Dragon age discussion

[Gorth]

Yeah, DA is real dark, man.

Oh come on... they are called darkspawn for petes sake. How much darker can you get?

 

Looking forward to continue my (still the first playthrough) game this weekend. Went to Denerim, to get started on the landsmeet. After several reloads I eventually figured out that there was a fight in there that I wasn't supposed to win. Good thing too, because the odds sure were stacked against me.

 

Saved the princess and got offered half the kingdom.

[Volourn]

"Yeah, DA is real dark, man."

 

All in the eye of the beholder. What does 'dark' even mean? And, can one assume there is an actual defintion that any two people agree with?

 

Read the BIO baords. There's a lot of talk of whether or not DA is dark. However, that's not the important part. The important part of that thread are the examples given in the thread of what people think are dark. Opinions vary so greatly that calling soemthing 'dark' (just as 'low magic') is frivlous useless hype that utterly means nothing. Examples such as LOTR, FR, PST, plus a host of books and movies were thrown out. One guy give an example of in order for soemthing to be 'dark', rape has to be protrayed as a positive thing or the protaginists all have to die.

 

 

 

"Saved the princess and got offered half the kingdom."

 

One potential ending. Multiple endings in DA don't end so happily. I know the one I got was bittersweet...

 

 

P.S. How many games allow you the option to murder a kid, and it actually potentially being for a 'good' cause? NOW, that's dark. Or, SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER, or SPOILER. Not even Bl got that dark or complex.

Edited December 3, 2009 by Volourn

[Monte Carlo]

This map of Thedas gives you some clues as to what DLC / XP / DA2 stuff might come next, especially when you think about the end-game postscript...

[Aristes]

I just ran into a talkative assassin who tried to ambush me. Didn't work well for him. What a bunch of chumps. Anyhow, I took him into my party and now he's hitting on Leliana. Still, my favorite dialogue is probably between the dog and either Alistar or Morigan.

[Oner]

Yeah, DA is real dark, man.

Oh come on... they are called darkspawn for petes sake. How much darker can you get?

PitchBlackSpawn. SomewhatDarkerSpawn. EvenLessWhiteSpawn.

Endless possibilities.

 

 

The marketing for DA was absolutely spot on. It delivered exactly what was promised.

Sex -check

Violence - check

LotR cutscenes - check

Slaughtering foes while Manson plays - nope

[Volourn]

"

Slaughtering foes while Manson plays - nope "

 

I don't rcall BIo ro EA promising in a solemn oath that Marilyn Manson music would be playing in game while you slaughtered eniemies?

[TheHarlequin]

"I got her approval to 100 this time by leaving her at camp the entire game and showering her with jewelry. First playthrough I always did the noble thing and her approval was +9 in the end."

 

I played a good character, always had her in my party, always made the 'good'/ 'nice' choice, and I ended up with her in love with me, and pretty much maxed approval.

 

Like I said, there are at least two 'nice' things when wondering if you should spare certain npcs will she'll push you not to kill them. That's pretty nice.

 

Please cite specific examples

[SeanM]

I think magic is meant to be fairly exotic to the average Ferelden. They may not ever meet a mage or witness someone doing magic. Mages are meant to be locked up in a tower and viewed as dangerous.

 

But in the main storyline you deal with several problems caused by magic. So it seems more common. I think magic is meant to be powerful but rare and difficult to control.

 

I agree it is a very powerful class. On my third playthrough I might try to finish it without using a mage in my party.

[Monte Carlo]

^ Mages are so rare and controlled in Ferelden that every other mob has several "Mercenary Mages" on tap, and every other hovel is a Blood Mage coven. Nobility hire mages to work as tutors. On street corners mages stand, openly, with a Sack 'O Quests. Honestly, the underground mage oppression thing reverberates through the game.

 

It's like making a game about a famine that, when you boot it up, has a strong abundance of food theme.

 

Whoever is in charge of the gate guard at Hogwart's needs relieving of their post!

Edited December 3, 2009 by Monte Carlo

[Gorth]

One potential ending. Multiple endings in DA don't end so happily. I know the one I got was bittersweet...

I was just joking based on the fun dialogue after a mission. I haven't finished the game yet.

[Volourn]

"Please cite specific examples"

 

No. Make me. I only do such favors for people whose opinions actually matter, and aren't hostile towards me. C&C, man, C&C!

 

Anyways, Obsidian doesn't allow spoilers without tags which means I'm banned. I've skirted the line too much a sis.

 

If you want actual spoiler exmaples, read my posts on the BIO boards.

 

 

 

"I was just joking based on the fun dialogue after a mission. I haven't finished the game yet."

 

Thought that was a possibility; but just ahd to make sure that not all DA endings are happy happy land.

Edited December 3, 2009 by Volourn

[SeanM]

My early expectations were that the mid game would have a more medieval feel. You would be dealing with Human/Elf/Dwarf enemies, issues and problems.

 

Then I saw the trailers with werewolves, zombies and abominations. I realised the game would be more exotic than my preconceptions.

 

I am fine with it. But I notice that aspect of it more than the overpowered mage class or abundance of mercenary mages.

Edited December 3, 2009 by SeanM

[TheHarlequin]

"Please cite specific examples"

 

No. Make me.

 

Translation: I have none as I am talking out of my arse... again.

 

*shrugs*

[HoonDing]

This map of Thedas gives you some clues as to what DLC / XP / DA2 stuff might come next, especially when you think about the end-game postscript...

Hopefully it won't be in Orlais. After 50+ hours of play that Pep

Edited December 3, 2009 by virumor

[Monte Carlo]

^ Hmmm. There are so many Baldur's Gate influences... BG2 took you some distance from BG1.

 

I'm pretty easy about it, but yeah the 'French' Orlesian accents are grating. Although the Zorro / Anitvan thing would get old quickly too. Rialto bay LOL!

 

Like I said: Dragon Age 2: The Deeper Roads: Fighting In Tunnels has to be the way forward. Cool acronymn too... DA2:TDR:FIT = Teh Awesome!

Edited December 3, 2009 by Monte Carlo

[Tigranes]

Geez, stop the bitchslapping you two.

 

Looking forward to continue my (still the first playthrough) game this weekend. Went to Denerim, to get started on the landsmeet. After several reloads I eventually figured out that there was a fight in there that I wasn't supposed to win. Good thing too, because the odds sure were stacked against me.

 

I actually beat Cauthrien in my second playthrough with the rogue (Hard). Thanks to the poor line of sight and nonexistent shout AI, half the enemies never follow you if you immediately retreat down the hallway. From there it's a matter of rotating Misdirection Hex, Cone of Cold and Force Field to keep Cauthrien from killing everyone in 3 hits while the others are down - then continuing that while everyone beats up on her. She has a lot of health and does insane damage and spells last a fraction, but at least she still takes hits.

 

It gets you a nice two-handed sword.

[HoonDing]

Like I said: Dragon Age 2: The Deeper Roads: Fighting In Tunnels has to be the way forward. Cool acronymn too... DA2:TDR:FIT = Teh Awesome!

Dear Lord, look at how far Kal Sharok is from Orzammar.

 

That's would be a lot of Deep Roads.

[deganawida]

I was just chatting with a colleague who also has the game, and he brought up the

female blood mage in the Tower who begs for a second chance

, and that brought up a major complaint that I have about BioWare's definitions of good and evil. I know many people hate Bio's stuff because their evil is often moustache-twirling caricatures, but good is also a caricature. Bio seems to think that sparing

the blood mage who killed her fellow mages that she lived and worked with, tried to kill you, and only now that you stand above her bleeding body with a blade to her neck is she expressing remorse and regret and promising to repent

is the good thing. No, it's not. That character has done too much, and there must be a reckoning. Letting the character go is an act of moral cowardice and stupidity. Seriously, it's like Bio thinks that every evil PC choice should make the PC Dark Helmet and every good choice should follow Dark Helmet's "good is dumb" axiom. Mass Effect's "Bring Down the Sky" bit had the most realistic portrayal of good and evil that I've seen in a Bio game, and I really wish that had been present in DAO, too.

 

So, Bio, listen up: Being good doesn't mean you have to be a chump. This isn't Eloi vs. Morlocks.

[Hurlshort]

Maybe Bio doesn't believe in the death penalty?

[deganawida]

Maybe Bio doesn't believe in the death penalty?

 

Death penalty is one thing, letting evil people go with no punishment at all is another. Seriously, there's not even a slap on the wrist for these people. You fight them, they give up, throw themselves on your tender mercies, and then you just let them go, never following up on whether or not they actually gave up their evil ways. It makes you responsible for all evil acts that they might commit after you set them free, because you did not stop them (by death or incarceration, doesn't matter) when you had the opportunity.

 

Also, if Bio doesn't believe in the death penalty, then they should put in some option where a surrendered opponent is remanded to the proper authorities. They do this with

Jowan in DAO and Dr. Saleon in ME

, but they don't do it anywhere often enough.

 

Seriously, the choices too often boil down to, "I'ma gonna keel you 'cause I like deathblooddecapitation!" or, "You poor dear, you've had such a hard life, I'm going to let you go after talking really sweet to you in the hopes that you'll change your notnice ways, bless your heart." That is not morality; that's what I see in my daughters' Care Bears movies.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Morrigan is very eager for you to save Sten and a blood mage in Redcliffe, and you get a lot of approval points if you do. Also you can tell her she's an evil shrew and to stop being such a bitch, which is great.

[jaguars4ever]

I was just chatting with a colleague who also has the game, and he brought up the

female blood mage in the Tower who begs for a second chance

, and that brought up a major complaint that I have about BioWare's definitions of good and evil. I know many people hate Bio's stuff because their evil is often moustache-twirling caricatures, but good is also a caricature. Bio seems to think that sparing

the blood mage who killed her fellow mages that she lived and worked with, tried to kill you, and only now that you stand above her bleeding body with a blade to her neck is she expressing remorse and regret and promising to repent

is the good thing. No, it's not. That character has done too much, and there must be a reckoning. Letting the character go is an act of moral cowardice and stupidity. Seriously, it's like Bio thinks that every evil PC choice should make the PC Dark Helmet and every good choice should follow Dark Helmet's "good is dumb" axiom. Mass Effect's "Bring Down the Sky" bit had the most realistic portrayal of good and evil that I've seen in a Bio game, and I really wish that had been present in DAO, too.

 

So, Bio, listen up: Being good doesn't mean you have to be a chump. This isn't Eloi vs. Morlocks.

The problem with this, is that by labeling her as a "blood mage who killed her fellow mages that she lived and worked with, tried to kill you...[who] has done too much [where] there must be a reckoning", you're presupposing she's evil beyond redemption. Never mind that latter qualifier of redemption for the time being. I don't believe we have enough information to even label her as evil. Practicing blood magic isn't inherently evil. Opponents of blood magic in the DA universe primarily believe it be because the Chantry says so. Well, the Chantry isn't exactly the paragon of spiritual purity. They're fanatical religious zealots enamored with ritual whose express purpose is expansionism in order to spread the Chant to the four corners of the globe. Just look how the ousted the Elves from the Dales via their crusade to vanquish the heathens. True, blood magic can also be used to entry another dreams within the Fade and mind-control them. But practice of blood magic doesn't necessitate this any more than driving a car necessitates running down pedestrians. Just like any tool, it's a means to end; thus, using that tool for an evil purpose doesn't automatically make that tool a malum in se. The Templars would have you believe is evil, but that's only a malum prohibitum because they say it is so.

 

Which brings us to our next point. Not all the blood mages in the tower were aligned/stayed aligned with Uldred (and his plan to turn the mages into abominations). Indeed, most of the rebel mages were motivated by escape. Look at it from the mages perspective. The Circle is but a glorified gilded cage, their home and prison both. Virtually, all the mages were drafted to the circle against their wishes. Is not freedom a fundamental right? Does not everyone have a right to personal liberty until they it has been forfeited? I don't believe that it is evil at all to for one of those mages to try and escape. And excluding the blood mages aligned with Uldred, the rebels only crimes were revolting against their Templar captors. It's not unreasonable to believe that the Templars are the ones with the lower moral standing, as they're the one's keeping the mages imprisoned against their wishes. On top of that, the Templars were poised to invoke their Right of Annulment. If this doesn't qualify as evil, I'm not sure what does. It essentially a blanket sentence of genocide - no due process, no fundamental safeguards for individual rights. And given that the Circle was locked up by the Templars, it would not be unreasonable for an ordinary prudent mage in her position to presume your presence in the tower was on behalf of the Templars. So I don't blame her one bit for attacking you on sight.

 

If anything, your vehemence in belief of her alleged irredeemable evil is tantamount to the fantastic job Bio has done in weaving a setting of morals shades of grey, rather than black & white. What you call "moral cowardice and stupidity", I call redressing injustice.

[deganawida]

I was just chatting with a colleague who also has the game, and he brought up the

female blood mage in the Tower who begs for a second chance

, and that brought up a major complaint that I have about BioWare's definitions of good and evil. I know many people hate Bio's stuff because their evil is often moustache-twirling caricatures, but good is also a caricature. Bio seems to think that sparing

the blood mage who killed her fellow mages that she lived and worked with, tried to kill you, and only now that you stand above her bleeding body with a blade to her neck is she expressing remorse and regret and promising to repent

is the good thing. No, it's not. That character has done too much, and there must be a reckoning. Letting the character go is an act of moral cowardice and stupidity. Seriously, it's like Bio thinks that every evil PC choice should make the PC Dark Helmet and every good choice should follow Dark Helmet's "good is dumb" axiom. Mass Effect's "Bring Down the Sky" bit had the most realistic portrayal of good and evil that I've seen in a Bio game, and I really wish that had been present in DAO, too.

 

So, Bio, listen up: Being good doesn't mean you have to be a chump. This isn't Eloi vs. Morlocks.

The problem with this, is that by labeling her as a "blood mage who killed her fellow mages that she lived and worked with, tried to kill you...[who] has done too much [where] there must be a reckoning", you're presupposing she's evil beyond redemption. Never mind that latter qualifier of redemption for the time being. I don't believe we have enough information to even label her as evil. Practicing blood magic isn't inherently evil. Opponents of blood magic in the DA universe primarily believe it be because the Chantry says so. Well, the Chantry isn't exactly the paragon of spiritual purity. They're fanatical religious zealots enamored with ritual whose express purpose is expansionism in order to spread the Chant to the four corners of the globe. Just look how the ousted the Elves from the Dales via their crusade to vanquish the heathens. True, blood magic can also be used to entry another dreams within the Fade and mind-control them. But practice of blood magic doesn't necessitate this any more than driving a car necessitates running down pedestrians. Just like any tool, it's a means to end; thus, using that tool for an evil purpose doesn't automatically make that tool a malum in se. The Templars would have you believe is evil, but that's only a malum prohibitum because they say it is so.

 

Which brings us to our next point. Not all the blood mages in the tower were aligned/stayed aligned with Uldred (and his plan to turn the mages into abominations). Indeed, most of the rebel mages were motivated by escape. Look at it from the mages perspective. The Circle is but a glorified gilded cage, their home and prison both. Virtually, all the mages were drafted to the circle against their wishes. Is not freedom a fundamental right? Does not everyone have a right to personal liberty until they it has been forfeited? I don't believe that it is evil at all to for one of those mages to try and escape. And excluding the blood mages aligned with Uldred, the rebels only crimes were revolting against their Templar captors. It's not unreasonable to believe that the Templars are the ones with the lower moral standing, as they're the one's keeping the mages imprisoned against their wishes. On top of that, the Templars were poised to invoke their Right of Annulment. If this doesn't qualify as evil, I'm not sure what does. It essentially a blanket sentence of genocide - no due process, no fundamental safeguards for individual rights. And given that the Circle was locked up by the Templars, it would not be unreasonable for an ordinary prudent mage in her position to presume your presence in the tower was on behalf of the Templars. So I don't blame her one bit for attacking you on sight.

 

If anything, your vehemence in belief of her alleged irredeemable evil is tantamount to the fantastic job Bio has done in weaving a setting of morals shades of grey, rather than black & white. What you call "moral cowardice and stupidity", I call redressing injustice.

 

She was part of a surprise attack on the mages that she lived and worked with in the Tower, killing some and enabling Uldred's plan to go forward. If you converse with her, she denies any real regret for the choices she made (change must be violent, I believe is what she says), only regret for how it turned out to be something she did not want (though only one specific conversation path leads to this dialog). She made evil choices before you arrived, and rather than, upon seeing armed people who were not templars, attempt to surrender beforehand, she attacks your party on sight and only begs for a chance for redemption when her death seems eminent.

 

I don't need to look at it from the mage's perspective. All that matters to me is that they killed their colleagues without warning because they disagreed with them. Their colleagues weren't event the ones oppressing them! The treatment of the mages by the Chantry? Immaterial to the blood mages' actions, insofar as the blood mages were not forced into the path that they took. There were other options, but the blood mages chose the easy route. Didn't turn out the way they wanted? Perhaps they should have tried not turning to the one thing that would give them an instant death sentence from every Thedasian government save the Tevinter Imperium.

 

EDIT: Let me put it in other terms: Should you let an office worker who, after being pressured by his bosses, joins in a violent conspiracy at his big company to kill everyone who makes the same money as the office worker, is no higher in position than the office worker, has family barbeques with the office worker, and labors under the same oppressive restrictions as the office worker, live and go free just because he says he's sorry? Even though he struck out against fellow sufferers and not the oppressors? No, of course not! That way lies folly!

Edited December 3, 2009 by deganawida

[jaguars4ever]

I was just chatting with a colleague who also has the game, and he brought up the

female blood mage in the Tower who begs for a second chance

, and that brought up a major complaint that I have about BioWare's definitions of good and evil. I know many people hate Bio's stuff because their evil is often moustache-twirling caricatures, but good is also a caricature. Bio seems to think that sparing

the blood mage who killed her fellow mages that she lived and worked with, tried to kill you, and only now that you stand above her bleeding body with a blade to her neck is she expressing remorse and regret and promising to repent

is the good thing. No, it's not. That character has done too much, and there must be a reckoning. Letting the character go is an act of moral cowardice and stupidity. Seriously, it's like Bio thinks that every evil PC choice should make the PC Dark Helmet and every good choice should follow Dark Helmet's "good is dumb" axiom. Mass Effect's "Bring Down the Sky" bit had the most realistic portrayal of good and evil that I've seen in a Bio game, and I really wish that had been present in DAO, too.

 

So, Bio, listen up: Being good doesn't mean you have to be a chump. This isn't Eloi vs. Morlocks.

The problem with this, is that by labeling her as a "blood mage who killed her fellow mages that she lived and worked with, tried to kill you...[who] has done too much [where] there must be a reckoning", you're presupposing she's evil beyond redemption. Never mind that latter qualifier of redemption for the time being. I don't believe we have enough information to even label her as evil. Practicing blood magic isn't inherently evil. Opponents of blood magic in the DA universe primarily believe it be because the Chantry says so. Well, the Chantry isn't exactly the paragon of spiritual purity. They're fanatical religious zealots enamored with ritual whose express purpose is expansionism in order to spread the Chant to the four corners of the globe. Just look how the ousted the Elves from the Dales via their crusade to vanquish the heathens. True, blood magic can also be used to entry another dreams within the Fade and mind-control them. But practice of blood magic doesn't necessitate this any more than driving a car necessitates running down pedestrians. Just like any tool, it's a means to end; thus, using that tool for an evil purpose doesn't automatically make that tool a malum in se. The Templars would have you believe is evil, but that's only a malum prohibitum because they say it is so.

 

Which brings us to our next point. Not all the blood mages in the tower were aligned/stayed aligned with Uldred (and his plan to turn the mages into abominations). Indeed, most of the rebel mages were motivated by escape. Look at it from the mages perspective. The Circle is but a glorified gilded cage, their home and prison both. Virtually, all the mages were drafted to the circle against their wishes. Is not freedom a fundamental right? Does not everyone have a right to personal liberty until they it has been forfeited? I don't believe that it is evil at all to for one of those mages to try and escape. And excluding the blood mages aligned with Uldred, the rebels only crimes were revolting against their Templar captors. It's not unreasonable to believe that the Templars are the ones with the lower moral standing, as they're the one's keeping the mages imprisoned against their wishes. On top of that, the Templars were poised to invoke their Right of Annulment. If this doesn't qualify as evil, I'm not sure what does. It essentially a blanket sentence of genocide - no due process, no fundamental safeguards for individual rights. And given that the Circle was locked up by the Templars, it would not be unreasonable for an ordinary prudent mage in her position to presume your presence in the tower was on behalf of the Templars. So I don't blame her one bit for attacking you on sight.

 

If anything, your vehemence in belief of her alleged irredeemable evil is tantamount to the fantastic job Bio has done in weaving a setting of morals shades of grey, rather than black & white. What you call "moral cowardice and stupidity", I call redressing injustice.

 

She was part of a surprise attack on the mages that she lived and worked with in the Tower, killing some and enabling Uldred's plan to go forward. If you converse with her, she denies any real regret for the choices she made (change must be violent, I believe is what she says), only regret for how it turned out to be something she did not want (though only one specific conversation path leads to this dialog). She made evil choices before you arrived, and rather than, upon seeing armed people who were not templars, attempt to surrender beforehand, she attacks your party on sight and only begs for a chance for redemption when her death seems eminent.

 

I don't need to look at it from the mage's perspective. All that matters to me is that they killed their colleagues without warning because they disagreed with them. Their colleagues weren't event the ones oppressing them! The treatment of the mages by the Chantry? Immaterial to the blood mages' actions, insofar as the blood mages were not forced into the path that they took. There were other options, but the blood mages chose the easy route. Didn't turn out the way they wanted? Perhaps they should have tried not turning to the one thing that would give them an instant death sentence from every Thedasian government save the Tevinter Imperium.

 

EDIT: Let me put it in other terms: Should you let an office worker who, after being pressured by his bosses, joins in a violent conspiracy at his big company to kill everyone who makes the same money as the office worker, is no higher in position than the office worker, has family barbeques with the office worker, and labors under the same oppressive restrictions as the office worker, live and go free just because he says he's sorry? Even though he struck out against fellow sufferers and not the oppressors? No, of course not! That way lies folly!

The treatment of the mages by the Chantry not only isn't irrelevant, but it's the sine qua non of the mages plight. That is, if they weren't imprisoned by the Chantry, then they wouldn't need to escape. And that's the important thing here: these mages were imprisoned against their wishes, without any trial, with their only "crime" being possessing the gift of arcane ability. What you call coworkers, were instead just another arm of their of their tormentors. The mages had different factions even within the Circle (Loyalists, aequaterians, etc), and the mages in league with the Chantry actually perpetuated their imprisonment.

 

EDIT: Also, the office analogy isn't very suitable because even if you're working under an oppressive boss, you still possess the element of choice: you can continue working or you can quit. For these mages they had no choice. Their freedom to choose whether to stay or leave was stripped from them the moment they were incarcerated. It would be better to compare it to Guantanamo Bay: where one is being imprisoned indefinitely without being charged or tried simply on the whim that they might be dangerous.

Edited December 3, 2009 by jaguars4ever

[HoonDing]

Maybe a future game will deal with a war between the Black Chantry of Tevinter & the White Chantry of Ferelden/Orlais. The Black Chantry basically consists of mages that rule Tevinter... exactly the opposite of the Inquisition-like Chantry in Ferelden/orlais.

 

It would be interesting to learn about the Tevinter interpretation of the life & death of Andraste... since Tevinter was the old battleground and the place where the chick was burnt, I'd say theirs is probably the accurate one.