Dragon Age: Inquisition

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

\So... you want to role-play a coward? Which wouldn't make sense in BG2 since your character survived BG1 where you fighting an incredibly powerfulfighter and his powerful henchmen and his powerful organization AND you won.

In BG1, you have no idea how powerful Sarevok is until you fight him in the last part of the game, his "powerful henchmen" are pretty weak if you have done most of the side quests available to you, and you have no idea that you're fighting the Iron Throne until the bandit camp.

In BG2, you know Irenicus is an immensely powerful mage right after you escape his dungeon.

Not going after someone who can rip apart reality with as much effort as an average person tears apart bread is not cowardice, it's sanity.

Eh, Sarevok wastes Gorion in an off-hand manner and their respective power is emphasised in the chapter start. Almost 1:1 same between the two BGs.

I'd say killing one Mage with a cleric, two archers, and a pair of ogres backing you up is less impressive than slaughtering several by yourself.

 

Also, in BG you don't know that you are going after Sarevok right after he kills Gorion. Like pretty much everything related to the main plot on BG, you discover ptretty far down the line.

[Nonek]

I am somewhat split on this subject, yes bearding a well prepared massively powerful foe seems like idiocy, but you also should have the option to prepare and anticipate that conflict. Clues are laid out for you in the game and by Irenicus himself that he has an interest in your unique condition and is trying to awaken it, something that logically my character would seize upon, if an Archmage of such power seeks this then it has undoubted value and potency. Personally I would spend my time rather than trying to court the Shadow Thieves or Bodhi, discovering more about myself and my heritage. In fact I would have done this from the moment I first stumbled upon it, rather than trekking off across the Sword Coast, the powers of a deity are not to be sneezed at and should surely take priority.

 

In a manner you do so, I read on the Witcher forums a while back a strange chap arguing that the dreams one experiences in BG2 are classic Freudian manifestations of the Id, Ego and Super Ego coming to terms with the Bhaalspawn condition. But personally I would have gone further and had the protagonist be able to follow a path where he begins to master the taint through study of his father, the nature of the taint and internal struggle, and perhaps be able to find Imoen and also face Irenicus on a more level footing.

 

After all one assumes that such a condition will be sought out by others as well, one may run only so far before a stand has to be made, and mastering oneself through knowing ones own nature seems a far more sensible alternative to trusting strangers and engaging in harebrained pursuits. To me at least. Then again reading through this I think this approach would suit far more an Obsidian game than a Bioware one.

Edited March 16, 2014 by Nonek

[213374U]

I am somewhat split on this subject, yes bearding a well prepared massively powerful foe seems like idiocy, but you also should have the option to prepare and anticipate that conflict. Clues are laid out for you in the game and by Irenicus himself that he has an interest in your unique condition and is trying to awaken it, something that logically my character would seize upon, if an Archmage of such power seeks this then it has undoubted value and potency. Personally I would spend my time rather than trying to court the Shadow Thieves or Bodhi, discovering more about myself and my heritage. In fact I would have done this from the moment I first stumbled upon it, rather than trekking off across the Sword Coast, the powers of a deity are not to be sneezed at and should surely take priority.

 

In a manner you do so, I read on the Witcher forums a while back a strange chap arguing that the dreams one experiences in BG2 are classic Freudian manifestations of the Id, Ego and Super Ego coming to terms with the Bhaalspawn condition. But personally I would have gone further and had the protagonist be able to follow a path where he begins to master the taint through study of his father, the nature of the taint and internal struggle, and perhaps be able to find Imoen and also face Irenicus on a more level footing.

 

After all one assumes that such a condition will be sought out by others as well, one may run only so far before a stand has to be made, and mastering oneself through knowing ones own nature seems a far more sensible alternative to trusting strangers and engaging in harebrained pursuits. To me at least. Then again reading through this I think this approach would suit far more an Obsidian game than a Bioware one.

 

That's the idea behind Sarevok's character development in ToB. If you take him with you, he'll reveal more about his years of research into the taint and the old Bhaal lore, and his efforts to master it. Unfortunately, this is not possible for the PC because a short unspecified period after Sarevok is defeated, you are cordially invited to Irenicus' BDSM And Mind**** Lounge so spending years immersed in study and profound self-reflection is out of the question. This is also addressed narratively by your "Bhaal powers" being replaced with increasingly powerful versions of the Slayer transformation, through the dream sequences. Irenicus, directly or indirectly, gives the player a crash course in harnessing divine power—far more than Sarevok ever managed through conventional research, by the way.

 

Finding Irenicus is the only logical course of action even if one is not interested in revenge because he seems to be the most readily available source of knowledge on charname's "condition". He managed to capture you once, no reason to believe that running away is going to prevent him from doing so again—taking the initiative could allow this reunion to happen on your terms (even if that actually backfires because <PLOT DEVICE>). Personally, my motivation for tracking him down was properly thanking him for ridding me of snotty Imoen.

 

Sure, you could argue that your charname would rather just retire and find a nice patch of land to cultivate or something equally prosaic, and that by not offering that path the game is a RPG FAIL! but that possibility is implicitly excluded by the player at the character generation screen when they choose a heroic class.

Edited March 16, 2014 by 213374U

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Finding Irenicus is the only logical course of action even if one is not interested in revenge because he seems to be the most readily available source of knowledge on charname's "condition".

That is only true if the PC either 1)wants revenge, 2)wants to use the "Bhaal power", 3)wants to rescue Imoen.

 

To bring this back somewhat on topic, BG2 assumes motivation that may not be true for some PCs, like DAO did. You can argue that one did so in a more palatable manner, but they both are guilty of doing assuming motivation.

 

He managed to capture you once, no reason to believe that running away is going to prevent him from doing so again—taking the initiative could allow this reunion to happen on your terms (even if that actually backfires because <PLOT DEVICE>).

Possibly, but that assumes that Irenicus is after a particular Bhaalspawn(namely you). Bhaal did spawn a lot of Bhaalspawmn, logic would suggest that Irenicus would find another suitable Bhaalspawn if it required less effort.

 

Sure, you could argue that your charname would rather just retire and find a nice patch of land to cultivate or something equally prosaic, and that by not offering that path the game is a RPG FAIL! but that possibility is implicitly excluded by the player at the character generation screen when they choose a heroic class.

To bring this back to the first point, isn't that true of all RPGs?

 

In (insert game here) you can't say "**** (doing what main plot requires), I'm going (somewhere else in game world) and (doing something)". This seems to be a universal problem in CRPGs, because they lack the narrative flexibility of PnP games.

 

So developers have to design the game to provide a list of motivations applicable to the most characters possible. So in BG2, you have the options to seek revenge(I'd argue that this is insanity given Irenicus' power, but I have more problems with the narrative in BG2 that would clog up this thread), master more of your inherent power, or rescue a childhood friend, which would apply to a good number of Good, Neutral, and Evil PCs. In DAO, you have the motivation of staying alive, then saving the world from the ravishing assault by an almost unstoppable force of corruption(arguably can be considered staying alive), which applies to a greater number of PCs than something like "stay in a city run by religious fundamentalists, occupied by individuals who often become hosts for demons, and where you will be mugged every ten feet for seven years because..."

Edited March 16, 2014 by KaineParker

[Monte Carlo]

All plots are smoke and mirrors and there's no such thing as non-linear unless you go pure sandbox. What you can do is create the (enjoyable) illusion of choice by creating divergent but ultimately convergent links to get from 'A' to 'B.'

 

Using BG2 as an example, the game takes for granted you want to discover more about your heritage. If you don't then you might as well not play. At least that occurrence is central to you, as charname, and as far as deux ex machina goes it's OK. Dragon Age is different... as others have said there are a dozen reasons why the characters in the origin stories woudln't want to join the Grey Wardens but you are forced into it anyhow.

[Volourn]

" That is only true if the PC either 1)wants revenge, 2)wants to use the "Bhaal power", 3)wants to rescue Imoen.

To bring this back somewhat on topic, BG2 assumes motivation that may not be true for some PCs, like DAO did. You can argue that one did so in a more palatable manner, but they both are guilty of doing assuming motivation."

 

This is such a silly argument as it's true about every RPG ever created. In FO, the game ends if you don't bring the water chip to the vault. What happens if you don't care about the vault or that  you may have moved on in the wasteland? In PST, what happens if you don't want to open the darks ecrets of your past and just live a normal life like many other versions of TNO apparently did? What happens if you don't want tos trive to be the ultimate good guy in the Ultimas? Or a treasure hunter in M&Ms?

 

Why does 'motivation' only matter in BIO games but not other games?

 

Those 3 reasons given to potentially go after Irenicus are rather good and reason depending on character.  People say you can just ignore Irneicus but that is silly. The guy friggin' haunts your nightmares. He goes out of his way hunt you down at start of game specifically. It is obvious (or should be) that you will be confronting him again whether you like it or not. Some things simply can't be ignored.

 

Also, people saying that irencius is 'more powerful' than Sarevok are missing the point as well. In BG1, or a low level scmuck yet you are told you are VIP (just ask both Gorion and Eliminster) and Gorion's two half elven buddies who he directs you to. You are on a collision course for your uber brother just like you are on a collision course with Irenicus in BG2 or the Archdemon in DA. Don't forget the psychological aspect of your nightmares/dreams in all 3 games. That also has to be noted when discussing potential motivations.

 

Compared to the vast majority of games, there is more than enough suitable motivation for the respective main quests.

 

 

 "as others have said there are a dozen reasons why the characters in the origin stories woudln't want to join the Grey Wardens but you are forced into it anyhow."
 

You are forced into it or you die. That's your choice. If you chose to die the game ends, move on, game over. Just like in BG2 if you don't want to learn about your past than don't. Uninstall. Seriously, this is such insanity.

 

Edited March 16, 2014 by Volourn

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

This is such a silly argument as it's true about every RPG ever created.

To bring this back to the first point, isn't that true of all RPGs?

Already covered that Volo.

[Volourn]

Good. Now get the others to see the light of truthiness.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Good. Now get the others to see the light of truthiness.

No can do. For some reason, BG2 shoves rose-tinted glasses on some people. As such, they can not see faults in BG2 that they criticize other games for having.

[Nonek]

As I said above I think there should be a third path in BG2 where you master your own version of the taint and through that can sense other Bhaalspawn, thus giving you an independent and neutral shot at reaching the Asylum, this needn't take years as you've allready struggled with it in the first game and a simple plot device is to say that Irenicus' experiments triggered something inside you (which it does) and you're trying to explore and build upon that. I also think that Kaine has a point, but one that I think should result in an early game over screen, like in say Fallout. Melissan or another Bhaalspawn finds you some years later and slaughter you wherever you are hiding, removing another opponent for their fathers powers. You don't see this any more in RPG's and it's disappointing to see another feature thrown by the wayside.

 

Facing Irenicus is not the only logical choice as there are a dozen others one can think of offhand, and I never usually play a heroic individual so that doesn't restrict me, however I would say that bearding Irenicus and finding out what he knows about you and how to further master a part of yourself is a very logical choice, and one I would pursue. Simply not in the manner that BG2 forces one into, I don't really mind Imoen unlike a lot of people so that is also a consideration for me, as my character wouldn't knowingly let a woman suffer if he could somehow prevent it in a reasonable manner.

 

I'd say that this would be a fairly easy path to implement, finding artifacts of the Cult of Bhaal, reading prophecies and doctrines perhaps locked in some dungeon, finding a way to take a more active role in ones dreams and thereby direct them before the Asylum and Irenicus steals ones soul. Perhaps make the Shadow Thieves and the Vampires both hold some artifact of the God of Murder that one has to recover to complete, seems in keeping with their remit. And then sail forth in a vessel one chartered by your own fair hand, and perhaps have a differing recation when reaching the Asylum.

 

However this is all hypothetical and largely pointless, personally i'd have liked a game over you died screen in DAO if one chose to not join the Warden's, it's a little aid to that sense of freedom.

 

Edit: Why am I in italics, passing strange.

 

2nd edit: One could even use the artifacts of Kazgaroth found in the first game perhaps, as an aid to knowing oneself.

Edited March 16, 2014 by Nonek

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

As I said above I think there should be a third path in BG2 where you master your own version of the taint and through that can sense other Bhaalspawn, thus giving you an independent and neutral shot at reaching the Asylum, this needn't take years as you've allready struggled with it in the first game and a simple plot device is to say that Irenicus' experiments triggered something inside you (which it does) and you're trying to explore and build upon that. I also think that Kaine has a point, but one that I think should result in an early game over screen, like in say Fallout. Melissan or another Bhaalspawn finds you some years later and slaughter you wherever you are hiding, removing another opponent for their fathers powers. You don't see this any more in RPG's and it's disappointing to see another feature thrown by the wayside.

 

Facing Irenicus is not the only logical choice as there are a dozen others one can think of offhand, and I never usually play a heroic individual so that doesn't restrict me, however I would say that bearding Irenicus and finding out what he knows about you and how to further master a part of yourself is a very logical choice, and one I would pursue. Simply not in the manner that BG2 forces one into, I don't really mind Imoen unlike a lot of people so that is also a consideration for me, as my character wouldn't knowingly let a woman suffer if he could somehow prevent it in a reasonable manner.

 

I'd say that this would be a fairly easy path to implement, finding artifacts of the Cult of Bhaal, reading prophecies and doctrines perhaps locked in some dungeon, finding a way to take a more active role in ones dreams and thereby direct them before the Asylum and Irenicus steals ones soul. Perhaps make the Shadow Thieves and the Vampires both hold some artifact of the God of Murder that one has to recover to complete, seems in keeping with their remit. And then sail forth in a vessel one chartered by your own fair hand, and perhaps have a differing recation when reaching the Asylum.

Perhaps this belongs in the Blasphemous thread, but I believe that BG2 would have been better if structured more like New Vegas. I think a plot revolving around the various factions in Amn making power plays would have been more interesting than Irenicus' storyline. It wouldn't be much of a stretch to have the Most Noble Order of the Radiant Heart, the Cowled Wizards, the Shadow Thieves, and a few other guilds competing for power.

 

I also would've preferred Irenicus portrayed as someone who pursues knowledge for the sake of knowledge and has lost his humanity through years of being alone studying rather than the lost love interpretation in BG2. That would make him more sympathetic IMO.

 

However this is all hypothetical and largely pointless, personally i'd have liked a game over you died screen in DAO if one chose to not join the Warden's, it's a little aid to that sense of freedom.

I agree.

 

 

Edit: Why am I in italics, passing strange.

Too much brandy?

[213374U]

and I never usually play a heroic individual

 

But in the BG games, yes you do. You cannot take "humanoid" or "creature" levels, you are forced by design to play the role of a heroic (or antiheroic) character. The game is about the epic journey of charname to discover her divine legacy. That the game does not offer you non-heroic alternatives is not a valid complaint past the point where you accept that this premise is the basis for the game you have bought, installed, and are rolling a character in. Complaining at the lack of non-heroic alternatives in BG is akin to decrying the lack of character development of the actors in Counter-Strike. One of the key assumptions that dealing with heroes brings is that the player will rise to the challenge, no matter how perilous, foolhardy or ill-advised it may seem, because that's the defining feature of fictional heroes. Would it be a better game if you could go "ah, screw this, I'm going to mug a few gnomes and drink myself to death in the Copper Coronet" to a game over screen? I honestly don't think the improvement warrants the effort.

 

Of the many faults that can be found with the writing in the BG saga, railroading towards a confrontation with the antagonist is the one I understand the least.

[Volourn]

. "That the game does not offer you non-heroic alternatives"

 

Becoming an evil god is 'heroic'? L0L So..  Bhaal, Bane, and Myrkul *were* heroes. LMAO

[Gromnir]

"heroic" does not needs carry with it the baggage o' noble self-sacrifice. sure, when we refers to a person running into a burning building to save a puppy, the heroism is integral linked to sacrifice... or potential sacrifice. doesn't take superpowers to risk death-- takes will and at least a moment o' foolish courage. however, "heroic" don't need have sacrificial component. looks through the catalog o' pre-christian heroes and you find some serious jerks. their granted title o' hero were a result o' the obstacles they overcame and not so much their concern for the greater-good. a hero is one who defeats monsters. the monster may be literal or figurative, but it takes a hero to fights and beat the monsters. 

 

'course context is important, but as bg allows you to play as a jerk, we thinks we can assume that #s were not limiting himself to post-christian notions o' the hero as One Who Sacrifices.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Volourn]

No.

[Orogun01]

Why does 'motivation' only matter in BIO games but not other games?

Now that's an interesting question, I would think that players could make the distinction between their character's motivation and their's. If I had to guess why BW is singled out it would be because they offer choices only to have the character or the story invalidate them further along. Add to that the sequential nature of many of their games and there are a lot of people whose playthroughs of past games are rendered "fake". 

I guess is not really motivation that people have a gripe about as much as the linearity in BW's non linear writing, if that makes sense.

[Volourn]

Nah. It has nothing to do with that. It's 'cool\' to hate BIO because they were so successful. Espicially on the Obsidian boards where it's an 'us vs them' mentality.

 

I mean  everything bad about Obsidian games is the publishers' fault, and everything good is all Obsidian. vice versa for BIO.

 

It wasn't BIO who made BG series popular, afterall.. it was BIS/Interplay. LMAO

[Gromnir]

No.

not your worst response.

 

*shrug*

 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

Nah. It has nothing to do with that. It's 'cool\' to hate BIO because they were so successful. Espicially on the Obsidian boards where it's an 'us vs them' mentality.

 

I mean  everything bad about Obsidian games is the publishers' fault, and everything good is all Obsidian. vice versa for BIO.

 

It wasn't BIO who made BG series popular, afterall.. it was BIS/Interplay. LMAO

 

Yeah I tend to agree, I think many people don't want to see any positive about any modern Bioware games because they have become part of this "Bioware Bashing" crusade and this gives them a good reason to complain through any medium possible. I also see them finding a spurious connection between the perceived decline of Bioware and the Bioware implementation of Romance.

 

Now I'm a simple person and believe companies can admit mistakes around RPG design but then produce another game in a series that will be very entertaining and address mistakes made in a particular previous game , hence my support for DA:I

[Nepenthe]

The reinforcement paradrops in DA2 are apparently a lot more annoying when playing a mage vs. playing an offtank. Glad to see the end of that particular mechanic.

[Bryy]

It wasn't BIO who made BG series popular, afterall.. it was BIS/Interplay. LMAO

Out of all the revisionist opinion BS, this is the worst.

[Wolfenbarg]

Nah. It has nothing to do with that. It's 'cool\' to hate BIO because they were so successful. Espicially on the Obsidian boards where it's an 'us vs them' mentality.

 

I mean  everything bad about Obsidian games is the publishers' fault, and everything good is all Obsidian. vice versa for BIO.

 

It wasn't BIO who made BG series popular, afterall.. it was BIS/Interplay. LMAO

 

That's... exaggerating. The Bioware hate has become so intense because they had three games which were started basically on the same cycle (DA2, ME3, and TOR) which happened after the acquisition and basically followed a very similar template for what their goals were. A lot of people hated those, and they landed one after another with no room for Bioware or EA to adjust for the backlash the last one received. DA2 was a dud, but they were too far in Mass Effect 3 to make sure that didn't garner a similar response, and The Old Republic isn't even a similar type of game so you can't adjust for expectation at all there. Basically, Bioware has been in the dog house for the last couple of years, while Obsidian's stock has risen significantly with gamers. If DA3 is more in line with typical expectations, then everyone will go right back to singing their praises, even on this board.

 

Aaaand I've never heard that last one before. Unless that's the joke, that's just way beyond the realm of reality.

[Bryy]

Nope, last one is real. People ask them all the time on their forums how horrible EA is treating them.

[Nepenthe]

Bioware´s success + acquisition by EA and suddenly stuff that A) happened before B) didn't lead to much of a splash suddenly became a symbol of how EA was RUINING Bioware and how the games now lack "soul". The EA haters and gaming hipsters (such as they are two different groups in the first place) found a unifying symbol.

 

Meanwhile, I look back and think that, maybe apart from the ME3 ending, nothing Bioware has released since the acquisition has been as dire as, say, NWN OC.

[Bryy]

Oh, also "Money = Bad" is also in effect here.