171 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

It used to seem logical. Everything from the strict roles to the assigned breeding to the denial of romance to the borg-like adherence to this hive mind and its' rules all point to a cold and logical society. This isn't something appealing but it's something that we can understand the reasoning behind. All the new stuff seems so random and ill-fitting like it was just thrown in, tacked on without thought to make the Qun seem more palatable.

If the Qun was random and nonsensical before (which I don't think it was) why just throw in more random nonsense rather than trying to nail down the concept for a believable culture?

Wait.. you thought Sten's argument about sex roles was logical? It's only logical if the premises of that logic are crazy; how is this different from Insane Troll Logic?

I should also point out that Gaider flat-out endorsed In Exile's Insane Troll Logic description on this board some months ago. In Exile's too classy to bring that up, but if we're going to talk design intent, it's in play.

And the idea that they're trying to make the Qun more palatable doesn't seem to be founded on anything at all.

[Donquijote and 59 others]

 

Anaan asam qun!

upload

[sniper_arrow]

Wait.. you thought Sten's argument about sex roles was logical? It's only logical if the premises of that logic are crazy; how is this different from Insane Troll Logic?

I should also point out that Gaider flat-out endorsed In Exile's Insane Troll Logic description on this board some months ago. In Exile's too classy to bring that up, but if we're going to talk design intent, it's in play.

And the idea that they're trying to make the Qun more palatable doesn't seem to be founded on anything at all.

 

What do you mean by Gaider's endorsement? Can you provide details, if possible?

[Shechinah]

What do you mean by Gaider's endorsement? Can you provide details, if possible?

 

I believe In Exile posted an explaination of the Qun in regards to the Qun's perception of gender in a thread and that David Gaider responded with confirmation to it. I remember reading it but not the name of the thread.

[Amne YA]

well what make the chantry better than the Qun or the dwarf stone religion better than the Qun   or the elfs gods better than the Qun .
to each race their religion and it must be respected  . your opion dont matter kadan 

[BansheeOwnage]

well what make the chantry better than the Qun or the dwarf stone religion better than the Qun   or the elfs gods better than the Qun .
to each race their religion and it must be respected  . your opion dont matter kadan 

So far, I don't recall seeing anything religious about the Qun. And I don't believe religions should inherently be respected. In any event, the Chantry and Evanuris have done some pretty terrible things.

[AlanC9]

What do you mean by Gaider's endorsement? Can you provide details, if possible?

Something along the lines of "we have a winner." It was one of those threads with a lot of varied interpretations of stuff being posted. Most of his substantive comments in the thread were to debunk claims that DAi was retconning the Qun -- those are always based upon people drawing inferences from DA:O that Bio had never intended to establish as facts. So there was no con to retcon; Bio had either always been planning to go another way, or had decided to not establish anything at that time. I believe the latter is the case for sexuality, as opposed to reproduction, under the Qun.

[vertigomez]

I'm going to raise my children under the Qun.

All zero of them.

[Nefla]

Something along the lines of "we have a winner." It was one of those threads with a lot of varied interpretations of stuff being posted. Most of his substantive comments in the thread were to debunk claims that DAi was retconning the Qun -- those are always based upon people drawing inferences from DA:O that Bio had never intended to establish as facts. So there was no con to retcon; Bio had either always been planning to go another way, or had decided to not establish anything at that time. I believe the latter is the case for sexuality, as opposed to reproduction, under the Qun.

What he said was that the Aqun Athlok concept hadn't been thought up in DA:O but didn't contradict anything that was set up and that Sten's opinion/perspective was his own and not indicative of the Qun. What he didn't mention was the implication of sex slavery of the Tamassrans or Iron Bull not being brought back for reconditioning but rather instantly cut off. Anyway whether they see it as a retcon or not, I see it as nonsensical and poorly done. In DA:O and DA2 we had a completely different view of it and whether that was due to missing information or a change in direction it made more sense back then. A strict society that protects women because of population and breeding concerns, rejects individuality, and assigns and treats its' people like drones makes for a cold but efficient society. Whatever this random thing from DA:I is supposed to be just doesn't make sense as either a cold and logical hive mind society OR an emotion/individual based society. It's just not believable as any kind of working society.

[Heimdall]

So far, I don't recall seeing anything religious about the Qun. And I don't believe religions should inherently be respected. In any event, the Chantry and Evanuris have done some pretty terrible things.

I get the sense of a vague spiritual logic to it, though it's not a religion in the sense we tend to think of it I'm not sure I'd call it secular either.

Though agree about religions.

[BansheeOwnage]

I get the sense of a vague spiritual logic to it, though it's not a religion in the sense we tend to think of it I'm not sure I'd call it secular either.

Though agree about religions.

True. I formulated that response quickly, and forgot to add that I'd be interested in seeing the more spiritual side of the Qun, because I'd like to think the characters in Thedas have a reason for viewing it as a religion as opposed to a philosophy. I get the less-educated masses (unintentionally) simplifying it like that, but the main characters, who are generally intelligent and educated, do it too.

[SonnyKohler]

 I don't believe religions should inherently be respected

Why?  Because they are not yours and only yours is the "correct" one or because you believe religion itself is inherently beneath respect?

 

Personally, I am irreligious myself, but I respect the right of others to follow whatever faith they choose, no matter how foolish I may believe them to be.  It is not my place to judge.

[Heimdall]

Why? Because they are not yours and only yours is the "correct" one or because you believe religion itself is inherently beneath respect?

Personally, I am irreligious myself, but I respect the right of others to follow whatever faith they choose, no matter how foolish I may believe them to be. It is not my place to judge.

For myself, I simply believe nothing should be considered beyond criticism. By all means I'm not going to stop people from following their religion, but if there's some particular practice within it I believe is harmful, I'm going to call it out.

To use an extreme example: would you respect a tradition that promoted human sacrifice?

[vbibbi]

Something along the lines of "we have a winner." It was one of those threads with a lot of varied interpretations of stuff being posted. Most of his substantive comments in the thread were to debunk claims that DAi was retconning the Qun -- those are always based upon people drawing inferences from DA:O that Bio had never intended to establish as facts. So there was no con to retcon; Bio had either always been planning to go another way, or had decided to not establish anything at that time. I believe the latter is the case for sexuality, as opposed to reproduction, under the Qun.

From an in-game perspective, nothing in DAO hints that what we've learned about Qunari culture weren't facts. Facts seen through the perception of the characters who lived under the Qun, but there aren't really hints of dissent until the mass Tal Vashoth desertions on the Wounded Coast and Tallis in MotA. I don't think it's fair that people who saw a change in Qun doctrine between DAO and DAI were "wrong" because they didn't know Bioware's intentions behind the scenes; they were working on information available to them through the game. So yeah, Bioware hopefully had a plan on how we would learn more about the Qunari and how it's not as unified as outsiders think it is, and that was done well so far, I think. But they provided this information through an unreliable narrator in IB, who confesses to being a spy and liar, and in Trespasser can be shown to be more of a liar than we thought.

 

What he said was that the Aqun Athlok concept hadn't been thought up in DA:O but didn't contradict anything that was set up and that Sten's opinion/perspective was his own and not indicative of the Qun. What he didn't mention was the implication of sex slavery of the Tamassrans or Iron Bull not being brought back for reconditioning but rather instantly cut off. Anyway whether they see it as a retcon or not, I see it as nonsensical and poorly done. In DA:O and DA2 we had a completely different view of it and whether that was due to missing information or a change in direction it made more sense back then. A strict society that protects women because of population and breeding concerns, rejects individuality, and assigns and treats its' people like drones makes for a cold but efficient society. Whatever this random thing from DA:I is supposed to be just doesn't make sense as either a cold and logical hive mind society OR an emotion/individual based society. It's just not believable as any kind of working society.

Qun society was fleshed out more in DA2 and DAI, which is good. I think DAI could have benefited by having more than Iron Bull as the sole voice of the Qun. We needed another perspective, as I don't really trust him to be a good voice of his homeland. He's a spy, he's going to make the Qun sound as good as possible. He's going to tell people the best interpretation of his society as he can.

[BansheeOwnage]

Why?  Because they are not yours and only yours is the "correct" one or because you believe religion itself is inherently beneath respect?

 

Personally, I am irreligious myself, but I respect the right of others to follow whatever faith they choose, no matter how foolish I may believe them to be.  It is not my place to judge.

Hopefully I don't start an argument, but I'll answer your questions:

 

No, neither. I don't believe religion is inherently beneath respect, nor do I believe it inherently deserves it. On a more personal note, I've seen a lot of suffering take place because of religious teachings, and history is fraught with examples of religions clashing because they are "the only correct" one. I don't think that is worthy of respect. On the other side of things, most people who are religious are not bad (though in my opinion, misguided), and will not actively seek to harm others in the name of their religion, even if their religion actually calls for that.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is, I can respect people who are religious, but there is no reason for me to respect an idea, especially if I think it's wrong and/or immoral. And people shouldn't take personal offense if I don't respect their religion. They didn't invent it, after all. Well, unless they did, which is another reason I don't think it deserves inherent respect: Anyone can create a religion, with any teachings. I don't think I should have to respect... anything you can think of.

 

And as Heimdall said, it's mostly just that I don't think religion should get special treatment by being seen as above criticism. It's just like anything else. Politics and other philosophies aren't, after all.

[Wulfram]

If the Qun stops messing with people who don't follow it, then we can start talking about respect. Though even then we'd have issues, since brainwashing people into accepting abuse doesn't make that abuse right.

I continue to support Anarcho-Qunism, personally.

[SonnyKohler]

For myself, I simply believe nothing should be considered beyond criticism. By all means I'm not going to stop people from following their religion, but if there's some particular practice within it I believe is harmful, I'm going to call it out.

To use an extreme example: would you respect a tradition that promoted human sacrifice?

Very good.  I agree with your first paragraph.

 

To answer your second:  Yes.  If that was their religious practice and it did not violate the laws of their particular society then, more power too them.

 

Sorry - I've been around a long time and seen a lot of things so, I prefer not to judge anyone on their traditions based on my personal moral code.  It is not my place.

 

I am getting from this particular thread that so many folks want to judge the Qun based on their "real-world", "modern" perception of right and wrong and their own moral code.  The Qun works for the Qunari.  That is all that matters.  Whether or not I agree with it is really rather moot.  The Tevinter's have a lot of practices that I would not agree with either, but, I am not Tevinter and it is not my place to judge.  If there are members of either of those groups that are willing to and are directly effected by the practices and beliefs of those circumstances then, more power too them.  Have at it.  They, as members of those groups, also know the ramifications of their actions and should be willing to pay whatever price is required for their actions.

 

It's kind of the old argument of judging someone because of their social status, gender or race in the US.  You are more than welcome to comment on and judge others, but, your opinion is, in the long run, completely moot.  As a white, middle-class, male, it is not my place, nor my right to judge the rich (or the poor), women or anyone of color.  I do not know their specific circumstances and I am not directly affected by those circumstances as they would be.  My judgment is an ignorant hypocrisy.

[SonnyKohler]

If the Qun stops messing with people who don't follow it, then we can start talking about respect. Though even then we'd have issues, since brainwashing people into accepting abuse doesn't make that abuse right.

I continue to support Anarcho-Qunism, personally.

Messing in what way?  Conquest is not messing with, it is simply the way of the world.  The strong will subjugate the weak.  Even in DA2 I don't remember the Arishok ever trying to convert me.  They simply wanted to take over.  The Qunari are not stupid enough to believe that they will convert the entirety of Thedas to the Qun.  Unfortunately, the Chantry is.

[Wulfram]

Messing in what way?  Conquest is not messing with, it is simply the way of the world.  The strong will subjugate the weak.  Even in DA2 I don't remember the Arishok ever trying to convert me.  They simply wanted to take over.  The Qunari are not stupid enough to believe that they will convert the entirety of Thedas to the Qun.  Unfortunately, the Chantry is.

They conquer to convert. If you won't convert, they'll send you to be "re-educated". If re-education won't work, they'll destroy your mind with Qamek and use your body for slave labour.

The same applies to people who leave the Qun, of course.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

Solas agrees with you. Take solace in that. 

 

I like the Qun as long as it stays inside the game. I can see the comfort in the idea of having somebody assigning you a role where you can be of some use, especially if you're feeling lost on what purpose you have in real life. And being fixed might sound amazing to people who are feeling pretty broken. 
But I might object when the idea is put into practice. So while I like/am neutral about the Qun in the game, I would probably be opposed to it in real life. Like I'm very opposed to being stabbed in the gut in real life, but don't mind it in video games. 

 

I think it's one of those deals it sounds it's good as a theory like communism and ratings labels, but never works in the real world or if does it's under a tyrant that uses it's an excuse for his/her actions.  

[SonnyKohler]

They conquer to convert. If you won't convert, they'll send you to be "re-educated". If re-education won't work, they'll destroy your mind with Qamek and use your body for slave labour.

The same applies to people who leave the Qun, of course.

Sounds like a plan to me.  Subjugate the weak.  Either do it or else.  The Chantry hasn't done much better when it comes to the Elves, now have they?

[Artona]

From what I gather from DA games (I haven't played Tresspasser yet though) I think that Qun - as a vision of society - is really advanced in comparison to states of Thedas. It's centralised, seems to be highly organised and somewhat recalls Soviet Union. Honestly, I don't think that countries like Ferelden (let's decide who will be king by duel!), or Orlais with its Game stand any chance in conflict. 

[Wulfram]

Sounds like a plan to me.  Subjugate the weak.  Either do it or else.  The Chantry hasn't done much better when it comes to the Elves, now have they?

... I thought you believed in respecting people's religion?

[Heimdall]

Sounds like a plan to me. Subjugate the weak. Either do it or else. The Chantry hasn't done much better when it comes to the Elves, now have they?

See, you're losing me here. We should respect the Qun, but the Qun shouldn't have to respect any other belief system or way of life? Not to mention anyone's personal autonomy in choosing their way of life? It seems a bit hypocritical to me. Respect has to be a two way street or it will never work.

[BansheeOwnage]

 

Qun society was fleshed out more in DA2 and DAI, which is good. I think DAI could have benefited by having more than Iron Bull as the sole voice of the Qun. We needed another perspective, as I don't really trust him to be a good voice of his homeland. He's a spy, he's going to make the Qun sound as good as possible. He's going to tell people the best interpretation of his society as he can.

I mentioned this is another thread recently: Yet another reason I'm sad they cut Shokrakar as a companion. Her views of the Qun, and experiences compared to Bull's, would have certainly given us better insight.

 

Very good.  I agree with your first paragraph.

 

To answer your second:  Yes.  If that was their religious practice and it did not violate the laws of their particular society then, more power too them.

Holy ****    You are a scary person. You'd be okay with completely immoral practices just because they are tradition? Slavery, killing, anything, just because they're part of some other culture? Wow

 

And ask the slaves of Tevinter or the dissenting qunari if their systems "work for them"...