rivals, therefor they never had to engage in politics, therefore their track record is completely spotless?
No. Realistically speaking, some members of the Cousland family should be flawed and/or corrupt (throughout Ferelden history and present day). Some people besides Howe (and not irredeemably evil assholes like Howe) shouldn't want to kiss the ground they walk on just for being Couslands. And some people should have at least some legitimate grievances against them. (Not "OMG WHAT ASSHOLES!" grievances, but just general distaste or apathy. "Bryce? Yeah... he's kinda self-righteous, don't you think?" or "Yeah... my great-grandfather got into a long border dispute with your great-grandfather, which the courts finally settled in your father's favor, so my father's really a fan of the Couslands.")
The Cousland's status of being the only nobles who never have to deal with politics depends on other characters (besides Howe) constantly treating them deferentially (despite never doing the same for each other), which isn't believable.
The writers should have either made the Couslands more flawed like everyone else, or had other "perfect" nobles elsewhere to balance out the Couslands' perfection, so the Couslands aren't the only perfectly perfect flawless paragons of perfection in a world filled with realistically flawed people.
No - Couslands in themselves could've been wiped out. And yet you choose to think their Mary Sues when they could have a bad members of the their family - who was blocked from the history books - keep in mind the Cousland's are an old family, you may never know just becuase they never dicuss it...
Coud've, should've, would've.
Didn't. Weren't.
And the fact that they are universally praised and admired by everyone all the time in the setting (except for Howe, who is not only the only one who doesn't worship them, but only does so because he's irredeemably evil and has no legitimate claims against them; he's just jealous of how amazingly fabulous they all are), and people only ever have good things to say about them, despite them being around for a thousand years and those characters always having something bad to say about others, makes me call bull.
Take the Theirins. They're also an old family. They've been Ferelden's royal family for over a thousand years, since the country's inception. Yet, they're shown to have a realistic balance of virtues and flaws. Some Theirins have been better than others; some were just, some were tyrants. But even the best of them have been shown to have at least some realistic flaws and weaknesses to balance out their virtues, making them realistic, believable, complex, dynamic characters. Even characters who love the Theirin family could point to a flaw if you asked them. "Arland? Yeah, he was a tyrant." "Cailan? Yeah, kind of a spoiled, sheltered idiot, isn't he?" "Alistair? Yeah, kind of an inexperienced idiot who always tells bad jokes, doesn't he?"
Couslands? Nope. Not a bit. Despite also being an old family and also being around since the country's inception a thousand years ago (and not even as high as the royal family), somehow there's never been anyone who was significantly flawed or poorly regarded in the slightest.
That's where I call both "Mary Sue" and bull.
And the fact that they are universally praised and admired by everyone all the time in the setting
No they aren't.
Or the writers could have instead realistically balanced the virtues and flaws of all noble families so that other not-so-nice nobles can have redeeming qualities and the Couslands have some negative qualities, instead of the current set-up where everyone is flawed and everyone does mean things except the Couslands.
Or, if they have to have the Couslands be perfect Mary Sues (because every author has a darling), they could have balanced this by having other "perfect" characters besides the Couslands, rather than the Couslands being the only ones who are both flawless and universally adored by all their peers.
But no. They alone are always nice and always virtuous and always above those little petty things that literally every other noble does. Literally every other noble in the setting plays at politics and power-grabbing and racism and classism to at least some extent... In fact, they have to. The Dwarf Noble Origin reveals that dwarven nobles have to play at cut-throat politics because if they don't, they'll get killed. The Amaranthine trials in Awakening reveals that Ferelden nobles constantly engage in petty squabbling and constantly try to take land and status from each other; but never the Couslands?
I'm sorry, but that's not believable for this setting. Why is it that all noble families from all times and places occasionally get jealous of and try to one-up each other, but never the Couslands? Why is it that every other noble family has to occasionally deal with other noble families trying to take from them or screw them over--but somehow, magically, no noble in the history of Ferelden before Howe ever once got jealous of nor wanted to take something from the Couslands, therefor the Couslands never had to deal with any political rivals, therefor they never had to engage in politics, therefore their track record is completely spotless?
No. Realistically speaking, some members of the Cousland family should be flawed and/or corrupt (throughout Ferelden history and present day). Some people besides Howe (and not irredeemably evil assholes like Howe) shouldn't want to kiss the ground they walk on just for being Couslands. And some people should have at least some legitimate grievances against them. (Not "OMG WHAT ASSHOLES!" grievances, but just general distaste or apathy. "Bryce? Yeah... he's kinda self-righteous, don't you think?" or "Yeah... my great-grandfather got into a long border dispute with your great-grandfather, which the courts finally settled in your father's favor, so my father's really a fan of the Couslands.")
The Cousland's status of being the only nobles who never have to deal with politics depends on other characters (besides Howe) constantly treating them deferentially (despite never doing the same for each other), which isn't believable.
The writers should have either made the Couslands more flawed like everyone else, or had other "perfect" nobles elsewhere to balance out the Couslands' perfection, so the Couslands aren't the only perfectly perfect flawless paragons of perfection in a world filled with realistically flawed people.
Cousland is just fine, no need to give them any flaws, they are fine as a perfect Mary sue. Why want to corrupt their background just for the sake of corrupting them? No need to, let them be like they were.
Even in real world history there are good incorruptible nobles no matter you want to believe it or not, but writers only love to highlight the corrupt ones because that's what everyone want to hear, peoples don't want to hear about good, wise, honorable nobles, peoples want to hear about corrupt, schemeing and backstabbing nobles, it have become stereotype.
Furthermore, the main character is YOU, if you want one of the family member is a corrupt one, just make your character become so, you can be a Cousland who is corrupt, psycho killer, a thief, involve in slavery, destroy religious relic and what not...if you really want a corrupt Cousland, make one yourself, you are free to do so.
Corrupt noble is a stereotype and it's boring, in contra with your own view, it is unrealistic...do you genuinely believe all nobles are corrupted, all politicians are corrupted, all elites are corrupted? This kind of believe come from modern socialistic movement that have prejudice toward peoples who hold power. "There is no incorruptible nobles", how realistic is that?
Nobles are just lke everyone else, it just that they have status, the one who give them status is the society itself. Just like everyone else, they can be good and they can be bad, so it is realistic to have a good noble family out of bad noble families out there, and that good noble family is the Cousland.
Coud've, should've, would've.
Didn't. Weren't.
And the fact that they are universally praised and admired by everyone all the time in the setting (except for Howe, who is not only the only one who doesn't worship them, but only does so because he's irredeemably evil and has no legitimate claims against them; he's just jealous of how amazingly fabulous they all are), and people only ever have good things to say about them, despite them being around for a thousand years and those characters always having something bad to say about others, makes me call bull.
Take the Theirins. They're also an old family. They've been Ferelden's royal family for over a thousand years, since the country's inception. Yet, they're shown to have a realistic balance of virtues and flaws. Some Theirins have been better than others; some were just, some were tyrants. But even the best of them have been shown to have at least some realistic flaws and weaknesses to balance out their virtues, making them realistic, believable, complex, dynamic characters. Even characters who love the Theirin family could point to a flaw if you asked them. "Arland? Yeah, he was a tyrant." "Cailan? Yeah, kind of a spoiled, sheltered idiot, isn't he?" "Alistair? Yeah, kind of an inexperienced idiot who always tells bad jokes, doesn't he?"
Couslands? Nope. Not a bit. Despite also being an old family and also being around since the country's inception a thousand years ago (and not even as high as the royal family), somehow there's never been anyone who was significantly flawed or poorly regarded in the slightest.
That's where I call both "Mary Sue" and bull.
I think it just makes the Cousland a better potential jerk to start off that way. Someone wracked with anger and loss. Some characters I feel better playing softer, or guilt ridden.. but Cousland works well for me the other way. So it doesn't matter if the family was more ideal at first.
That said, playing a jerk isn't all that great since DAI came out. There isn't much reaction to any of it. They're gonna be seen as a hero no matter what. But that's kind of another issue.
I think it just makes the Cousland a better potential jerk to start off that way. Someone wracked with anger and loss. Some characters I feel better playing softer, or guilt ridden.. but Cousland works well for me the other way. So it doesn't matter if the family was more ideal at first.
That said, playing a jerk isn't all that great since DAI came out. There isn't much reaction to any of it. They're gonna be seen as a hero no matter what. But that's kind of another issue.
Aren,You may be correct because Duncan may have leak a secrete about my CE wardens when he told them I already heard about you.
Tidus Will not hesitate to kill when necessary or for justice. He help train Shianna, Soris and other elves how to use a bow and crossbow. He's was never overly fond of Shems until he became a Grey and then only a select group. Morrigan and later Leliana was his first human lovers..
Camine is a well trained rogue,bard and assassin. She is suspected of killing a Nobel in Orlais for beating and killing a Elven servant. She is believed to be a member of the Denerim Dozen.
She help her cousin Tidus train the Elves. and when Camine's Shem boyfriend was killed by a bandit, this bandit was found dead several days later and his murderer was never caught.
Chasha (Camine's youngest sister) is a mage in Ferelden's Circle. Before her magic abilities became publicly known at the age of 15 she was trained as a warrior by Camine..
The HoF could be a greater criminal than Loghain and Howe were and they can be still worshipped as an hero at the end game,well that's lame....
And by "lame" we mean "perfectly reasonable". Save a significant part of the world and you'll become popular for a while, even if you are Victor Von Doom.
And by "lame" we mean "perfectly reasonable". Save a significant part of the world and you'll become popular for a while, even if you are Victor Von Doom.
It's not perfectly reasonable. You can leave Redcliffe to damnation and they still build a statue of you in DAI. There's nothing reasonable about that. It's just a sign of lazyness.
And Leliana and Cass were on a quest for this Warden to be a possible Inquisitor, even if you killed Leliana and defiled their prophet. Again, lazy. It's like asking someone to be the pope, even if they took a giant crap on the head of a Virgin Mary statue...and aren't even Catholic in the first place. But worse. It's one thing to say people are all groovy and openminded and want to give others the benefit of the doubt.. but that's just outright retarded.
All it takes is a line change or so to make it work better. But with Redcliffe, I expect some graphical changes at least.. and more than a few NPCs who didn't like HoF. What if their mom or sister got their faces eaten off by skeletons? Exactly why would they care about the Warden. He isn't that great.
No they aren't.
Name one character.
Seriously. Besides Rendon and Nathaniel Howe (the former because of "jealousy," the latter only back when he was on his "you killed my father" shtick, which of course he instantly gets over the minute he realizes his father really was a monster who deserved to die), name one character in the entire setting who has anything negative to say about them?
Cousland is just fine, no need to give them any flaws, they are fine as a perfect Mary sue.
Yeah, so what their Mary Sues? Ferelden needs some Mary Sue nobles, anyhow.
You two make me sick.
Name one character.
Seriously. Besides Rendon and Nathaniel Howe (the former because of "jealousy," the latter only back when he was on his "you killed my father" shtick, which of course he instantly gets over the minute he realizes his father really was a monster who deserved to die), name one character in the entire setting who has anything negative to say about them?
No. That's not the claim on the table. The claim is that they are universally praised and admired. They are not. General indifference is not "universal praise and admiration". Name one person who wasn't a houseguest or on their payroll who "praised and admired them"
You should watch the ''The Game of Thrones'' if you want to see powerful, corrupt, political families. There are no good nobles on that show; the Cousland's were a breath of fresh air from that seterotype of noble we usually see presented in games and shows.You two make me sick.
The HoF could be a greater criminal than Loghain and Howe were and they can be still worshipped as an hero at the end game,well that's lame....
As for the Couslands i find rather interesting to play with a character that coming from that background is slowly becoming an empty shell of darkness,while still being false with others on the surface about the emotions..
You two make me sick.
You two make me sick.
Awwww.....someone who don't like to believe good rich and powerful elites does exist...
Ever heard Batman?
Good pop cultural references, you've got there. Or more like we both used pop cultural references, lol.Awwww.....someone who don't like to believe good rich and powerful elites does exist...
Ever heard Batman?
Aeducan Mama was so fat, she used the Aeducan shield as a plate.
I must have missed the humor.
You should watch the ''The Game of Thrones'' if you want to see powerful, corrupt, political families. There are no good nobles on that show; the Cousland's were a breath of fresh air from that seterotype of noble we usually see presented in games and shows.
Retour en haut