85 réponses à ce sujet

[CptPatch]

Schurge wrote...
I view same-sex relationships to be immoral but I didn't realize that mattered. I find it very very hard to believe that there is true respect in open relationships or that there is any love in such a relationship. Regardless of how I feel about same-sex stuff, I can at least believe that they have respect/love for each other. There is the key difference. And thats what I meant, sorry I wasn't clear. But yes I see your point, when you get right down to it they are both currently socially unacceptable and probably will be for a long time.

It all depends on your definition of "a long time".  For most of recorded history, most cultures have frowned on homesexuality.  As recently as 50 years ago, it would have been hard to find a jury that would convict someone that had attacked "queers" or "****gots" strictly because of the "immoral" behavior of the victims.  Today, gays are Loud & Proud.  "Don't ask/don't tell" is on the verge of being excised from the US military as THE official policy.

The times, they are a-changing -- and perhaps faster than you may think.  It may very well be that Mormons may soon be able to once again openly practice polygamy.  And I would expect that legalized polyandry wouldn't be too far behind.  Probably not in what is left of my lifetime, but very possibly during yours.

You also have to define "true respect".  I get the impression that to your mind that the phrase, "forsaking all others" would be an integral part of your definition.  That may very well work for you, but it usually would be incorrect to conclude, "What _I_ believe is what is Right, for ALL people." [And that includes my opinion of what is "Right".]

[hexaligned]

Socially unacceptable for whom? The entire world isn't the american south. I grew up with plenty of the old school hippi crowd as my elders, I know more than one couple that have been married for years and that have open relationships, both romantically and sexually. One of the people I respect most in this world is a bisexual shaman who's raised 3 perfectly normal kids with her partner. Hell I never even stepped foot in a christian church until my early 20's.(and that just for a friends wedding)

I think your defiintion of society might not hold up to reality.

Modifié par relhart, 12 février 2010 - 01:40 .

[errant_knight]

Hmmm.... Just popped by and read the last few. Is this whole thread just people telling each other that their deeply held beliefs are wrong? I'm guessing it probably is. *leaves again*

[ejoslin]

No, errant_knight, I was here so there was Zevran squee as well.

[IanPolaris]

Everyone,



I was the one that commented on the children thing with Zev. If I am wrong, it was an honest mistake on my part. I am *certain* that there is a different (and nicer) ending if your HNF marries Alastair if she is seeing Zev on the side than if she is romancing Alastair alone and I was almost sure it involved heirs (or the lack thereof).



-Polaris

[ejoslin]

IanPolaris wrote...

Everyone,

I was the one that commented on the children thing with Zev. If I am wrong, it was an honest mistake on my part. I am *certain* that there is a different (and nicer) ending if your HNF marries Alastair if she is seeing Zev on the side than if she is romancing Alastair alone and I was almost sure it involved heirs (or the lack thereof).

-Polaris

You are wrong.  I've various endings on the HNF.  Where there is a difference is if the HNF ever romanced Alistair or not -- but if she's romancing Zevran, you hear about what happens to them in the future (standard romance partner epilogue card).  There is a difference in how the princess-consort is viewed -- as a ruler in her own right or as Alistair's beloved bride -- but that's based solely on whether Alistair was romanced ever in the game or not.  There is no mention of heirs in the vanilla game in any ending.

Edit: clarity

Modifié par ejoslin, 12 février 2010 - 02:14 .

[IanPolaris]

ejoslin wrote...

You are wrong.  I've various endings on the HNF.  Where there is a difference is if the HNF ever romanced Alistair or not -- but if she's romancing Zevran, you hear about what happens to them in the future.  There is a difference in how the princess-consort is viewed -- as a ruler in her own right or as Alistair's beloved bride, but that's based solely on whether Alistair was romanced ever in the game or not.  There is no mention of heirs either way in the vanilla game.

Edit: clarity

Ah, that must be it.  When I romanced Zev, I did not romance Alistair (but was at 100 friendly with him).  However it is worth noting that you can pick the convo option (and you'll need a good coercion) that you will bear heirs but not necessarily his heirs.  You'll get an approval drop from Alistair and you get a grim "we'll have to talk about this", but he in no way cancells the wedding.

Naturally I harden Alistair before trying this.  [And honestly I wouldn't want an unhardened Alister within 10 feet of the throne.]

-Polaris

[ejoslin]

IanPolaris wrote...

ejoslin wrote...

You are wrong.  I've various endings on the HNF.  Where there is a difference is if the HNF ever romanced Alistair or not -- but if she's romancing Zevran, you hear about what happens to them in the future.  There is a difference in how the princess-consort is viewed -- as a ruler in her own right or as Alistair's beloved bride, but that's based solely on whether Alistair was romanced ever in the game or not.  There is no mention of heirs either way in the vanilla game.

Edit: clarity

Ah, that must be it.  When I romanced Zev, I did not romance Alistair (but was at 100 friendly with him).  However it is worth noting that you can pick the convo option (and you'll need a good coercion) that you will bear heirs but not necessarily his heirs.  You'll get an approval drop from Alistair and you get a grim "we'll have to talk about this", but he in no way cancells the wedding.

Naturally I harden Alistair before trying this.  [And honestly I wouldn't want an unhardened Alister within 10 feet of the throne.]

-Polaris

Heh, I always pick that selection, and Alistair says, "Should I be glad about that? I guess I should."  -5 approval but he's not mad.  if you're romancing him, he gets MAD though and says, "That's a cheery thought." -15 approval.  

Then again, Alistair will marry a HNF at 0 Neutral approval.  My next test will be -100 hostile, but my guess is, as long as your coercion is high enough, he will.

Edit: Marrying Alistair at lower approval ratings usually means Alistair is not hardened.  It really doesn't matter, though.  A Cousland marriage makes as much sense if not more than a Mac Tir marriage.  It's purely political.  Alistair doesn't like Anora either.  The one I feel sorry for in that circumstance is Zevran, though.  He gets a raw deal there, especially if there are children.

Yet another edit: The one who actually says, "We'll have to  talk about this later" is Zevran and it's regarding your marriage.  

Modifié par ejoslin, 12 février 2010 - 03:04 .

[IanPolaris]

ejoslin wrote...
Edit: Marrying Alistair at lower approval ratings usually means Alistair is not hardened.  It really doesn't matter, though.  A Cousland marriage makes as much sense if not more than a Mac Tir marriage.  It's purely political.  Alistair doesn't like Anora either.  The one I feel sorry for in that circumstance is Zevran, though.  He gets a raw deal there, especially if there are children.

Yet another edit: The one who actually says, "We'll talk about this later" is Zevran and it's regarding your marriage.  

Eh, actually IIRC Zev doesn't say that.  Zev opens up with, "I've heard this funny little rumor about the new queen...."  Basically he gives you a chance to opt out, but is totally OK with being (to use his words), "your handsome elf on the side" for as long as you want him.  No disapproval drop and no "talk later" or anything like that at least when I did it.  I do recall it was Alistair that said, "We'll talk later" regarding heirs.

The Epilog does confirm that you marry the King and continue to sleep with Zev btw.

-Polaris

[ejoslin]

IanPolaris wrote...

ejoslin wrote...
Edit: Marrying Alistair at lower approval ratings usually means Alistair is not hardened.  It really doesn't matter, though.  A Cousland marriage makes as much sense if not more than a Mac Tir marriage.  It's purely political.  Alistair doesn't like Anora either.  The one I feel sorry for in that circumstance is Zevran, though.  He gets a raw deal there, especially if there are children.

Yet another edit: The one who actually says, "We'll talk about this later" is Zevran and it's regarding your marriage.  

Eh, actually IIRC Zev doesn't say that.  Zev opens up with, "I've heard this funny little rumor about the new queen...."  Basically he gives you a chance to opt out, but is totally OK with being (to use his words), "your handsome elf on the side" for as long as you want him.  No disapproval drop and no "talk later" or anything like that at least when I did it.  I do recall it was Alistair that said, "We'll talk later" regarding heirs.

The Epilog does confirm that you marry the King and continue to sleep with Zev btw.

-Polaris

At the end of that conversation, Zevran says, "Let us continue on then.  We can always discuss this more later...provided one of us is not eaten by a dragon.  And if so, problem solved."

But yes, you're right.  The epilogue does confirm that Zevran and the warden stay together. I don't think I said otherwise.  It's a sad ending, though, I think.

Edit: so yes, the wording is NOT "we need to talk later", it's "we can discuss it later."  However, that's far closer than what Alistair says to the warden about the heir.  It's a funny exchange though, the look Ali gets on his face, especially when he's in full romance. 

My favorite selection there is turning on the romance just before going into the chamber and then watching Alistair's reaction if you say to him, "Not for lack of trying."  He gets SO embarrassed.  He has to be romanced but he and the warden never had sex to get that reaction.  It's priceless.

Blah blah blah edit -- I'm terrible: Alistair really does NOT say "We'll talk later," regarding the heirs.  It's either, "Should I be glad? I guess I should."  or "That's a cheery thought."  OOOOOH, he does conclude that conversation with "We'll talk later," but it's not regarding the heir.  It's the standard end of the conversation, no matter what you select before. I think it's actually about the engagement.

Modifié par ejoslin, 12 février 2010 - 03:23 .