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 if you're not human.
I heard that, for Origins, they originally planned to have the choice to be a Chasind as one of the background options, so a non-Andrastian human choice almost happened. Maybe you'll get your wish in the next game?
...
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.
Like I said in my original post:
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.
And here:
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.
It is optional, and intended for the player's benefit. It can feel weird, but I get it -- though that's not to say that informational auto-dialogue is bad if it's still educating the player. It's not a criticism of mine that they should've added auto-dialogue. I understand the nature of the speech options.
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.
Just to clarify, the Inquisitor asking about Mythal is NOT an optional dialogue. It is part of the initial conversation with Morrigan as soon as you enter the Arbor Wilds. Questions later on in the temple are optional, but if you don't click on the mosaics, you don't unlock the codex entries either.
It didn't ruin my experience in DA2, but I prefer to play an elf, if possible. There are two reasons. One is that it's more interesting to me from a narrative perspective. Elves are seen as inferior and untrustworthy in universe, which makes it more interesting for my character to prove themselves. Also, human culture is everywhere and it's newer. That makes the lost, more advanced history of the elves more interesting to me, and it means more when I uncover it as an elf than a human. This was especially true in Inquisition compared to past games. Basically, from a story perspective, I find it more interesting to work with the social and cultural material they wrote for elves than for humans. I think when people say humans are boring, they mean they're what's expected. There's no surprise in a human (especially non-mage human) character. You're what everyone expects and what makes sense for the status quo. To some people, that's what they want, but to others it's a less interesting story. I think the problem is that you're looking at this from a VERY broad angle and not just how the differences effect how your character fits into the world culture as it's written.
But the second reason, that's a body type issue. I'm a male with a small, slight build. You don't see male heroes with small builds in media. In movies and TV guys are pretty ripped and games even go above and beyond that most of the time. Playing an elf is the closest thing I basically see to a male character with a body shape like mine, which is refreshing. What caught my interest in Bioware games is all the ways I can put myself into them through choices and customization, because I rarely see protagonists in media that I can relate to. This isn't a dealbreaker type issue, but it is one of many ways Bioware allows me to build a character I can deeply empathize with.
I heard that, for Origins, they originally planned to have the choice to be a Chasind as one of the background options, so a non-Andrastian human choice almost happened. Maybe you'll get your wish in the next game?
I linked David Gaider's explanation of it all in a previous post, but here you go.
Like I said in my original post:
And here:
It is optional, and intended for the player's benefit. It can feel weird, but I get it -- though that's not to say that informational auto-dialogue is bad if it's still educating the player. It's not a criticism of mine that they should've added auto-dialogue. I understand the nature of the speech options.
My post wasn't really addressed to you, it was more of a general rant on the whole thing, extending from the tweet link you posted.
Just to clarify, the Inquisitor asking about Mythal is NOT an optional dialogue. It is part of the initial conversation with Morrigan as soon as you enter the Arbor Wilds. Questions later on in the temple are optional, but if you don't click on the mosaics, you don't unlock the codex entries either.
I did make a point to differentiate between auto-dialogue and optional dialogue in my post.
Also, the Inquisitor doesn't actually ask, "Who is Mythal?" in the auto-dialogue. Morrigan mentions the Temple of Mythal and the Inquisitor auto-dialogues, "Which is?" After her explanation -- "A place of worship out of elven legend..." -- there are explosions and the scene moves on. Yes, I will agree that it points to the same level of ignorance, which is not good, but I think it's less bad than blatantly asking who Mythal is. And as you say, the further question in the temple -- "You said this Mythal was worshiped as a goddess," which, to my mind is the more outrageous wording in terms of roleplay, is an optional investigate dialogue.
The description for this mod explains all of the various instances, complete with video links. Some I agree with, and some I don't.
...
My post wasn't really addressed to you, it was more of a general rant on the whole thing, extending from the tweet link you posted.
...
Ah. Understood. But I didn't post any link. 
I wasn't even aware there was such a fuss on the subject in the first place. 
I heard that, for Origins, they originally planned to have the choice to be a Chasind as one of the background options, so a non-Andrastian human choice almost happened. Maybe you'll get your wish in the next game?
Oh, I wasn't actually referring to a non-Andrastian culture in that case, I was referring to roleplaying a non-believing human.
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.
Fingers crooooosseeed! Maybe enough people sent the goat thrower to Tevinter to warrant an origin?
I definitely roleplay around backgrounds too, quite a bit. I guess... I'm not sure what I'm trying to say anymore. I'm tired 
Avvar, yay!
...*Sleeps*
I guess because it's fun. I'd only really have a problem if we only had dwarves and/or qunari.
I can tell you why I almost always play a human.... if that counts!
I want to role play what I construe as a visually appealing character - beautiful, handsome, gorgeous... I find the the design of Elves, Qunari and Dwarves in DA:I unappealing.
Two main reasons for me:
1) There is a difference between elves and dwarves and qunari and humans, an elf would interpret and experience the revelations about their culture and history radically different from a human. Learning about the titans would mean waaay more to a dwarf than a qunari. It's not like that elf or dwarf is gonna think "Hmmm, I really wasn't written to be distinct enough from humanity to be meaningfully compelling." If you're even gonna try to inhabit the headspace of your character a bit this goes out of the window, those options being present can make for a radically different story if you allow them to.
2) I like non-standard heroes. If the default idea of a hero would be human, straight, white and male I'd like to not be that.
It wouldn't be the end of the world if they did abandon them tho, especially if they provided varied backgrounds for the humans (it'd never be as disparate as the races but). And I can see some benefit in there definitely being an improvement in cutscene animation and maybe animation in general and pooossibly a tighter story.
Well, if that's so, then playing elves or dwarves, or asari or turians in Mass Effect, is just as boring
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 cosmetic if the game does not respond to your race. But if it does, then 2 things happen: First, it's interesting for variety's sake to have a multitude of possible origins. And secondly, it puts you into the shoes of someone who's not part of the dominant race, with all the complexities that entails.
If you believe Shakespeare in that art holds a mirror up to the world, then you can easily see how that's a good thing to have.
Actually you see it more often now. Merlin on scifi is one exampleIt didn't ruin my experience in DA2, but I prefer to play an elf, if possible. There are two reasons. One is that it's more interesting to me from a narrative perspective. Elves are seen as inferior and untrustworthy in universe, which makes it more interesting for my character to prove themselves. Also, human culture is everywhere and it's newer. That makes the lost, more advanced history of the elves more interesting to me, and it means more when I uncover it as an elf than a human. This was especially true in Inquisition compared to past games. Basically, from a story perspective, I find it more interesting to work with the social and cultural material they wrote for elves than for humans. I think when people say humans are boring, they mean they're what's expected. There's no surprise in a human (especially non-mage human) character. You're what everyone expects and what makes sense for the status quo. To some people, that's what they want, but to others it's a less interesting story. I think the problem is that you're looking at this from a VERY broad angle and not just how the differences effect how your character fits into the world culture as it's written.
But the second reason, that's a body type issue. I'm a male with a small, slight build. You don't see male heroes with small builds in media. In movies and TV guys are pretty ripped and games even go above and beyond that most of the time. Playing an elf is the closest thing I basically see to a male character with a body shape like mine, which is refreshing. What caught my interest in Bioware games is all the ways I can put myself into them through choices and customization, because I rarely see protagonists in media that I can relate to. This isn't a dealbreaker type issue, but it is one of many ways Bioware allows me to build a character I can deeply empathize with.
I didn't mind the mythal convos or any of the dalish specific education info dialogue because i had no player knowledge of the topics so i personally learned from them. My character may have known but i didn't.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.
I like it if it provides something useful. I only think it's useful because of the established lore.
I just prefer how humans handle with the controls, then the elves and the Qunari. I'm not a fan of the dwarven maneuverability.
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 beginning to doubt I'll ever comprehend the "humans are boring" or "it's fantasy; why be what you already are in real life?" arguments. This thread hasn't helped much in that regard so far.
But Charlie said something interesting, comparing playing nonhumans to dressing up for Halloween. I've never been much of a fan of costumes, at least not as far as wearing them goes. I like what I am. Why would I want to be anything else? That sounds off-putting. I suppose that's one big reason why I don't relate to those who think multiple playable races is oh-so-important.
Another has been explained excellently by you and Medhia. Sapient creatures other than humans in fiction always fall down into one of two categories (I have yet to see any that didn't fit either mold): imitations of humanity, and often poor ones at that, or truly alien beings. The latter is hard to write and even harder to roleplay. I think humans are interesting, and I think otherness is an interesting concept to explore. But things that are not properly either? Kind of beside the point, really.
I don't buy the "but there are no non-superficial/mechanical differences" argument, to be honest. Mechanically, shooting a space gun is identical to shooting arrows, but those weapons are not interchangeable. Mechanically, an enemy mage can be replaced with a Carta alchemist who throws grenades, but swapping those out implies different things about the area and the local politics, even if that encounter is too minor to have an associated codex entry.
Flavor makes a difference, even when it has no effect on the gameplay. A character's appearance makes a difference, even at times when the game isn't explicitly calling out "hey oxman!" or "hey knife-ear!"
The problem is not so much that the game doesn't react to a nonhuman PC, but that there is nothing particularly Not Human about a nonhuman PC. That's what makes some people like myself (and I imagine Ieldra and Medhia) find the extreme importance some people place on race selection so strange.
The problem is not so much that the game doesn't react to a nonhuman PC, but that there is nothing particularly Not Human about a nonhuman PC. That's what makes some people like myself (and I imagine Ieldra and Medhia) find the extreme importance some people place on race selection so strange.
Indeed so. I get the appreciation of cultural variety, but there isn't anything not human about elves and dwarves - and maybe qunari - but appearance. They mate and have children the same way, they co-operate and go to war the same way, their cultures have features any human culture could have, etc. etc.. So as I see it, race selection is a nice feature to have, but the only reason why it's meaningful is that it *also* is cultural background selection. The "non-human-ness" is just cosmetic.
A player character with significant non-human aspects, that would be more interesting. Of course, one could argue that we have that with being able to play a mageborn. Being mageborn sets someone apart from the rest of humanity more significantly than being a non-mageborn elf or a dwarf. Being an elf could be different, too, but only if elves were still immortal.
Back to top