119 réponses à ce sujet

[90s Kai]

Depends how meaningful you need the change to be. I found meaning helping Zerlinda and her son, comforting Athras when his wife died horribly and painfully as a werewolf, taking off Vaughan's head for hurting Shianni, making sure Merrill and Fenris and Sera had some sort of safe haven and support system, freeing Zevran from the Crows, saving the lives of mages three games in a row, giving Briala more political clout through Celene or Gaspard, protecting the casteless from Harrowmont's... everything, etc.

You don't have to enact big, sweeping change to make a difference in someone's life.

This. Is. Everything.

And I agree with it 100%. Small acts of kindness, go a very long way. Because once that seed is planted, other people will do things to help others. Big, sweeping changes can only go so far because not all people have the status and reputation to make big changes to the world. And a change like that can't just happen overnight it takes time, like a lot of it.

But giving a shoulder to cry on, an ear to listen, giving food to the hungry, a kind word, even just a smile can change a persons outlook of a certain person/people.

That got really deep guys, sorry about that.

[vertigomez]

And then the second you take out these individual oppressors, new ones will just fill in to take their place.
 
It's like stomping on an anthill; you might take out a few individual ants, but there's a whole system colony underneath with a queen ant breeding a hundred new ones to replace the old ones. The system of Thedas' socioeconomic hierarchy breeds this level of injustice, so just taking out one or two here or there doesn't make a meaningful, lasting change.

I understand your frustration, and I do hope the setting doesn't just stagnate and die with no significant gains for the oppressed by the time DA10 rolls around (if only because that's a bit boring and unimaginative on the part of the devs)... but I disagree with the above entirely. Who cares if new baddies replace the old ones?

My PCs have made meaningful, lasting change in the lives of their elven and mage friends. And as the people of Thedas become accustomed to that kind of open, easy, loyal friendship between people of different races/classes/nationalities, old prejudices fall to the wayside. It's not an overnight thing and I don't think it's going to happen because a King decrees something or an Inquisitor crushes someone into submission. Societal attitudes will have to start to change, and then we'll see elves with more political and socioeconomic power. The best way to do that is to be the kind of person who helps even if it doesn't seem to make a difference in the long run.

Celene's affection for Briala is what got the elf's foot in the door, politically speaking. Varric's friendship with Lavellan sees the whole Wycome situation come to fruition. Bhelen marries a casteless woman instead of just making her a concubine. The College of Magi is a thing now. Change is happening in increments.

[congokong]

That's what I'm seriously considering. Learn to read.

There's no need to be rude. And I did read your post. All I could be certain of was you no longer wanted to care about working to make things better for elves in your playthroughs because your choices don't matter; not that you want to quit DA entirely.

[MisterJB]

I have been patient and optimistic. It's been three ****** games and nothing has gotten better. The few times it seems like things are getting marginally better, they're back to where they started within a few years.

By the end of Trespasser those alienages have not been said to be rebuilt on account of Solas, so until we learn otherwise the the elves of Orlais have greater freedom because of YOUR noble actions.

Until humans take it back the way they took back the Dales from the elves, then took back the better treatment they promised the Denerim Alienage for a City Elf Bann, or they took back the Hinterlands they promised to a Dalish Warden.

Also, what happened for an Inquisitor who sided with mages and elected someone besides Vivienne as Divine? Didn't mages also get to enjoy "greater freedom"? How long did that last? Two years, until Vivienne restored the Circles.

Like I said, no meaningful, lasting change.

Don't bother getting your hopes up, because it's not going to last.


I'm not saying all conflict should be magically resolved and everything should be all hunky-dory, but by the same token, when they constantly rub our faces in how much life sucks for everyone but non-magic humans then give us a chance to try to help them, I'd like things to actually get better and actually stay better for longer than just a few years at most.

It's never new conflicts with new challenges for these games (like "mages are no longer locked in towers; now we need to figure out how to integrate them into non-magic society" or "elves have increased legal rights, and humans don't like this; we have to figure out how to get these two to coexist"), it's the same old conflict with the same old song and dance because the writers keep finding new ways to completely undo any progress the player character makes for a group and just restore the previous game's status quo.

It's the exact same conflict game after game after game ("Templars lock mages in Circles" "humans herd elves into alienages or out of human settlements", etc), and after a while you get tired of taking the exact same stance in the exact same conflict the fourth game in a row, since you already know nothing you do is going to make a meaningful impact, and any new development will be undone by the next game, so why bother caring?


That's what I'm seriously considering. Learn to read.


You have no idea what my real life has been like.

Don't go making assumptions.


And then the second you take out these individual oppressors, new ones will just fill in to take their place.

It's like stomping on an anthill; you might take out a few individual ants, but there's a whole system colony underneath with a queen ant breeding a hundred new ones to replace the old ones. The system of Thedas' socioeconomic hierarchy breeds this level of injustice, so just taking out one or two here or there doesn't make a meaningful, lasting change.

Because player agency and "meaningful, lasting change" just do not work together.
For BioWare to have a game in which the plot centered around "integrate mages cinto non-magical society, they would first have to remove any option but those pro-mage and they have no wish to take choice away from the players.

Thus, of course, we must havê conflicts that all can experience regardless of their save status and they must happen in a world that is fundamentally identical in all world states.
Naturally, this means that the status quo takes precedence.

Should there lasting consequences for our actions, both positive and negative?
Yes but it's not happening.

[Gervaise]

Would just reiterate that in the case of the mages they did take the choice away from players because no matter which path they chose or who became Divine, the outcome at the end of Trespasser was exactly the same: a loyalist Circle and an independent College of Enchanters.   The only real difference is whether the balance of power is more towards one or the other.  

 

The changes that help the elves get a foot in the door only happen if you make certain choices regarding who rules Orlais.   Wycombe can only happen if you have a Dalish Inquisitor and then only if you get your choices right.   My elven Inquisitor used the argument to the Healer in Redcliffe that by helping people it might change attitudes towards our race (I'm not sure if you get a similar option if you aren't an elf) but there is really no evidence that it did.    The only acknowledgement of my race having an affect on the outcome was in the main game epilogue concerning putting Briala in charge of Orlais and that is likely to have spectacularly backfired after Trespasser.

 

Actually the most disappointing thing about the Exalted Council was that they treated you exactly the same whether you had been a tyrant or a saint.    There was no difference between someone who happily accepted the role of Herald of Andraste, believed in it and tried to live by the moral code of the Chant and someone who did not.   If leading by example is meant to work in changing attitudes (and I agreed it should), then it is a pity this was not recognised in the dialogue of the participants, even if the outcome was the same. 

[Patchwork]

Would just reiterate that in the case of the mages they did take the choice away from players because no matter which path they chose or who became Divine, the outcome at the end of Trespasser was exactly the same: a loyalist Circle and an independent College of Enchanters.   The only real difference is whether the balance of power is more towards one or the other.  

 

The changes that help the elves get a foot in the door only happen if you make certain choices regarding who rules Orlais.   Wycombe can only happen if you have a Dalish Inquisitor and then only if you get your choices right.   My elven Inquisitor used the argument to the Healer in Redcliffe that by helping people it might change attitudes towards our race (I'm not sure if you get a similar option if you aren't an elf) but there is really no evidence that it did.    The only acknowledgement of my race having an affect on the outcome was in the main game epilogue concerning putting Briala in charge of Orlais and that is likely to have spectacularly backfired after Trespasser.

 

Actually the most disappointing thing about the Exalted Council was that they treated you exactly the same whether you had been a tyrant or a saint.    There was no difference between someone who happily accepted the role of Herald of Andraste, believed in it and tried to live by the moral code of the Chant and someone who did not.   If leading by example is meant to work in changing attitudes (and I agreed it should), then it is a pity this was not recognised in the dialogue of the participants, even if the outcome was the same. 

 

I think this is the real problem, the most promising changes are optional and sometimes only available if the pc is of a certain race so come the next game those changes are ignored, downplayed or retracted in order to make the world easier for developers to handle.

 

I can understand that even if I don't like it but after three games I want something that benefits the elves to stick. 

[Qun00]

You have no idea what my real life has been like.

Don't go making assumptions.

It is reality. There is nothing similar to warrant your comparison in western society. Perhaps in North Korea or the Middle West, but that's not your case, is it?

The world is full of people who cry oppression although they enjoy all their rights. Elves and mages don't have that luxury.

[TobiTobsen]

It is reality. There is nothing similar to warrant your comparison in western society. Perhaps in North Korea or the Middle West, but that's not your case, is it?

The world is full of people who cry oppression although they enjoy all their rights. Elves and mages don't have that luxury.

 

The casteless! Won't somebody please think of the casteless!

[Qun00]

Especially the casteless, dear child of the Stone.

[nightscrawl]

It is reality. There is nothing similar to warrant your comparison in western society. Perhaps in North Korea or the Middle West, but that's not your case, is it?

The world is full of people who cry oppression although they enjoy all their rights. Elves and mages don't have that luxury.

To be honest, you should never bring up real life scenarios in internet discussions, or make assumptions, for the simple reason that you can't possibly know your opponent's history, and they are under no obligation to tell you. Someone could be a victim of abuse, or a political asylum seeker, or something else along those lines. Just because the likelihood of that possibility is rather slim, doesn't mean that it is entirely implausible.

 

Or to take the cynics path, if the person were to make some claim about their past you can't also know whether they are telling the truth, or merely lying in order to bolster their argument by a claim that you have no way of refuting, and will also most likely not call out as a lie or exaggeration.

 

And then there is the actual possibility that the person might then respond by stating, "Well, my parents smuggled me across the North Korean border when I was 10 years old, but they had to stay behind, and I've never seen them since," after which you might then feel like an ass. Or hell, what if Malala Yousafzai played Dragon Age and posted on these forums?

 

Truly, it is best to just avoid all that.

[MisterJB]

Then, if they're being generous, they might let players TRY to change things for the better, but they have no intention of following through.

 

Not only is "change for the better" entirely subjective, there is also the factor of the minimum amount a player must have before he or she is happy.

For some people, gradual changes are enough while others will only be satisfied with sweeping tides of it.

[Gervaise]

I'll repeat; a precedent was set with the mages.    We have gone from a situation where mages were locked up in towers and unable to interact with the world or their families, unless they were from nobility for whom exceptions were made to a situation where there are two factions, the Chantry loyal Circle and the independent College of Enchanters.    It hasn't been explained what will happen with the education of mage children now but I assume they will have the choice of which organisation they go to and at least with the College will be still be able to keep contact with their families.    This is the situation at the end of Trespasser no matter what choices you made in the game.    

 

To be honest the message that gives me is that for the elves to get any sort of concessions they need to blow up a Chantry and destroy half a city, say "F**k the Divine", sell out to a foreign power after being given the protection of a nation state and (potentially depending on the choices of the PC) even be part of an army marching under the head of a elf supremist and then they will be rewarded with some improvement in their lot in Thedas.  

 

So thinking about it, the Conclave was an elf indirectly blowing up a Chantry, the events in Trespasser were the elves giving the finger to the Divine (even if she was Divine Leliana) and allying with either Solas or the Qun against Orlais, which in my game was being run by Briala where life was getting better for the elves as a result, and we have got them running off to join an elf supremist, so may be by the end of the next game the elves of Thedas will be better off regardless of choices made by the PC.   (Please note this is said with a lot of sarcasm)

[nightscrawl]

^ Well good, then maybe we can get a game about dwarves.

[Seracen]

I feel a lot of the original elf hate in the world probably came from back when the Elvhen Empire was powerful, essentially what the Tevinter Imperium is around the time of these games.

 

Imagine how Tevinters would be treated once their Empire fell...indeed, just look to how mages are treated in general.  Oppression begets hatred, and then the oppressors become the oppressed.  In the case of the elves, it just became systemically acceptable treatment.  Dwarves are similarly looked down upon, one could make the case, but they are insulated in a seat of relative power (feeling better than "surfacers," being the main source of lyrium, etc).

 

By Inquisition, it seems to be the Qunari who are rising, and perhaps Ferelden to an extent.  If what was hinted at in "Trespasser" comes to pass, elves would once again look at all the other races with superior disdain.  History is generally cyclical, with different powers trading who's at the top.  It often behooves the powerful to maintain such behavior.

 

That's where the main heroes of these stories come in, and why they serve a purpose...to shake up the status quo (or uphold it, depending on choices, against those who would).

[In Exile]

I'll repeat; a precedent was set with the mages.    We have gone from a situation where mages were locked up in towers and unable to interact with the world or their families, unless they were from nobility for whom exceptions were made to a situation where there are two factions, the Chantry loyal Circle and the independent College of Enchanters.    It hasn't been explained what will happen with the education of mage children now but I assume they will have the choice of which organisation they go to and at least with the College will be still be able to keep contact with their families.    This is the situation at the end of Trespasser no matter what choices you made in the game.    

 

To be honest the message that gives me is that for the elves to get any sort of concessions they need to blow up a Chantry and destroy half a city, say "F**k the Divine", sell out to a foreign power after being given the protection of a nation state and (potentially depending on the choices of the PC) even be part of an army marching under the head of a elf supremist and then they will be rewarded with some improvement in their lot in Thedas.  

 

So thinking about it, the Conclave was an elf indirectly blowing up a Chantry, the events in Trespasser were the elves giving the finger to the Divine (even if she was Divine Leliana) and allying with either Solas or the Qun against Orlais, which in my game was being run by Briala where life was getting better for the elves as a result, and we have got them running off to join an elf supremist, so may be by the end of the next game the elves of Thedas will be better off regardless of choices made by the PC.   (Please note this is said with a lot of sarcasm)

 

What Anders did was completely pointless. It started a crackdown, but anything could have started a crackdown. The mage rebellion was precipitated by other events. 

[Nixou]

What Anders did was completely pointless. It started a crackdown, but anything could have started a crackdown. The mage rebellion was precipitated by other events. 

 

Which is the game's point: The morality of DA2's story is not "If only Anders hadn't done it, things would have been different": the story's morality was "Keep oppressing people for long enough, and sooner or later on will go on a murderous rampage and be hailed as a hero for it": oppression begets violence.

[Medhia_Nox]

@nightscrawl:  I will say... that a person enjoying the luxury of a video game forum... might not be experiencing a lifetime of oppression in a ghetto. 

 

@nixou:  It can also beget civil resistance... but that might not be so interesting for a video game crowd who wants to solve everything through violence.

[In Exile]

Which is the game's point: The morality of DA2's story is not "If only Anders hadn't done it, things would have been different": the story's morality was "Keep oppressing people for long enough, and sooner or later on will go on a murderous rampage and be hailed as a hero for it": oppression begets violence.

 

But Anders isn't hailed as a hero. He's hailed as a loon. And rightly so, because his gameplan was to spur a genocide. 

[Gervaise]

Which is why it was rather disappointing at the end of DA2 that the implication was the whole thing happened because of what Anders did.    I always side with the mages at the end because of the injustice of the annulment but it really sucks that people think I'm supporting what Anders did.   The reaction of Varric says it all.   If you do side with the Templars then he says you are supporting their way of life (approvingly).   If you side with the mages he says he isn't sure about us letting dangerous people run amok and he doesn't mean the Templars.    So mages fighting to stop themselves being killed is running amok, Varric?    To be honest, I wonder if the writers played down making a direct link between the two subsequently because they suddenly realised it did look like supporting terrorism.

 

Actually Vivienne was also right (although I hate having to agree with her).   Fiona's originally call for independence took place at the conclave at Cumberland in the aftermath of Anders' bomb.  The timing was absolutely awful.   What she should have done was make a call for the Divine to properly investigate the circumstances leading up to the action, declare the right of annulment by Meredith was illegal, since it was not sanctioned by a Grand Cleric (in the absence of Elthina, Meredith should have sent to the next settlement with a Grand Cleric), so the actions of the mages (and Hawke) was justified.  Anything but seem to condone the actions of Anders since independence is what he wanted, or the Resolutionists, the extreme group of mage liberation party, who want to bring about change by frightening people into giving it to them, in other words terrorists.   We never hear about them subsequent to DA2 but I do wonder if they morphed into the Venatori, since I believe the Resolutionists did have links to Tevinter.

 

At the next meeting of the First Enchanters that they allowed, Fiona admits that she came back to the Circles from the Grey Wardens specifically to cause trouble.   And the string of events I outlined above (which I said was done sarcastically) nevertheless was the sequence that occurred: Bomb, Call for Independence by Fiona, Crack Down, Attempt on Divine's life, Report to Divine on Pharmond's research: call for conclave of First Enchanters to discuss, Fiona says "F**k the Divine" and makes another call for independence, Seeker Lambert overeacts; Divine's agent helps mages escape; Mages vote by very narrow majority to fight for independence; Lambert bullies Templars into doing likewise; Divine calls peace conference; Mage blows up Divine; Mages join Venatori a mage extremist group intent on ruling the world because apparently freedom only applies to mages and thus there is no harm in selling out to a group that wants to deny it to everyone else; Mages get independence.    Violence wins.

 

I wouldn't mind so much if Fiona could have been demoted from Grand Enchanter at some point but she remains steadfastly at the head of affairs if you side with the mages.    Plus no one is ever called to account for the murder of all the tranquil to make the occulara.    They are still people even if they don't have emotions and in fact the moment before their throats were cut, they would have recovered them because they were forcibly possessed by a demon.

[Nixou]

@nixou:  It can also beget civil resistance... but that might not be so interesting for a video game crowd who wants to solve everything through violence.

 

 

Well, yeah, but DA2 made it clear that Meredith was zealously crushing any and all form of dissent, with the notable exceptions of Hawke and Elthina, who were the two remaining authorities in town too powerful to be bullied with impunity, and even they were standing on thinning ice.

 

***

 

But Anders isn't hailed as a hero. He's hailed as a loon. And rightly so, because his gameplan was to spur a genocide. 

 

 

You don't need to be hailed as a hero by most: you just need enough people who regard your actions as heroic to follow you personally or follow in your footsteps.

 

And that's where oppression plays a role: recent studies by political scientists and historians have shown that there's a clear link between how oppressive established authorities are and the success of violent rebellions:

Relevant quote:

When both terrorism and counterterrorism inflict massive costs on civilians, the population is left with a choice of two bad options. Given that preexisting grievances are likely to have facilitated rebels’ mobilization efforts in the first place, governments are doubly likely to lose in such a contest.

 

 

Anders expected "the government" -in that case, the corrupt (and increasingly infamous about it) Templar Order- to overreact and crank up its persecution not only against mages but against everyone suspected of being a mage sympathizer, which in turn would push the population as a whole to reject them and side with the mages by default.

Had Anders' paranoia been completely groundless and the Templar Order half as honorable as it claimed to be, he would have remained a lone madman.

But the Order reacted exactly as Anders predicted: its local commander used the murder as an excuse to commit the massacre she already wanted to commit, then the other branches cranked up the oppression while treating with utter contempt the more level-headed authority figures' calls for restraint, and by the time Inquisition rolled in, Templars were executing farmers for the crime of wearing a shovel and on the verge of pledging themselves to Corypheus.

And all that for what result? No matter who becomes the next Divine, by Trespasser's end the Circles no longer have full control over southern Mages, with Vivienne's political maneuvering -Not the Templars' unfettered violence- being the reason there's still a vestige of the Circles to begin with.

 

So yes, in the end, a clear majority regarded Anders as a loon, but that didn't stop the rebellious faction he inspired to emerge victorious in the end.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

You don't need to be hailed as a hero by most: you just need enough people who regard your actions as heroic to follow you personally or follow in your footsteps.

Except nobody regarded his actions as heroic. Even the mages, the people he was trying to help and inspire, wrote Anders off as a lunatic and condemned his actions.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

The casteless! Won't somebody please think of the casteless!

Yeah. The Casteless Dwarves have it the worst. 

[Tidus]

 Tidus and Carmine are gentle and caring until crossed or you hurt their family and friends as Vaughan, Howe and Loghain came to realize to late..  I can imagine the last thing they saw before their death was the fiery hate filled eyes of my Elven warden. 

[MisterJB]

Anders expected "the government" -in that case, the corrupt (and increasingly infamous about it) Templar Order- to overreact and crank up its persecution not only against mages but against everyone suspected of being a mage sympathizer, which in turn would push the population as a whole to reject them and side with the mages by default.

Had Anders' paranoia been completely groundless and the Templar Order half as honorable as it claimed to be, he would have remained a lone madman.

But the Order reacted exactly as Anders predicted: its local commander used the murder as an excuse to commit the massacre she already wanted to commit, then the other branches cranked up the oppression while treating with utter contempt the more level-headed authority figures' calls for restraint, and by the time Inquisition rolled in, Templars were executing farmers for the crime of wearing a shovel and on the verge of pledging themselves to Corypheus.

Anders never expected the population of Thedas to reject the Templars. In fact, when questioned if he is not concered how his actions will pain the mages in the eyes of the general population, his answer is "Was anyone ever with us". What he wanted was for the mages to be free or be dead. That he accomplished, in Kirkwall, at least.

 

And the population never did reject the Templars. By the beginning of DAI, the mages have been barred by every city but Redcliff while the nobles and Chantry are all but begging for the Templars to defend Val Royeaux.

 

 

 

And all that for what result? No matter who becomes the next Divine, by Trespasser's end the Circles no longer have full control over southern Mages, with Vivienne's political maneuvering -Not the Templars' unfettered violence- being the reason there's still a vestige of the Circles to begin with.

 

So yes, in the end, a clear majority regarded Anders as a loon, but that didn't stop the rebellious faction he inspired to emerge victorious in the end.

Many factors contribute to the ending of Trespasser. Corypheus, the Inquisitor's whims on who to ally with, Leliana's bleeding heart, Vivienne's uncharacteristic mercy, Ferelden and Orlais standing against the Inquisition, etc.

It is telling, however, that not a single one of these factors are actually the actions of either Anders or the mages. In fact, their fate is entirely dependant on more important people having pity for them.

Without that, without Ferelden's protection, without Corypheus altering the political situation, without the Inquisition's protection, without the Divine's mercy, the Templars win. Therefore's the Templars "unfettered violence" carry the day.

 

Furthermore, a "vestige of the Circle" may apply in certain endings but in others it is clearly the College that is the weaker organization.
 

[Carmen_Willow]

 

A recurring theme of the series, already hinted at during Origins and openly displayed with the Hawke Tragedy is how powerful History's Inertia is, that merely being a formidable warrior doesn't suffice to put an end to centuries' old prejudice and hatred, because you simply can't bully people into becoming decent.

 

One of the hardest things to change is culture. Culture has been imposed on weak groups by the strong and decades and centuries later the weaker culture still survives. Of course the strongest proof of this is the culture the Elven Alienages imitate - that of the European Jews. Centuries later and both cultures survive, Jewish culture and those cultures that hate Jewish culture. Changing the beliefs and mores your parents and others in your ethnic or national or religious group have taught you is incredibly difficult Even those who rebel carry it forward in a negative or mirror image. As the Jesuits said, "Give us a child until he is seven, and he is ours forever."