224 réponses à ce sujet

[nightscrawl]

I don't remember anything specific, unfortunately, since the last time I played through that scene without romancing him was a long time ago, and when I did romance him, I took the heart option the chantry scene, of course. Which leads me to a tangent somewhat related to the thread topic at least, that is: romance dialogue. I'm not a fan of the Click Heart, Get Romance style, for two main reasons.
 
1. It means that if you want to be romantic in your romance (or actually initiate it), you can't say any of the other options, even if they are interesting/better for your RP, etc.
 
2. Because there is only one heart option. If there were usually 2 or 3 options instead (1 for simple comments), that would not only be infinitely better for RP, but wouldn't railroad all Inquisitors into the same romance outside of romance-specific scenes.

1 I feel ya, but at the same time it is just another dialogue option for the player. Assuming you're already in a romance -- that is, it's locked-in -- it gives you the opportunity to RP being more romancey, or not, depending on the situation. Also, I REALLY don't want the icons to go anywhere. Even if it doesn't lead anywhere (as in the case of flirting with a non-sexuality compatible person), I want to know with 100% certainty my character's intent when clicking on a line that is meant to be a flirt. Ninja-mancing happens, and I don't want to deal with it. To me, it's just for clarity, just as any of the other emotion-based icons: and . (In DAI, these would be: fist for anger, !!! for shock, swirly brain for confusion, tears for sadness, and armor for stoic.)

2 While I agree that more lines would be nice (more mushy, more flirty, teasing) in a given conversation, I don't think they are likely to do too many options simply because these romances are optional content and they never get that many resources outside over the total amount of character lines. I think this is one case where headcanon just has to suffice for the majority of players.

But I think it also comes down to the way the individual romance is crafted by the writer. I only did the Cullen romance a single time, but I found it to be rather samey, with not much variation. However, the Dorian romance does have a ton of variation, with alternate paths, and so on, just as his personal quest where you can decide to show, or not show, him the letter, which leads to vastly different reactions from him. The romance has several of those. So, in addition to the dialogue where you can be more flirty, or more sappy (my Inquisitor), or more aggressive (in one instance, Dorian responds: "You are a frustrating man,") these things help to define the flavor of the romance and make it unique from person to person.
 

Spoiler

I freaking LOVE this.
 

Whenever things pop up like this, I can clearly see that they're about railroading and Bioware not wanting too many diverging stories more than what the characters would actually say, so I blame Bioware and try not to let those lines affect my view of the characters.

This is my general view as well. I know it's difficult, but sometimes players need to step back from the story aspect of these games and consider that these ARE "games" and there are gamey things to take into consideration, like sequels and characters moving forward in those sequels, and so on. There are story/game divergences with many things, combat, character skills, lyrium consumption, the mechanics of blood magic (in DAO/2). This is just one more thing.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

 

I took it more along the lines that it's more meaningful if a Tevinter actually works toward saving it, rather than an outsider. Otherwise, it's kind of like the Orzammar situation in DAO. 4/6 of the DAO origins have nothing to do with dwarves and 2/3 of the races are not dwarves. Your Warden goes in there as an outsider, makes their own value judgements on a culture they were not born into, and makes a crucial decision that should have been made by the dwarves themselves. Obviously, the way this plays out in the game means the Warden PC is compelled to do so out of necessity, but the fact remains that an outsider has the influence. That has NEVER sat well with me.

So I can completely understand Dorian's reasoning here. Out of the three DA protagonists we've had so far, the Inquisitor is the most powerful, influential, and has already made numerous important decisions, including deciding the ruler of Orlais, the second largest and powerful nation in Thedas. I personally do NOT want an outsider to be solving these problems. In fact, it is one of the concerns I have regarding the protagonist of the next game especially if we're going into Tevinter. They don't have to have the protagonist in a position to decide these issues. They can certainly go the Neverwinter Nights route and have them be mostly an agent while other people make the big choices.

 

 

That said... I've never liked the post-Mythal conversation either, but for different reasons. Dorian is going to respond how he responds, but I felt that the Inquisitor's options were too limited, especially for a romance.

 

See, my opinion is that the noble dwarf is just the worst person to make the decision about who should rule Orzammar. I think that Bhelen is the right choice because he helps the Casteless, who are some of the most oppressed people in all of Thedas. Their situation is terrible and literally anything that can be done to help is great, even if it's not done by the nicest guy in the world. Unfortunately, it's going to be pretty hard for a noble dwarf to make him king, although I'm sure some did. I feel like an "insider" isn't always the best choice, because they already have their own biases and prejudices. I think objectivity is a good thing in this context. I don't think cultures are these sacred things that nobody else can ever understand, though, honestly. The Casteless situation is wrong. The slavery situation in Tevinter is wrong. I think people that are part of the noble/privileged class structure are maybe LESS likely to understand that and more likely to make excuses, which is exactly what Dorian even does, if you ask him about slavery. Maybe the best person to make choices about a culture are those at the lowest rungs of their society, but I don't really believe it's their privileged class. 

 

I also feel like it means a lot more to Dorian and his fellow Altus than it does to those below that it's one of them that makes the changes. Do you think the average slave wants to wait around watching their friends and family be blood sacrificed until maybe an Atlus decides to free them? Do you think someone like Fenris would have cared if it was the Magisters changing things, or someone making them change things? I don't believe this actually matters to the people that are really hurting. I think it's Dorian abusing his own privilege to make them wait until a time when it's more convenient for him.

 

 

Also @"for game reasons", I mean, I get it. This was maybe just a bad writing moment that wasn't thought through, because they needed a reason for Dorian and the Inquisitor to split. I know they needed a reason, I expected that. Personally, though, I accept whatever they put in as a part of the characters. If they write a bad, clashy bit, then it's still part of the story and the character to me. They could have just as easily written another reason why the Inquisitor couldn't go, or just canon accepted that the Inquisitor never offered to go with him and felt that their responsibility was remaining with the Inquisition. There were a lot of things they could have done, but this is what they went with it. I think it's easier for me to accept that Dorian is just a prideful egotist because I'm not even sure what he thinks needs reformed in Tevinter, though. If he hasn't even thought about slavery, what's even his grievance? The only thing I can clearly see he's against is arrange marriage and specifically the Venatori. Otherwise, it seems his want to "reform" is pretty nebulous and undefined. For all I know, he means he wants to redesign their uniforms. I at least know that's important to him.

[fdrty]

Maybe come down off your high horse. There are plenty people who roleplayed a Hawke that supported mage freedom and Anders' actions. Just because people roleplay differently from you, doesn't mean they're doing it wrong.

 

I never suggested that those who played differently to me where 'playing it wrong' and if you're saying that I did, then you're putting words into my mouth.

 

My point was Anders did an extreme thing and a lot of people won't be happy with that, and would be unable to support him after that, and if you are one of those people then deciding to ignore the whole, you know, murder of innocents thing is not a decision that they can make easily - even if others could, because, you know, it's a video game. Nothing really is on the line, and there aren't really any repercussions for choosing this thing or that. In fact, that's one of the appeals of video games, is it not? That we can play and make decisions that we wouldn't make otherwise? So I'm not criticising the player for making that decision, but the writing and the structure leading to that decision. But, at least in my first playthrough, I try to play to my real life morality. And I would NEVER accept what Anders did, no matter the cause.

 

Yet again, this discussion shouldn't be all about Anders. It is meant to be about marriage. I compared the Solas romance and the Anders romance because they are both characters who end up doing evil deeds - and I think the Solas one is both better concluded, better foreshadowed, better written, and that Solas is a far better character overall, and his romance would have been significantly worse if it had ended in marriage.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

Yet again, this discussion shouldn't be all about Anders. It is meant to be about marriage. I compared the Solas romance and the Anders romance because they are both characters who end up doing evil deeds - and I think the Solas one is both better concluded, better foreshadowed, better written, and that Solas is a far better character overall, and his romance would have been significantly worse if it had ended in marriage.

I feel like the disconnect here is that you're saying Anders definitely did an evil thing and we're saying, "Well, that's just, like.. your opinion, man." 

[Catilina]

I never suggested that those who played differently to me where 'playing it wrong' and if you're saying that I did, then you're putting words into my mouth.

 

My point was Anders did an extreme thing and a lot of people won't be happy with that, and would be unable to support him after that, and if you are one of those people then deciding to ignore the whole, you know, murder of innocents thing is not a decision that they can make easily - even if others could, because, you know, it's a video game. Nothing really is on the line, and there aren't really any repercussions for choosing this thing or that. In fact, that's one of the appeals of video games, is it not? That we can play and make decisions that we wouldn't make otherwise? So I'm not criticising the player for making that decision, but the writing and the structure leading to that decision. But, at least in my first playthrough, I try to play to my real life morality. And I would NEVER accept what Anders did, no matter the cause.

 

Yet again, this discussion shouldn't be all about Anders. It is meant to be about marriage. I compared the Solas romance and the Anders romance because they are both characters who end up doing evil deeds - and I think the Solas one is both better concluded, better foreshadowed, better written, and that Solas is a far better character overall, and his romance would have been significantly worse if it had ended in marriage.

Of course you suggested.

[SmilesJA]

I thought this thread was about marriage. Let's talk about marriage in Dragon Age.

[Catilina]

I thought this thread was about marriage. Let's talk about marriage in Dragon Age.

We talked about for example that virtuous thing to be marry with Anders, or not.

[Mike3207]

Forget marriage, the romances in Dragon Age are a bit disappointing. Bioware's very good at the gradual process as two people establish the relationship-and then not so good after their first time together. It's improved since Origins-but there's still a long way to go.

 

I'll be honest and say I actually haven't had a Inquisition romance yet-but given Bioware's past record on romance, I have very low expectations.

 

As for current marriage in Inquisition-not a lot of options for male characters-like none-so it's not really an issue until I create a female character.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I have to admit, I was a little annoyed how much DA:I slanted in favor of female characters for romances. Twice as many choices, overall, and both of the marriage options were for female characters. I wish they would balance things more between genders and sexualities in the future.

[SmilesJA]

Yeah I felt males were left out. Hopefully that'll change in future Dragon Age titles.

[vertigomez]

I thought this thread was about marriage. Let's talk about marriage in Dragon Age.

A dwarf merchant in Orzammar told my casteless he could get married by the "human Chantry" if he went to the surface. It was a lie!

[nightscrawl]

Spoiler

See, my opinion is that the noble dwarf is just the worst person to make the decision about who should rule Orzammar. I think that Bhelen is the right choice because he helps the Casteless, who are some of the most oppressed people in all of Thedas. Their situation is terrible and literally anything that can be done to help is great, even if it's not done by the nicest guy in the world. Unfortunately, it's going to be pretty hard for a noble dwarf to make him king, although I'm sure some did. I feel like an "insider" isn't always the best choice, because they already have their own biases and prejudices. I think objectivity is a good thing in this context. I don't think cultures are these sacred things that nobody else can ever understand, though, honestly. The Casteless situation is wrong. The slavery situation in Tevinter is wrong. I think people that are part of the noble/privileged class structure are maybe LESS likely to understand that and more likely to make excuses, which is exactly what Dorian even does, if you ask him about slavery. Maybe the best person to make choices about a culture are those at the lowest rungs of their society, but I don't really believe it's their privileged class. 
 
I also feel like it means a lot more to Dorian and his fellow Altus than it does to those below that it's one of them that makes the changes. Do you think the average slave wants to wait around watching their friends and family be blood sacrificed until maybe an Atlus decides to free them? Do you think someone like Fenris would have cared if it was the Magisters changing things, or someone making them change things? I don't believe this actually matters to the people that are really hurting. I think it's Dorian abusing his own privilege to make them wait until a time when it's more convenient for him.
 
 
Also @"for game reasons", I mean, I get it. This was maybe just a bad writing moment that wasn't thought through, because they needed a reason for Dorian and the Inquisitor to split. I know they needed a reason, I expected that. Personally, though, I accept whatever they put in as a part of the characters. If they write a bad, clashy bit, then it's still part of the story and the character to me. They could have just as easily written another reason why the Inquisitor couldn't go, or just canon accepted that the Inquisitor never offered to go with him and felt that their responsibility was remaining with the Inquisition. There were a lot of things they could have done, but this is what they went with it. I think it's easier for me to accept that Dorian is just a prideful egotist because I'm not even sure what he thinks needs reformed in Tevinter, though. If he hasn't even thought about slavery, what's even his grievance? The only thing I can clearly see he's against is arrange marriage and specifically the Venatori. Otherwise, it seems his want to "reform" is pretty nebulous and undefined. For all I know, he means he wants to redesign their uniforms. I at least know that's important to him.

You and I just have a completely different perspective on the character and the romance.

[Catilina]

A dwarf merchant in Orzammar told my casteless he could get married by the "human Chantry" if he went to the surface. It was a lie!

[nightscrawl]

I thought it was a shame that the guys didn't get at least one marriage option, or at least the option for the LI to talk about it in a serious manner or plan for the future. I can understand why Cassandra and Josephine might not want to get married right at that moment**, but I think at least having a meaningful conversation about it might have mattered to a lot of their romance players.

 

 

** I'm not even crazy about the Sera or Cullen marriages in terms of timing and wouldn't do something like that in real life. I would feel that there is too much distracting crap going on to focus on my partner in an appropriate way. But you know, it's a game written by other humans and you take what you can get.

[sniper_arrow]

As long as your wedding song isn't Rains of Castamere, I'd say marriage should at least be optional for most LIs moving forward.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

You and I just have a completely different perspective on the character and the romance.

Fair enough. That's what makes discussing Bioware games interesting. Everyone has a different perspective on pretty much everyone and everything. 

[MattH]

I'd have guessed the reason Dorian, Josie and Cassandra don't have the option is because they're nobility. Marriage with them is about titles and inheritance (not that imagine Cass or Dorian caring about all that, but who knows).

As for a noble inquisitor being able to marry peasants, well, who is going to tell them no?

[TheRatPack55]

I'd have guessed the reason Dorian, Josie and Cassandra don't have the option is because they're nobility. Marriage with them is about titles and inheritance (not that imagine Cass or Dorian caring about all that, but who knows).

 

Well, a noble, non-mage Inquisitor has all that, so there really shouldn't be anything stopping them. All three of these characters would actually be pretty perfectly matched in terms of an advantageous marriage. Though in the case of Dorian maybe a mage Inquisitor would have actually been better, at least for how it would have been received in Tevinter. There is the sexuality/heirs issue, however. But yeah, Cass and Josie would make perfect sense.

 

Still, not really a problem for me personally, just an observation.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I feel like the noble issue is no reason not to discuss it. In DA:O you're able to discuss this with Alistair and come to several different conclusions, depending on what choices you made concerning his personal quest. If you marry him or Anora, it also offers additional options with Leliana and Zevran. In Inquisition, it just seems like they left some romances less fleshed out. If some characters didn't want to marry and only wanted to keep you as a consort, then that's an acceptable plot point, but it should actually be a point that comes up. 

[TheRatPack55]

I feel like the noble issue is no reason not to discuss it. In DA:O you're able to discuss this with Alistair and come to several different conclusions, depending on what choices you made concerning his personal quest. If you marry him or Anora, it also offers additional options with Leliana and Zevran. In Inquisition, it just seems like they left some romances less fleshed out. If some characters didn't want to marry and only wanted to keep you as a consort, then that's an acceptable plot point, but it should actually be a point that comes up. 

 

It was actually one of my favorite things in Origins, that it took your, well, origins into consideration and it altered the plot. I'm sure it made some Alistair-mancers unhappy, but made sense and added some depth to the storylines. In Inquisition almost everything is just cosmetic.

[nightscrawl]

I'd have guessed the reason Dorian, Josie and Cassandra don't have the option is because they're nobility. Marriage with them is about titles and inheritance (not that imagine Cass or Dorian caring about all that, but who knows).

As for a noble inquisitor being able to marry peasants, well, who is going to tell them no?

Well, a noble, non-mage Inquisitor has all that, so there really shouldn't be anything stopping them. All three of these characters would actually be pretty perfectly matched in terms of an advantageous marriage. Though in the case of Dorian maybe a mage Inquisitor would have actually been better, at least for how it would have been received in Tevinter. There is the sexuality/heirs issue, however. But yeah, Cass and Josie would make perfect sense.
 
Still, not really a problem for me personally, just an observation.

 
I don't think Dorian or Cassandra would care about titles or inheritance. In their case, I think it is about what marriage represents for nobility, that is, not being for love. This is why I say that Dorian's first reaction might be to ask, "Why?"
 
I think a noble Trevelyan can raise this issue with Sera, but Sera being Sera, she dismisses it as unimportant.
 
Dorian isn't likely to change his stance on marrying a woman or siring heirs, so that is probably not among the considerations for he and the Inquisitor not getting married. He didn't want to get married to a woman and had never had a real relationship before the Inquisitor, so I don't imagine that he ever even entertained the idea of marrying another man. The idea must seem completely bizarre and alien to him, combined with the previously mentioned nobility aspects.
 
 
(I don't think Josephine would actually care either for her own self, but her case is different since she is involved in family business whereas the other two eschew those certain requirements associated with nobility.)

[nightscrawl]

Since we are talking about David Gaider's characters, I thought this was an interesting bit...

I've always been of the opinion that marriage is best left to the "happily ever after", if it's an option at all. Doubt I'd ever put it in as something that could actually take place during a game, not unless it's a political marriage or something similarly dramatic and plot-related. That's getting a bit domestic for my tastes, otherwise.

He didn't write the bulk of Trespasser (though I imagine some elements were already planned out), since he had already moved on from Dragon Age at that point, but he did write Cassandra and Dorian in it.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I'd have guessed the reason Dorian, Josie and Cassandra don't have the option is because they're nobility. Marriage with them is about titles and inheritance (not that imagine Cass or Dorian caring about all that, but who knows).

As for a noble inquisitor being able to marry peasants, well, who is going to tell them no?

The problem is that Josephine's romance quest is literally dueling the man she is arranged to be married to to break off the engagement, ending with you two publicly declaring your love for each other and the suitor stepping aside, with both him and her family agreeing to call it off because love is more important than the politics. And considering how regardless of race, gender, or class the Montilyets welcome you with open arms in the Trespasser epilogue, that won't change after DAI. So having that be the reason they don't get married is spitting in the face of what the romance quest was about. 

 

Not that it matters since those involved with her character have said it is perfectly valid to see them as marrying after the events of Trespasser. 

[Biotic Apostate]

I never suggested that those who played differently to me where 'playing it wrong' and if you're saying that I did, then you're putting words into my mouth.

 

My point was Anders did an extreme thing and a lot of people won't be happy with that, and would be unable to support him after that, and if you are one of those people then deciding to ignore the whole, you know, murder of innocents thing is not a decision that they can make easily - even if others could, because, you know, it's a video game. Nothing really is on the line, and there aren't really any repercussions for choosing this thing or that. In fact, that's one of the appeals of video games, is it not? That we can play and make decisions that we wouldn't make otherwise? So I'm not criticising the player for making that decision, but the writing and the structure leading to that decision. But, at least in my first playthrough, I try to play to my real life morality. And I would NEVER accept what Anders did, no matter the cause.

 

Yet again, this discussion shouldn't be all about Anders. It is meant to be about marriage. I compared the Solas romance and the Anders romance because they are both characters who end up doing evil deeds - and I think the Solas one is both better concluded, better foreshadowed, better written, and that Solas is a far better character overall, and his romance would have been significantly worse if it had ended in marriage.

You said

 

Just because your Hawke was able to ignore that, you think that it is a simple choice for the player to make, and I guess it is if you aren't really much of a roleplayer.

meaning that people who do not agree with your opinion cannot roleplay, which is absurd. You keep saying "you just ignore this situation," blind the fact that many people are fully aware of the repercussions and still support those actions. We're not talking about the real world, but a fictional one, where violence and murder are normal parts of everyday life. Those countless thugs in the streets? You kill then. In the real world you would apprehend and imprison them. Many believe the chantry to be complicit of committing systematic genocide (Annulling a circle every 50 years). The chantry is not some quaint church with frail old ladies, but a part of a massive political organisation, the head of which has a personal murderer to get rid of her opponents. Any real world comparison falls flat on its face.

 

I disagree that Solas is better written, they're both well written characters. And I RP that Hawke and Anders got married after the events of 2, and contrary to your belief that Anders' actions ended the romance, I find nothing in the canon to disallow my version from happening.

[nightscrawl]

I disagree that Solas is better written, they're both well written characters. And I RP that Hawke and Anders got married after the events of 2, and contrary to your belief that Anders' actions ended the romance, I find nothing in the canon to disallow my version from happening.

Sort of a subject shift, but what does Hawke say about where a romanced Anders is when the Inquisitor asks about him? Or just anything about Anders, really. My import has a dead Anders and a Hawke that did not agree, but I don't really like what Hawke says in that instance. I think she called him crazy, or insane, or something, which I didn't care for. Also there was one line where Hawke said, "I don't think there ever was just an Anders." I was kinda like, Uh... yeah, that's really the whole point. I didn't see the point of that redundant statement. If you had played DA2, it's lame, and if you were ignorant about DA2, it makes no sense since it's not qualified with anything.





Back to "Mawwaige!"

I don't think that all LI should have the option. If they allow the PC to bring it up, that's fine, but not everyone wants to get married for any number of reasons. I think any writer of these characters and their romances will likely be able to answer whether they think their character will or will not want to get married, and the reason for that. It's a part of the character's personality as anything else about them and will be a result of their upbringing and life experiences. They should have the LI get married, or desire marriage, if the writer feels it is appropriate for the character and if that is something the LI would want to do.

 

These characters don't exist just to please us. If we say in one instance that we want followers who are independent of the PC, who don't fawn over them, who make their own choices, then something like marriage is also included in that. I think there are too many instances of players thinking only about what they want for their character. That's fine for most of the game where your character is the one making a decision, but it is not fine for a romance where there are two people whose thoughts, feelings, and opinions matter about the future of the relationship.

 

Now, I realize that marriage may be a deal-breaker for some people in some relationships, and that is fine if you feel that way. BUT they are not likely to allow any sort of nuanced or greatly involved discussion about marriage between the PC and LI. The games just aren't built around that. The greatest discussion in any game to date was between Alistair and his female Warden, but even then it came down to a couple of dialogue choices tacked onto another, unrelated conversation that was had in front of the entire band of followers; hardly an intimate, personal conversation between a couple (this has always irked me).

 

I think that the greater part of this should be left to headcanon. It is easier to headcanon that something happened, especially post-game, than headcanon that something did not happen.