12 réponses à ce sujet

[greenbrownblue]

So what's the difference. I am only asking for opinions based on codexes, dialogues, murals etc. Pls remember to add a wikia link if possible.

[Reznore57]

Well possesion is when a spirit/demon feels like it wants to party in someone's body.

And binding is when someone , usually a mage bind a spirit to something , and the spirity demony thing is trapped .

That's how I understand it anyway.

[vertigomez]

One's trapped inside your body, one's trapped outside your body.

[nightscrawl]

I think it's the difference between taking over and being attached to a person/thing.

[Sah291]

Well I don't have a wiki link handy, but my impression is the purposes are totally different. Binding is to control or restrict a spirits power to an object or person's will...and usually isn't voluntary. So the object being bound to is acting like a restraint or prision for the bound spirit to contain its power. So like the Pride demon in DA2 that was bound after the war. And then possession is taking control of the body to use that person's physical abilities or power...the person has to ultimately accept the spirit to for this to happen, according to dialogue.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Possession is when a spirit takes up residence inside something; this usually involves taking control of it, but doesn't seem to require it since Wynne apparently keeps her free will.

 

Binding is when a mage puts a spell on a spirit that makes it do what the mage wants it to. The two are not mutually exclusive; a blood mage can force a demon to possess something. Nor does binding require that the spirit possess something as we see from the numerous summoned demons that keep their own forms.

 

(If you're wondering, most of the stuff I didn't cite alternative evidence for can be gathered here. Check the first full paragraph.)

[greenbrownblue]

I think it's the difference between taking over and being attached to a person/thing.

Hum.. Ok... Was just wondering because in a post about Qunari's immunity to demon possession someone said that Hakkon possessed a dragon and on the wikia it is said that Hakkon was bound to it. Made me confused..

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Hum.. Ok... Was just wondering because in a post about Qunari's immunity to demon possession 

... what? Okay, where's that supported in canon?

 

 

Hum.. Ok... Was just wondering because in a post about Qunari's immunity to demon possession someone said that Hakkon possessed a dragon and on the wikia it is said that Hakkon was bound to it. Made me confused..

As for the actual question, I think Hakkon was clearly summoned and clearly possessed the dragon. I don't think Hakkon was bound, however, as limiting the freedom of one of your gods is not a thing most people would do.

[greenbrownblue]

... what? Okay, where's that supported in canon?

 

 

 

As for the actual question, I think Hakkon was clearly summoned and clearly possessed the dragon. I don't think Hakkon was bound, however, as limiting the freedom of one of your gods is not a thing most people would do.

1. Qunari: http://forum.bioware...a-short-theory/  Btw, seems my theory could be right, so I am gonna make a vid for YT for suuure ^^. The only thing that was keeping me was the doubt about Hakkon. Someone wrote that dragons could not be highly resistant to possession, coz Hakkon possessed a dragon (and Hakkon was a spirit). NOw I am sure that this is not true.

2. DA Wikia says it was bound not possessed. That's why I asked what's the difference.

Here is a quote (there are more than one): This High dragon is an ancient beast which during the Divine Age was bound and forced to serve as the vessel for the Avvar god Hakkon Wintersbreath. 

[Secret Rare]

I'm interested in this topic so i will wait more to  develop my impression.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

1. Qunari: http://forum.bioware...a-short-theory/  Btw, seems my theory could be right, so I am gonna make a vid for YT for suuure ^^. The only thing that was keeping me was the doubt about Hakkon. Someone wrote that dragons could not be highly resistant to possession, coz Hakkon possessed a dragon (and Hakkon was a spirit). NOw I am sure that this is not true.

2. DA Wikia says it was bound not possessed. That's why I asked what's the difference.

Here is a quote (there are more than one): This High dragon is an ancient beast which during the Divine Age was bound and forced to serve as the vessel for the Avvar god Hakkon Wintersbreath. 

The wiki makes fairly clear the dragon was both bound and possessed. (Bound in the context of the dragon meaning it was controlled by the Hakkonites before being given to the spirit.) Not that I'd want to put as much stock into a theory that depends on the exact wording in the fan-made wiki as you are even if it supported this.

 

In addition to which Iron Bull's dialogue as you enter the Fade in Here Lies The Abyss heavily implies that he can be possessed, since he says "If I get possessed" before telling the rest of the group how to hit an opening in his defense that Cullen had picked up on.

 

And you're assuming, without decent support, that there are no weak Qunari mages just because we don't see any. How many qunari mages do we actually see?

[nightscrawl]

The wiki makes fairly clear the dragon was both bound and possessed. (Bound in the context of the dragon meaning it was controlled by the Hakkonites before being given to the dragon.) Not that I'd want to put as much stock into a theory that depends on the exact wording in the fan-made wiki as you are even if it supported this.

 

In addition to which Iron Bull's dialogue as you enter the Fade in Here Lies The Abyss heavily implies that he can be possessed, since he says "If I get possessed" before telling the rest of the group how to hit an opening in his defense that Cullen had picked up on.

 

And you're assuming, without decent support, that there are no weak Qunari mages just because we don't see any. How many qunari mages do we actually see?

 

In addition, there is also the Arvaarad's dialogue in DA2 during the whole Ketojan quest; Qunari definitely fear that their mages can be possessed.

[Smudjygirl]

In addition, there is also the Arvaarad's dialogue in DA2 during the whole Ketojan quest; Qunari definitely fear that their mages can be possessed.

 

Thing with the Qunari is mages considered weak are killed right away  no questions asked. Those that don't are generally considered "strong".

 

Most mages get possessed because they attract a certain demon (pride, hunger, desire etc) but the Qunari are so indoctrinated by the Qun they seem more resistant to falling victim to demons. Though that is mostly my opinion based on my observations. But it does happen, or they wouldn't bind and fear their mages.