Questa discussione ha avuto 115 risposte

[Joseph Warrick]

It's true there aren't too many race-specific differences, like access to unique maps (this is a good thing imo but that's another topic.)

 

But in my opinion DAI had enough race-specific content to allow you to imagine up a character. It's an illusion that shifts how you approach the game.

 

As a qunari, you can be as andrastian and involved with the Inquisition as a human noble. Likewise, as a human, you can be as uncaring as a qunari. But to me as a player, it makes a lot of sense to play as an involved Andrastian human and then replay as an uncaring qunari. I fill in the gaps myself by giving my character race-related motivations.

 

Then, the race-specific content enhances this to make it feel meaningful. For example, when you're in the temple with the ancient elves and as an elf you tell them that your people needs them, that's very special characterwise (if not plotwise).

[LobselVith8]

This is a question I'd like to put to the community because I don't understand it.

 

What is it about? Well, of course, I, too, like more choices about what kind of character I play, and yes, I, too have availed myself of the multiple-race feature in DAI. It's not that I actively dislike it, or don't understand why people like it.

 

Meanwhile, what I don't understand is why people find it important, because in my view, it is a completely superficial feature! Every character we play, human or not, is, in spite of a non-human label that was attached to them, still human in everything but name and appearance. And that means, human in everything that counts.

 

It's an issue where these people aren't the same as the Andrastian humans; they have their own unique cultural (and sometimes religious) perspective that some people find more entertaining and appealing than the one held by Andrastian humans.

 

Dwarves...well, they are short and stocky humans with a somewhat interesting cultural background. Elves....somewhat skinny humans with long pointed ears and their own cultural background. Those cultural backgrounds, however, are nothing that a human culture couldn't have. Asari - lesbian human women with a specific culture. Turians - look like "horrible spiky monsters" but psychologically they're just militaristic humans.

 

 

Dwarves follow the Stone, they have 'Stone sense', they have their own culture with the thaigs and the caste system; their never-ending war against the darkspawn to try and slowly reclaim what they once lost. Dalish elves are nomadic tribes who fight a battle every day of their lives to maintain their autonomy and religious freedom in the face of real dangers and persecution from all sides; they view magic as a "gift of the Creators" and their magical abilities adapted to their nomadic lifestyle. These non-Andrastian cultures appeal to people.

 

I've heard people say playing humans is boring. Well, if that's so, then playing elves or dwarves, or asari or turians in Mass Effect, is just as boring because these races and species are plainly not non-human enough to make the difference to the human standard significant.

 

I find playing as an Andrastian human very boring; I was one of the people who didn't plan on buying Inquisition when it was initially announced as human only, because Andrastian human culture and perspectives simply don't appeal to me. Some people felt the same way as me, and voiced their opinions on the same. Apparently, it was enough to get the developers to add in different races again.

 

So really, why are people so obsessed with this feature? Sure, it's nice to have, but the way it's implemented, it's superficial. Cosmetic. I can imagine any number of character templates I'd find it interesting to play in the world of Thedas, but those that would require a *really* non-human species have never had a fitting species implemented.

 

People find it entertaining. People enjoy some of these non-Andrastian cultures. There are threads about the elves, about the dwarves, because people like them - there's culture and history to them, and there's the roleplay aspect when you play as someone from one of these groups.

[Ghost Gal]

Why do people find it important to play a human?

 

If you're playing a fantasy game filled with fantasy races where you get to roleplay someone or something you can never be in real life - a Grey Warden, a mage, the leader of a huge religious military organization, the perceived prophet of a dead goddess, etc - might as well add fictional fantasy race we can never be in real life to it.

 

I personally also find it important because DAO established a world filled with different racial and class points of view thanks to DAO Origins. Mages experience the world differently from nobles, elves experience life differently from humans, city elves differently from Dalish from Circle mage elves, casteless differently from dwarf nobles from surface dwarves, dwarves differently from surface races (since they can't dream or use magic), vashoth different from older Thedas races, etc.

 

We also have many conflicts during each game where it would be fun to see the same events and conflicts from different perspectives, or from the perspective we most enjoy. Some players just want to play mages because they like experiencing Thedas (or certain romances) from a mage's point of view, dwarf fans like experiencing Thedas from a "nice dwarven perspective," some from an elven perspective, the all-new vashoth perspective, etc.

 

Some players actually aren't all that interested in the Andrastian human perspective, and since DAI is all about "Andraste this" and "Andraste that," the one thing that makes the game bearable to some is playing a non-human who sasses the whole concept (since it's not their religion and they get strong-armed into it); or what they find interesting is playing the kind of character who wouldn't normally be considered for this job. "A Qunari leads the army of the faithful; who knew?"

 

Sometimes certain races or classes feel more personally relevant to certain conflicts. Many players feel DA2 wouldn't have been as compelling if Hawke had been prevented from being a mage, since playing a mage in a game that focuses heavily on the mage/Templar conflict felt more personally relevant to some players. Given how the second half of DAI focused on elfy locations and revelations (Temple of Mythal, Eluvians, Flemeth as Mythal, Solas as Fen'Harel, etc), and set up the main conflict next game being about Fen'Harel's elves against Thedas, some feel playing an elf is more interesting or personally relevant to experience this conflict.

 

There are a lot of reasons to enjoy playing non-human races.

[JessicaLGraff_02]

This is a question I'd like to put to the community because I don't understand it.

 

What is it about? Well, of course, I, too, like more choices about what kind of character I play, and yes, I, too have availed myself of the multiple-race feature in DAI. It's not that I actively dislike it, or don't understand why people like it.

 

Meanwhile, what I don't understand is why people find it important, because in my view, it is a completely superficial feature! Every character we play, human or not, is, in spite of a non-human label that was attached to them, still human in everything but name and appearance. And that means, human in everything that counts.

 

Dwarves...well, they are short and stocky humans with a somewhat interesting cultural background. Elves....somewhat skinny humans with long pointed ears and their own cultural background. Those cultural backgrounds, however, are nothing that a human culture couldn't have. Asari - lesbian human women with a specific culture. Turians - look like "horrible spiky monsters" but psychologically they're just militaristic humans.

 

I've heard people say playing humans is boring. Well, if that's so, then playing elves or dwarves, or asari or turians in Mass Effect, is just as boring because these races and species are plainly not non-human enough to make the difference to the human standard significant.

 

To add to that, since the foundation on which "non-human" races and species are built is a particular human archetype, playing those is usually much more limiting than playing a human.

 

So really, why are people so obsessed with this feature? Sure, it's nice to have, but the way it's implemented, it's superficial. Cosmetic. I can imagine any number of character templates I'd find it interesting to play in the world of Thedas, but those that would require a *really* non-human species have never had a fitting species implemented.

 

I'm not 100% sure, but people might find it important because once they play it from a human's perspective they can play the game again from another species perspective for lore purposes. 

 

I'm sure people realize it's a superficial feature in the sense that these non-human characters are "not non-human enough" to make the human standard significant, but that's what makes them so alluring or forbidden in my opinion. We will find them attractive because they resemble us; thus, allowing for romance and offspring, yet different enough to be repulsive. However, you want to look at it.

 

Or they might represent historical parts of our culture. I always though the elves represented the Native Americans and the Qunari represented Communism. So to play the game through an elf's eyes, it could be like playing a game through the eyes of a Native American. I'm not saying that's what is happening, but you could see it that way.

 

OR you can simply take it for what it is... A fantasy RPG that submerges its players in a world with magic, war, castles and dragons lol. None of it is necessary, but together, they make up a whole world. It would be like Lord of the Rings without elves, dwarves, orcs and other creatures.

[nightscrawl]

Having said that, I can offer an explanation of why I personally find playing as a Human in Dragon Age annoying sometimes - All the Human characters we have had are nobility in some form or another. Cousland is a noble, Hawke is related to the Amell who was a noble and Trevelyan is a noble. That can get tired or boring fast.

You explained it yourself. It's interesting because you get to play from a different cultural viewpoint.
 
Sure, humans could be written with a similar background to what the Elves and Dwarves - but they're not. The human background is always written to be the most "normal", for the players that just want to insert themselves into the plot. There will never be anything too alien in there.

This is the main problem with the portrayal of humans in the Dragon Age franchise to date. The human experience that the player has is pretty much the same. There have been no peasants or lower class origins. There have been no different cultures (Tevinter, Rivain, Antiva) for the player. We've only heard of these other nations through our followers, but not been from them ourselves. So far, the human experience in Dragon Age has been limited to upper class Western civilization; Ferelden, the Free Marches.

 

And of course, DAO originally had both a human commoner origin and an Avvar origin, but both were cut for a variety of reasons. They have not revisited those ideas since, although I think the further development of the Avvar in DAI, even more so in JoH, was a significant step in that direction.

 

I could ask the same about humans, as I had several people say they wouldn't play the next game if it had a mandatory elven protagonist.

What ultimately matters is one or both of aesthetics and cultural background. Some people find some races more appealing in those areas than others.

While I prefer to play humans, primarily for aesthetic reasons, I don't discount the value that multiple race options provide for those players that want them. If there are multiple race options for a given game, then I am happy for those players. However, where I get confused, and sometimes irritated, is when some players act like playing humans is "boring" or inferior and rag on other players who make that choice.

 

We're all just trying to enjoy the game. You [general you, not you, Xilizhra] got your non-human race, so be happy with that and respect that there are some people that are just not interested.

[Captain Wiseass]

Variety is the spice of life.

[BansheeOwnage]

I could ask the same about humans, as I had several people say they wouldn't play the next game if it had a mandatory elven protagonist.

 

What ultimately matters is one or both of aesthetics and cultural background. Some people find some races more appealing in those areas than others.

I'm not one of the people who said they wouldn't play with an elf-only protagonist, but I'll answer anyway. I don't expect this to apply to anyone except me

 

I generally play partial-self-inserts (more morality and decision making, less appearance and name) to begin with, and depending on how much I replay a game and other factors, I'll do it again as something different. So playing as humans fits there, naturally, since I'm human.

 

Of course, since these games are so long, I don't always get to the point of doing anything significantly different, and sometimes I don't even want to enough, and I can enjoy replaying the same character just as I can enjoy rereading a book or rewatching a movie. The most significant deviation I've done is probably romancing Cullen on a subsequent playthrough, since my canon is a forever-alone lesbian (actually, most of my canons are. Heh    Heh heh ). And yet, I still romanced him as a human, partly because I didn't feel the need not to, and partly because I was borrowing my girlfriend's character anyway, so I had to.

 

Aesthetics do also play a role here, if I'm honest. While I could rail about the model-looks of Bioware's human female protagonists extensively, I'm not a huge fan of the elves, dwarves*, or qunari either, for quite different reasons. My body-type doesn't overly resemble any of them anyway, so, eh. Some people really like the faces of elves, dwarves, or qunari, but I think the humans look just fine.

 

*I actually like the look of female dwarves in DA:O/DA2, but I can't bring myself to play one in DA:I because of the effective retcon of how they look (since there is only one body type for everyone). In DA:O/DA2, they were still stocky and well-built; only slightly thinner than males. In DA:I they creep me out because they look like children with boobs Also, I can't romance Cullen with them

 

So long story short, I don't have anything against playing other races, I just default to humans. I feel like the people who have such strong opinions that one race or other is better to play as are very silly. We all have our reasons for liking different things. I would, however, be more interested in playing non-humans if they were more... well, non-human, as I say below.

 

My point was neither is there "anything too alien" in the culture of the elves and dwarves. They might as well be humans.

I think it would be very interesting to be able to play as a spirit in DA or Geth in ME (or other AI). However, I think they would be very difficult to write as a roleplaying protagonists - much harder than simply writing them as a set character. And it would be challenging simply because they are among the most alien characters in these settings, so naturally hard for humans to write.

 

 

This is also a factor for me, albeit in the opposite direction from elves . There's an extra reason I like to play dwarves, even beyond my fascination with the culture and history of their Dragon Age incarnation. Outside of games with a lot of elaborate body customization, I've never seen a human woman in a video game that looked remotely like me. I probably never will. I don't blame BioWare for that - I don't expect them to overturn the conventions of the entire entertainment industry on my account. But if I can play a woman who's short, curvy and muscular via selecting 'dwarf' at character creation, that makes me happy. (I would also love to play a fat woman in an RPG some day, but I do not expect miracles. Maybe body sliders will become more of a thing in the future.)

Well, I can relate that I haven't seen a human woman in a game who looked much like me, except some I've created. Because of how many body sliders there were in Neverwinter (not Neverwinter Nights), this is the closest to my body-type any of my characters have.

Spoiler

The other thing I like to do when given body-sliders is to simply make larger-framed, muscular women, since that never happens otherwise, and usually makes more sense.

Spoiler

A bit hard to tell because of the armour and no frame of reference, but there you go. And yes, observant people, I am not very creative and am terrible at coming up with original names

 

I really hope/wish Bioware would implement them. I know they would cause a lot more work for animation, but I think it would definitely be worth it. Remember, this would apply to all characters, not just the protagonist, so I think it would go a long way in making the world seem more real, since people in real life actually have different bodies, not just faces! *Gasp*

 

If they won't do that, I think they should at least implement a range of (maybe 3) preset bodies so we aren't stuck either being an incredibly jacked lumbering brute as a male, or an unrealistically un-built supermodel "soldier" as a female. Keep in mind that for Andromeda, which is human-only, this would be less animation work than making 4 races was for DA:I, and significantly easier since the bodies would be much more similar in size.

 

 

Now onto the mage part. I am someone who inherently likes to learn, read and study things. I have been doing this for as long as I can remember and I do it to the point where people now tell me (I'm 25 now) - "There's no point in you studying so much. You should be working hard,saving money, get a girl and start a family." FFS, when I was in high school, my parents stopped buying books for me read in my leisure time because according to them I am reading too much and costing them too much money.

Wow, that sucks. I never got anything but encouragement for wanting to learn. Sorry

 

Long story short ... because I am denied such a choice in so many other games.  While I have no particular issue with Human Characters, being forced to play them in so many other styles of games (especially RPGs) have made them all around pretty boring.  They are the status quo, the mundane, the common.  Playing characters of other races feels a bit more unique, if only on a surface value and if only because now I have a choice.  

 

Though I normally define what race i want to play based off of a planned theme for a character rather than anything else anyway, so if the theme calls for a Human, I'll gladly play a human.

I can totally understand this, because if you replace "human" with "male", I could have written almost the same paragraph

[Dabrikishaw]

This is a question I'd like to put to the community because I don't understand it.

 

What is it about? Well, of course, I, too, like more choices about what kind of character I play, and yes, I, too have availed myself of the multiple-race feature in DAI. It's not that I actively dislike it, or don't understand why people like it.

 

Meanwhile, what I don't understand is why people find it important, because in my view, it is a completely superficial feature! Every character we play, human or not, is, in spite of a non-human label that was attached to them, still human in everything but name and appearance. And that means, human in everything that counts.

 

Dwarves...well, they are short and stocky humans with a somewhat interesting cultural background. Elves....somewhat skinny humans with long pointed ears and their own cultural background. Those cultural backgrounds, however, are nothing that a human culture couldn't have. Asari - lesbian human women with a specific culture. Turians - look like "horrible spiky monsters" but psychologically they're just militaristic humans.

 

I've heard people say playing humans is boring. Well, if that's so, then playing elves or dwarves, or asari or turians in Mass Effect, is just as boring because these races and species are plainly not non-human enough to make the difference to the human standard significant.

 

To add to that, since the foundation on which "non-human" races and species are built is a particular human archetype, playing those is usually much more limiting than playing a human.

 

So really, why are people so obsessed with this feature? Sure, it's nice to have, but the way it's implemented, it's superficial. Cosmetic. I can imagine any number of character templates I'd find it interesting to play in the world of Thedas, but those that would require a *really* non-human species have never had a fitting species implemented.

I don't really get it either. I often hear that people say they dislike playing Humans because they're human in real life though. Another part of doing so seems to come from wanting to roleplaying as persecuted fictional species. 

 

But in the end, you can do the same with actual humans.

[vertigomez]

Also dwarves are squishy and cute and have muscles.

I like being 4'10" and kicking everybody's ***.

[Donquijote and 59 others]

I don't play as an elf, human,dwarf or a Qunari i play only as Geralt of Rivia which is  the master race!

[Sah291]

1. Variety for the different cultural backgrounds, etc. True enough, they could do that with humans, but with the exception of mages, the human backgrounds we get tend to be pretty similar (noble family, Andrastian, etc).

2. The other races aren't actually that alien after all, and they play a big role in the sociopolitical landscape of the series, and in the lore, so it makes sense to be able play them.

That said.... I usually gravitate to humans, and Mages. Mages because, I always liked caster roles in combat. Also probably becasue I'm sort of a bookwormy person IRL. I also like stories about magic and mysticism, and dreams, symbolism, etc.

DAI was the first time I made an elf character canon, and if I had to psychoanalyze myself why, probably because there are things about their culture that overlaps with some real life interests, and themes I find interesting. For example, the Dalish are tying to reconstruct their ancient religion based on scattered and half remembered lore. I just find the conflicts in that fascinating.

[Spirit Vanguard]

Considering that DA and ME are created by humans, there's only so much that can be done to make any race "truly alien." Even the Qunari that are as far away as we've gotten still have reflections of perceptions of human society. Their gender roles, for instance, mimic the Asari, Krogan and Salarians.

 

There's also the idea that this is a video game with limited differences at the best of times. The story is driven by the player character, so looser terms of character get applied. Even though a Dalish Inquisitor can seem rather ignorant of their own culture, that still fits the role. Dalish don't know as much as they think -- though certain questions like "Who's Mythal?" kind of seems to be meant for newer players. I think they've tried to convey how much difference a race can make in the story of the game. It's enough for me to role play however I choose regardless of race because the basic idea is there. A person isn't always the epitome of their race or culture. Like Iron Bull says: "People are just people." There's freedom in the definitions.

 

For me, the fact that all these cultures and races have similarities despite their differences only offers the thought that: we're all the same. All races are still people. They live together. They fight. They love. They struggle. They change. Commonality is something I like because it shows that they aren't so different despite whatever they might believe.

 

Personally, I'm drawn to elves because I find them interesting. I like their history. Their status as an abused and extorted underdog is another appealing factor, definitely. Humans are a default in most games, so given the chance, why not play non-humans? Mostly because of that is why I find humans to be a little more dull -- but, a mage human is still an outcast, so that's a push-pull scenario that I enjoy. Rising up against/fighting injustices? I won't deny that's a fantasy. (And I just really like using magic. )

 

Ultimately, though, I enjoy playing different races because it's fun.

[jlb524]

I really don't like playing as a noble.  That's my Dragon Age reason for not playing human much at least.  That even goes for Dwarf Nobles (I never finished that origin).  I've done the human noble origin once and stopped at some point in the game.  In Elder Scrolls, I count the Dark Elves as my fave race to play mainly because I loved ES: Morrowind and really like their lore.  I do like playing some of the human races too (Redguard/Breton).

 

Theoretically, the DA games could provide us with more diverse 'human' backgrounds to play as but they decided to do that through different races/cultures like elves, dwarves, etc. which are, as you say, humans with pointy ears or short humans, but I guess they want to do the Tolkieny fantasy world thing.

[LobselVith8]

There's also the idea that this is a video game with limited differences at the best of times. The story is driven by the player character, so looser terms of character get applied. Even though a Dalish Inquisitor can seem rather ignorant of their own culture, that still fits the role. Dalish don't know as much as they think -- though certain questions like "Who's Mythal?" kind of seems to be meant for newer players.

 

I really don't understand why some people think the Dalish claim to know everything about their past - they don't. Merrill openly admits that the Dalish don't even know who started the war between the Creators and the Forgotten Ones, or who was right; she even says that they don't really know much about the Forgotten Ones. When she speaks about Audacity, she concedes that the clan doesn't know which side in the war summoned the spirit, so it's not even like they dismiss the possibility that the ancient elves could have done so.

 

There's no indication that the Dalish ever thought they knew everything about their past. Even the Dalish codex about the fall of Arlathan explicitly notes that it's "a legend", and could very well be wrong.

 

As for questions like "Who is Mythal?", I think Bioware dropped the ball a lot when it comes to the non-Andrastian backgrounds - similar to the Dwarven Inquisitor saying nothing to Bianca in the conversation about lyrium despite their background.

[Spirit Vanguard]

I really don't understand why some people think the Dalish claim to know everything about their past - they don't. Merrill openly admits that the Dalish don't even know who started the war between the Creators and the Forgotten Ones, or who was right; she even says that they don't really know much about the Forgotten Ones. When she speaks about Audacity, she concedes that the clan doesn't know which side in the war summoned the spirit, so it's not even like they dismiss the possibility that the ancient elves could have done so.

 

There's no indication that the Dalish ever thought they knew everything about their past. Even the Dalish codex about the fall of Arlathan explicitly notes that it's "a legend", and could very well be wrong.

 

As for questions like "Who is Mythal?", I think Bioware dropped the ball a lot when it comes to the non-Andrastian backgrounds - similar to the Dwarven Inquisitor saying nothing to Bianca in the conversation about lyrium despite their background.

 

It might be simply because for so long the Dalish were the only ones that seemed to have any knowledge about their history, even if a legend, and that can make it seem mostly true, even to players, because of no alternatives. Morrigan for all her investigative "insight" is still mistaken. "You can't help giving legend the weight of history" Solas chides her. I guess it's more the idea that the Dalish have some knowledge -- this of course varies by clan and how much of the language has been preserved or changed.

 

A Dalish Inquisitor knows the names and stories of their  gods but can't easily recognize them by looking, like in the Temple of Mythal. I just find some of the questions a Dalish can ask to be... eh, commonly known which is why it seems to be intended for new players. I haven't played as a dwarf yet, but a qunari Inquisitor was raised outside the Qun, so it's understandable their information would be limited.

 

I always think back to the storyteller, Sarel, in Origins as he says "Oh, I'm certain we played a part in our downfall..." He was right and wrong at the same time.

[LobselVith8]

It might be simply because for so long the Dalish were the only ones that seemed to have any knowledge about their history, even if a legend, and that can make it seem mostly true, even to players, because of no alternatives. Morrigan for all her investigative "insight" is still mistaken. "You can't help giving legend the weight of history" Solas chides her. I guess it's more the idea that the Dalish have some knowledge -- this of course varies by clan and how much of the language has been preserved or changed.

 

I think Merrill's points were that the Dalish are cognizant of the limitations of their knowledge, and that what little they have kept from the centuries of slavery in the Imperium and living as nomadic tribes after the fall of the Dales could be false (which is also a sentiment shared in the Dalish codex about Arlathan stressing that it's simply a legend and could be wrong).

 

A Dalish Inquisitor knows the names and stories of their  gods but can't easily recognize them by looking, like in the Temple of Mythal. I just find some of the questions a Dalish can ask to be... eh, commonly known which is why it seems to be intended for new players. I haven't played as a dwarf yet, but a qunari Inquisitor was raised outside the Qun, so it's understandable their information would be limited.

 

The Dalish have statutes of the gods that they take with them, including one of Fen'Harel. I believe Weekes conceded on twitter that it was a mistake when a fan brought up Lavellan asking who Mythal was (I think he termed it as a "scripting error").

[BansheeOwnage]

I really don't like playing as a noble.  That's my Dragon Age reason for not playing human much at least.  That even goes for Dwarf Nobles (I never finished that origin).  I've done the human noble origin once and stopped at some point in the game.  In Elder Scrolls, I count the Dark Elves as my fave race to play mainly because I loved ES: Morrowind and really like their lore.  I do like playing some of the human races too (Redguard/Breton).

 

Theoretically, the DA games could provide us with more diverse 'human' backgrounds to play as but they decided to do that through different races/cultures like elves, dwarves, etc. which are, as you say, humans with pointy ears or short humans, but I guess they want to do the Tolkieny fantasy world thing.

I forgot to address this in my other post, so I'll do it here.

 

I am fairly neutral about playing as a human noble. It's more relatable than playing a dirt-poor peasant, for me. So it doesn't affect my usually playing humans. That said, I think some of the complaining about humans always being noble is overblown, since they did actually do it differently in all three games.

 

In DA:O, you lose your wealth and most of your influence right away, even if you might get it back at the end. In DA2, you start with nothing and Rise to Power™ and wealth. In DA:I, your nobility doesn't change, and can help you in minor ways, but nothing major.

 

The other thing is that if Bioware wants to have any background be nobility, it almost has to be humans, so humans are stuck with it. Perhaps dwarves could have it next time around? Nevertheless, I'm in favour of mixing things up for the next game(s) and having a different human background. Avvar, maybe?

[Spirit Vanguard]

I think Merrill's points were that the Dalish are cognizant of the limitations of their knowledge, and that what little they have kept from the centuries of slavery in the Imperium and living as nomadic tribes after the fall of the Dales could be false (which is also a sentiment shared in the Dalish codex about Arlathan stressing that it's simply a legend and could be wrong).


The Dalish have statutes of the gods that they take with them, including one of Fen'Harel. I believe Weekes conceded on twitter that it was a mistake when a fan brought up Lavellan asking who Mythal was (I think he termed it as a "scripting error").

That makes sense. Even so, the mosaics in the Temple were so old that they might not look the same, and so be unrecognizable? Or is it really all only for the player's benefit? Haha, I don't know. Until now it's been hard to distinguish what the Dalish know as fact and fiction, even when taking their stories as more of a "guideline." It's the writing of the Dalish in-game that can make it feel inconsistent, which is actually still somehow true to the way they are.

[Fiery Phoenix]

The other thing is that if Bioware wants to have any background be nobility, it almost has to be humans, so humans are stuck with it. Perhaps dwarves could have it next time around? Nevertheless, I'm in favour of mixing things up for the next game(s) and having a different human background. Avvar, maybe?

The good thing is almost every BioWare game in recent memory appears to have been written entirely with a human protagonist in mind. Even Inquisition was originally a human-only game, and it really shows in the final game. Since they're already established in that department, you'd think introducing new human backgrounds wouldn't be so difficult, but I suspect the reason we have yet to see that is because the writers are convinced folks favor race variety over background variety (which certainly appears to be the case, as per this very thread). Thus, we end up with a boring noble background for the human protagonist, and whatever slots remaining are filled with the remaining races.

DA2 could have greatly benefited from the fact that it was a human-only title, but as it stands Hawke was heavily predefined which did not leave much room for flexibility. Not that I think it would have made much of a difference either way, since DA2 was done in, like, 11 months. But it was certainly an opportunity for the writers to explore different human backgrounds without worrying about adding other races.

[LobselVith8]

That makes more sense. Even so, the mosaics in the Temple were so old that they might not look the same, and so be unrecognizable? Or is it really all only for the player's benefit? Haha, I don't know. Until now it's been hard to distinguish what the Dalish know as fact and fiction, even when taking their stories as more of a "guideline." It's the writing of the Dalish in-game that can make it feel inconsistent, which is actually still somehow true to the way they are.

 

In case you're curious, someone on tumblr posted the pictures of Weekes' tweet here.

[nightscrawl]

^ That's a bit disingenuous. I don't blame you for posting it, I blame the Tumblr person for not posting the entire tweet chain.

 

Later on, he also said, "Dunno. Didn't write it. Could also have been an honest oversight." You know what else was an oversight, in his own words a "goof"? That Solas didn't have more lines about drinking from the well, making his following anger seem irrational.

 

Here is the link to the whole thing. He's just guessing.

 

IMO that doesn't make much sense, particularly since that is contrary to every other origin in existence; ALL origins can ask questions they should know to account for the player being ignorant. They are optional most of the time. This happens with all of the DAO origins, and also with the DAI origins. Shouldn't the noble Aeducan know what noble hunters are? Yes, but the player doesn't. Shouldn't the mage know about [whatever in the mage origin]? Yes, but the player doesn't. Shouldn't the Trevelyan non-mage know about the Chantry? Yes, but the player doesn't. On and on and on. Sure, there may be some different phrasing here and there, but the information is still presented.

 

Should there have been auto-dialogue for some of the mosaics in the Temple of Mythal? NO. I am completely with Dalish players on that one.

 

Should there be an OPTIONAL dialogue for the player to choose in asking about Mythal? YES. That some players are upset at the mere existence of a dialogue option is absurd. You don't have to click on it.

[vertigomez]

I am fairly neutral about playing as a human noble. It's more relatable than playing a dirt-poor peasant, for me. So it doesn't affect my usually playing humans. That said, I think some of the complaining about humans always being noble is overblown, since they did actually do it differently in all three games.
 
In DA:O, you lose your wealth and most of your influence right away, even if you might get it back at the end. In DA2, you start with nothing and Rise to Power™ and wealth. In DA:I, your nobility doesn't change, and can help you in minor ways, but nothing major.

I gotta disagree. As a Cousland you (generic you, not You you) grew up with a silver spoon in your mouth and every human who isn't loyal to Loghain practically grovels at your feet because you're (apparently) the last living member of an extremely popular, influential, ancient family. You can marry the King or Queen.

DA2 was the biggest departure, but even still you're descended from nobility, related to the human mage Warden, and after Act I everyone is tripping over themselves to get to know the mysterious scion of the Amell family / the Champion of Kirkwall. People act very deferential to you even before you save the city from the Qunari. You have a mansion and servants. You can marry the Prince of Starkhaven.

In DAI you're part of a smaller noble house, nothing as grand as the Cousland family, but Trevelyan is still a name that carries weight. You can bring this up with Cullen if you're romancing him, asking if it's an impediment. You're distantly related to Dorian. Whether you were in the Chantry or the Circle, your influence is immediately higher than that of any other race and class at the Winter Palace - those poor qunari mages!

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that even with these minor differences, you still have money and connections, you grew up wealthy (even Hawke was set to inherit a fortune), well-fed, and educated. I just don't find them all that different and wish they'd do something else. If an Avvar origin was an option, I would absolutely consider playing a human. As it is, lolnope. Hawke gets away with it because they're mandatory, snarky, and I can tolerate one hero out of three being human.

That said, if we end up in Tevinter I think it's extremely likely that as a human PC we'll be noble again, if only to explore what it's like to be the big man on campus in a magocracy.

But I rly friggin hope there's another option.

[BansheeOwnage]

 

I find playing as an Andrastian human very boring; I was one of the people who didn't plan on buying Inquisition when it was initially announced as human only, because Andrastian human culture and perspectives simply don't appeal to me. Some people felt the same way as me, and voiced their opinions on the same. Apparently, it was enough to get the developers to add in different races again.

That's why I find it interesting to play a non-Andrastian human. In some ways, it's more interesting than another race, since you won't be expected to be Andrastian anyway if you're not human.

 

Considering that DA and ME are created by humans, there's only so much that can be done to make any race "truly alien." Even the Qunari that are as far away as we've gotten still have reflections of perceptions of human society. Their gender roles, for instance, mimic the Asari, Krogan and Salarians.

Wait. Asari... have gender-roles?

 

 

Should there be an OPTIONAL dialogue for the player to choose in asking about Mythal? YES. That some players are upset at the mere existence of a dialogue option is absurd. You don't have to click on it.

But some people like me, probably also completionists, extend that to clicking every investigate option available! So it's annoying Still, Morrigan reveals information about the Temple, so not clicking on it results in less information, and that applies to most of the awkward investigate options.

 

What I would have done, was have a Dalish (or learned non-Dalish) Inquisitor have a different (or alternate option) line where they gave the information Morrigan otherwise does. "Ah yes, Temple blah, Mythal blah blah. I know this." I would do this wherever possible to prevent these awkward and dumb questions.

[BansheeOwnage]

I gotta disagree. As a Cousland you (generic you, not You you) grew up with a silver spoon in your mouth and every human who isn't loyal to Loghain practically grovels at your feet because you're (apparently) the last living member of an extremely popular, influential, ancient family. You can marry the King or Queen.

DA2 was the biggest departure, but even still you're descended from nobility, related to the human mage Warden, and after Act I everyone is tripping over themselves to get to know the mysterious scion of the Amell family / the Champion of Kirkwall. People act very deferential to you even before you save the city from the Qunari. You have a mansion and servants. You can marry the Prince of Starkhaven.

In DAI you're part of a smaller noble house, nothing as grand as the Cousland family, but Trevelyan is still a name that carries weight. You can bring this up with Cullen if you're romancing him, asking if it's an impediment. You're distantly related to Dorian. Whether you were in the Chantry or the Circle, your influence is immediately higher than that of any other race and class at the Winter Palace - those poor qunari mages!

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that even with these minor differences, you still have money and connections, you grew up wealthy (even Hawke was set to inherit a fortune), well-fed, and educated. I just don't find them all that different and wish they'd do something else. If an Avvar origin was an option, I would absolutely consider playing a human. As it is, lolnope. Hawke gets away with it because they're mandatory, snarky, and I can tolerate one hero out of three being human.

That said, if we end up in Tevinter I think it's extremely likely that as a human PC we'll be noble again, if only to explore what it's like to be the big man on campus in a magocracy.

But I rly friggin hope there's another option.

Part of my point was that being nobility rarely has any effect on the story, only background. You can't, say, use your family's considerable funds at all. It's kind of just flavour, at least in Inquisition. Especially since you don't get so much as a letter from your family.

 

Anyway, like I said, I hope they change it up (as long as we aren't forced to be a slave). I'd be interested in an Avvar origin too.

[vertigomez]

Part of my point was that being nobility rarely has any effect on the story, only background. You can't, say, use your family's considerable funds at all. It's kind of just flavour, at least in Inquisition. Especially since you don't get so much as a letter from your family.

See, I think that's where we're getting our wires crossed. I see the background as inextricable from the story - even if it's not frequently acknowledged, as a player I know where my human noble comes from, how they think, how their background influences their behavior. And I can't unknow it or I end up feeling like I'm not roleplaying at all.

Which is not to say there's a right or wrong way to play, this is just how I percieve it when they give me human nobles.
 

Anyway, like I said, I hope they change it up (as long as we aren't forced to be a slave). I'd be interested in an Avvar origin too.

Fingers crooooosseeed! Maybe enough people sent the goat thrower to Tevinter to warrant an origin?