Julilla
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 335 Likes: 901
inherit
415
0
Sept 26, 2024 22:00:50 GMT
901
Julilla
335
August 2016
julilla
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Julilla on Jan 27, 2017 22:19:49 GMT
Interesting discussions. One of the things I liked about Origins was the ability to snark out on someone or tell them they were wrong. I honestly think we'd have gotten more of that if they'd known that the option of playing other races was going to be a thing. Instead, I believe, they originally thought they'd only be able to do the human Inquisitor. And unfortunately, you can tell. There should be a lot more options for elves or dwarves or Tal Vashoth to be able to tell people off for being racist assholes. I will definitely agree with that.
One of the ways that this lack of time?/planning?/understanding? is blatantly obvious to me is when Solas tells you the Evanuris were *only* powerful mages. This made me, a Pagan polytheist, crazy. Because what is a God but a powerful mage? Powerful mage is pretty much *the* definition of a God. Now, I'm not going to insist I know what religious background PW comes from, but this screams "monotheist who only has one definition of Deity as omnipotent and omniscient Universal creator". It certainly is not anything that would even make my Dalish polytheist blink or feel like this was any sort of revelation. "Mythal was a super powerful mage? That's pretty obvious. And?" There is nothing in that statement that would have shaken her faith. The only thing that would have, maybe, was that they weren't so nice all the time, and the irony of the meaning of the vallaslin. But again, this is the nature of Gods, they're not all sunshine and rainbows coming out of unicorn's asses.
I would have much preferred it if Solas had censured the Evanuris for being petty or power hungry, or really, the actual thing that he doesn't like them for instead of tacking in the whole "they're not Gods" spiel. I wish there was a lot more nuance in the discussions revolving around divinity. We get a lot of that nuance with Andraste, I think, but the elves, no. And that's a huge shame because there are many many ways to understand Deity/ies, and many lenses with which They can be viewed. Monotheism and agnosticism/atheism aren't the only games in town. I know they've said that they wanted this game to make you think about faith. But the options are pretty much limited to three: Rah Rah Chantry!; I Just Don't Know; and You're All Delusional.
Finally, the effect of the "Evanuris are only powerful mages" crap is that now monotheist humans of Thedas can continue to live in their delusional "everything else is demons" fog and continue to persecute the Other, despite the very real shit that is about to go down. Also, it makes elf hating players even more insufferable, for which I could really just smack you, BW.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1620
0
Sept 29, 2024 7:27:55 GMT
Deleted
0
Sept 29, 2024 7:27:55 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2017 22:20:34 GMT
Well in Solas' case, he was definitely and obviously supposed to come off as a major hypocrite due to the (understandable, considering his backstory) fact that he desperately tries to see what he wants/needs to see. I feel Sera kind of gets away with a lot in comparison, but it possibly feels that way because we never really get a sensible basis for her extreme disdain for the Dalish, and it looks extremely silly considering she stands for sticking up for the oppressed at all costs. So it looks like she hates for no real reason and any time you try to call her on it or at least look for a true reason, she just dislikes you. And then yeah, Pride Cookies tm. It definitely could have been handled better. Her hatred towards the dalish and elves in general come from her self hatred for being an elf. She was raised by humans who on average have a very low opinion of elves and so they looked down on her for being an elf. Also city elves don't take to kindly to elves who try to integrate into human society and so they wouldn't be to accepting of her for being raised by humans. She's not elfy enough for the elves and she's an elf to the humans, but since she was raised by humans she wants to be accepted by them and a way to do that is to put as much distance between her and other elves as possible. To help do this, she puts elves down "Stupid elves, they should stop whining so much." as a way to say "See humans, I'm different! Accept me." The dalish just happens to be the epitome of elfyness so she is of course going to hate them. Perhaps she also hates them because they have embraced their elfyness and are comfortable with who they are, even having pride in it, while Sera feels shamed and insecure with her being an elf. "I hate myself for being an elf, so you should hate yourselves for being an elf too." I can only kind see Sera really getting along with an elf who self-flagellate themselves for being an elf. She doesn't really stand up for the oppressed. Red Jenny is really about sticking it to nobles, not helping the oppressed. She wants to hurt nobles, not help people. Its just empty rhetoric because it makes her feel good.
|
|
inherit
Resident Diplomat
526
0
8,896
Natashina
In lurking mode, playing the ME games.
2,340
August 2016
natashina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights
16,553
19,139
|
Post by Natashina on Jan 27, 2017 22:30:35 GMT
|
|
midnight tea
Twitter Guru
gateway beverage
Posts: 7,982 Likes: 19,475
inherit
gateway beverage
109
0
19,475
midnight tea
7,982
August 2016
midnighttea
|
Post by midnight tea on Jan 27, 2017 22:48:48 GMT
You say that Sera gets more considerate if the Inquisitor takes care of the relationship but only on her terms. There's a difference between 'getting more considerate' and 'becoming accepting and loving with no strings attached' or whatever position you're trying to strawman me into. I did underline that Sera still has ways to go and it takes her time to get there. Tell me - is she really that different with magic or mages? Or Cole? Up until the very end she doesn't modify her stance on them (probably changes when Trespsser arrives, especially with Dagna as her girlfriend), even though she knew and befriended more than a few. Sera is terrified of magic and anything she finds related to it, or to admit that the world is bit more complicated than she thinks it is - so it's really no surprise that she has a reaction to ToM revelation she has. She may gloat that 'elves are no better than anyone else' (and hey, it's not like she's not right in that small regard), but everything else is just pure rejection, because things we've found in ToM DON'T really conform to her worldview any better than they conform to worldview of the Dalish. So she may be glaringly insensitive about the whole thing, but it's obvious that she struggles with it hard on some levels as well, and her first reaction to it is just flat-out denial. Who exactly does Sera identifies with? Because a rather big deal is made out of Sera NOT even knowing who she identifies with. What, really? "Pride cookies" don't explain everything? How she felt ostracized even by her adoptive mother? How she felt horrible for making that baker's life miserable for wrongly-perceived wrongdoing and basically pushed that out of her mind, and the whole scene was her confronting that reality? How she has no idea who she is, because everyone basically kept telling her that there's something wrong with her and expecting rejection from Inquisitor too? And while I don't romance Sera with Lavellan, I don't really find it that hard to befriend her - you net quite a bit of approval if you take her to the party and do quests that help 'little people' or do War Table missions that help Red Jennies, and generally approves of things that help common folk. I don't mind "giving in" to helping people - she also tolerates biting back quite well. In fact, when Sera yells at Dalish Inky for trying to say that there might be some truth in what they've found in ToM AND be a Herald of Andraste at the same time and saying that it's simply stupid, Inky biting back that that never stopped Sera so they're in good company actually gains her approval. Right - despite Solas immediately apologizing to Lavellan if they make a good point at the beginning of the game, later amending his stance on Dalish if he's impressed by Inky enough and saying that for all he criticizes about the Dalish, he ADMIRES their indomitable spirit? False pride, ey? More like cherrypicking. Considering that we know that Solas's agents have infiltrated Dalish clans long before he woke up (Felassan, yo) and we don't even know how much he saw in the Fade, it's quite a stretch to claim that his observations are based on just two clans. And Sera doesn't just criticize the Dalish, but what she considers 'elfy elves' - and we don't even know the extend of her experience with the Dalish. Don't you find it peculiar that in JoH she knew who Ghilan'nan was? You think that she just knew that fact when she was born? That she knows how living in alienage is? She obviously has some experiences, she just doesn't like to talk about that, and if we can hardly squeeze her birthplace from her, we're not getting her full experience with any 'elfy elves' she had. Seriously now - why do you keep limiting the whole thing to the Dalish, when Sera's beef is not with Dalish per se, but 'elfy elves' and all those who she perceives as being forceful about what an elf is and how they should properly identify? Solas is NOT Dalish, he demonstrably ain't their fan, yet she has problems with him as well and his 'head being crammed 1000 years ago' and being 'all elfy'. So basically, you've created another strawman. Sera doesn't care about Dalish that much, who she has issues with are those she thinks are too preoccupied with ancient history and how to be a 'proper elf' (she makes comments in similar vein about other groups like that as well). You can pretty fairly characterize her for overgeneralizing way too much, or being unfair - what you cannot do is just overfixate on the Dalish.
|
|
Julilla
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 335 Likes: 901
inherit
415
0
Sept 26, 2024 22:00:50 GMT
901
Julilla
335
August 2016
julilla
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Julilla on Jan 27, 2017 23:21:32 GMT
Excellent! Thank you! I missed this discussion!
|
|
inherit
1923
0
6,858
Rynnju
1,417
November 2016
rynnju
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by Rynnju on Jan 28, 2017 0:13:22 GMT
Interesting discussions. One of the things I liked about Origins was the ability to snark out on someone or tell them they were wrong. I honestly think we'd have gotten more of that if they'd known that the option of playing other races was going to be a thing. Instead, I believe, they originally thought they'd only be able to do the human Inquisitor. And unfortunately, you can tell. There should be a lot more options for elves or dwarves or Tal Vashoth to be able to tell people off for being racist assholes. I will definitely agree with that. One of the ways that this lack of time?/planning?/understanding? is blatantly obvious to me is when Solas tells you the Evanuris were *only* powerful mages. This made me, a Pagan polytheist, crazy. Because what is a God but a powerful mage? Powerful mage is pretty much *the* definition of a God. Now, I'm not going to insist I know what religious background PW comes from, but this screams "monotheist who only has one definition of Deity as omnipotent and omniscient Universal creator". It certainly is not anything that would even make my Dalish polytheist blink or feel like this was any sort of revelation. "Mythal was a super powerful mage? That's pretty obvious. And?" There is nothing in that statement that would have shaken her faith. The only thing that would have, maybe, was that they weren't so nice all the time, and the irony of the meaning of the vallaslin. But again, this is the nature of Gods, they're not all sunshine and rainbows coming out of unicorn's asses. I would have much preferred it if Solas had censured the Evanuris for being petty or power hungry, or really, the actual thing that he doesn't like them for instead of tacking in the whole "they're not Gods" spiel. I wish there was a lot more nuance in the discussions revolving around divinity. We get a lot of that nuance with Andraste, I think, but the elves, no. And that's a huge shame because there are many many ways to understand Deity/ies, and many lenses with which They can be viewed. Monotheism and agnosticism/atheism aren't the only games in town. I know they've said that they wanted this game to make you think about faith. But the options are pretty much limited to three: Rah Rah Chantry!; I Just Don't Know; and You're All Delusional. Finally, the effect of the "Evanuris are only powerful mages" crap is that now monotheist humans of Thedas can continue to live in their delusional "everything else is demons" fog and continue to persecute the Other, despite the very real shit that is about to go down. Also, it makes elf hating players even more insufferable, for which I could really just smack you, BW. Well of course Solas would never consider them gods. He appears to have been on their level, acts as if he witnessed their rise to "godhood" from non-gods, and he doesn't consider himself a god, so why would he consider them gods? He rejected that narrative so strongly because they used it to elevate themselves and hurt others. He also gets on them for being power hungry and using their "god status" to manipulate the people around them to gain that power. I'd say that maybe it's just Solas' POV, but I'm thinking it's just that BioWare doesn't intend them to be gods. It might be a faulty idea, but the intent within the story is the intent within the story.
|
|
lobselvith8
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 426 Likes: 496
inherit
581
0
496
lobselvith8
426
August 2016
lobselvith8
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by lobselvith8 on Jan 28, 2017 0:46:40 GMT
Well in Solas' case, he was definitely and obviously supposed to come off as a major hypocrite due to the (understandable, considering his backstory) fact that he desperately tries to see what he wants/needs to see. I feel Sera kind of gets away with a lot in comparison, but it possibly feels that way because we never really get a sensible basis for her extreme disdain for the Dalish, and it looks extremely silly considering she stands for sticking up for the oppressed at all costs. So it looks like she hates for no real reason and any time you try to call her on it or at least look for a true reason, she just dislikes you. And then yeah, Pride Cookies tm. It definitely could have been handled better. I also feel like Sera was kind of used as a mouthpiece for all the less than flattering views many players have about the Dalish. As in she was meant to be cathartic, in that way, thus you can't really argue much with her about it. I've seen many people say they dislike Sera for all but her ripping on the Dalish. Some people really just don't like the Dalish. But why use Sera as a mouthpiece at all? It's not like there was an overwhelming number of players who liked the Dalish, after all (something Gaider criticized in regards to players who sided with mages, for example). Bioware has shown that they will go out of their way to change things to try and make people feel differently about a particular person or a group when they want to. Players pointed out how Leliana came across as anti-mage in "Faith", and Gaider was genuinely surprised when it was pointed out to him; then, Leliana is depicted as staunchly pro-mage in Asunder and is the exemplary pro-mage option in Inquisition. Giselle was heavily criticized over her comments about Dorian following the release of Inquisition, then Trespasser has her apologize for what she said to Dorian two years later simply to try and persuade the fans who disliked her to feel differently about her. Even Alistair's condemnation of the Chantry over their use of lyrium (in a pro-templar commentary) was rectonned, with Grand Cleric Elthina (the face of the local Andrastian Chantry) positioned as the 'good guy' in the next game. Yet people have expressed contempt for the Dalish (sometimes for not buttering the butt of the main character like some groups will do), and Bioware doesn't do anything to try and persuade them to feel differently about them. They even go out of their way to introduce new lore that contradicts previously established lore to vilify them, as with the 'three mage' recton, which doesn't add anything to the story except provide reasons to dislike the Dalish over something that doesn't make any sense. For those of us who were hoping for three-dimensional portrayals and nuanced depictions, it's incredibly frustrating.
|
|
midnight tea
Twitter Guru
gateway beverage
Posts: 7,982 Likes: 19,475
inherit
gateway beverage
109
0
19,475
midnight tea
7,982
August 2016
midnighttea
|
Post by midnight tea on Jan 28, 2017 1:35:22 GMT
One of the ways that this lack of time?/planning?/understanding? is blatantly obvious to me is when Solas tells you the Evanuris were *only* powerful mages. This made me, a Pagan polytheist, crazy. Because what is a God but a powerful mage? Powerful mage is pretty much *the* definition of a God. Now, I'm not going to insist I know what religious background PW comes from, but this screams "monotheist who only has one definition of Deity as omnipotent and omniscient Universal creator". I know that definitions of 'god' differ wildly among people, but no - there's a qualitative difference between that particular God and 'powerful mage'. Just like elephants are grey, but not all grey things are elephants, 'god' can be a powerful mage, but not all powerful mages are gods. (Besides, considering that to many Christians 'magic' is a stuff of evil, I think many of them would be offended if you called God a powerful mage... So do Andrastians if you characterized Maker like that, in fact) Besides, Solas made it VERY clear what he considers a god or not, in conversation with Cassandra: "I believe the elven gods existed, as did the old gods of Tevinter. But I do not think any of them were gods, unless you expand the definition of the word to the point of absurdity. I appreciate the idea of your Maker, a god that does not need to prove his power. I wish more such gods felt the same." Right... in a world where the Avvar consider spirits 'gods'? I think you may be somewhat unfair, or miss the intent of the writers - their intent is to have a discussion of matters of godhood and what it could be. After all, doesn't Morrigan raise the very question of "what is god if a powerful mage" in ToM? And isn't Inquisitor struggling with their position as demigod, fighting a guy who claims is a god? Why shouldn't he be tacking "they're not Gods" spiel, if he doesn't believe that one should expand the definition of god to point of absurdity (or meaninglessness)? And Fen'Harel explained what his beef with Evanuris is - they're 'mortals powerful with magic' and they fashion themselves to be something they're not, in order to distinguish themselves from others and rule them. Solas's argument is that they're not really that different from other 'mortals', aside from level of proficiency in magic (and probably a hefty secret or two). Ergo: if they're basically just powerful Elvhen, it means that other Elvhen are gods as well. So there are two problems with that - either the word becomes meaningless (because practically every elvhen is god on some level), or it creates a world where some people falsely claim that they're different or better than others, which leads straight to bigotry and prejudice. ... So why shouldn't he be fighting the distinction that basically means "I'm better than you and you should worship me for that, you filthy Untermensch"? ... We're actually getting it And I don't think that'll stop in DA4, once we start figuring out more things. a.) Andraste is not a god - Andraste is Maker's prophet. And we know for sure that she was human, or at least began as such. b.) we're only just now finding out details about Evanuris! But even with our paltry knowledge I don't think you can say that Solas or Mythal lack nuance as characters. We actually know more about them than Andraste. Right... because Andrastian faith hasn't been undermined at every possible corner, what with turning out that 'it's actually all about elves!' and 'we live in a world literally created by powerful elf!', or 'oh, the Avvar think that all spirits are gods, how cute... HOLY CRAP, THAT'S A SPIRIT DRAGON AND I DON'T KNOW IF It'S A REAL GOD OR NOT" or "OMG, there's a MONUMENTAL TITAN below the ground that may be responsible for shaping the world to its will on massive scale!" or - and here's the real kicker - "I'm the only one wielding unique power and having strange, near divine luck, and I'm being treated by many people as being as close to god as it is humanely possible." ... or, you know, the very real question of what does it mean to be a god in a world where people have achieved power that at one point was considered godly. Kinda like elves did in ancient past. Kinda like we do in XXI century. Needless to say, I certainly don't agree that DAI doesn't tackle the subject in depth, and I expect more to come.
|
|
lobselvith8
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 426 Likes: 496
inherit
581
0
496
lobselvith8
426
August 2016
lobselvith8
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by lobselvith8 on Jan 28, 2017 1:37:07 GMT
Interesting discussions. One of the things I liked about Origins was the ability to snark out on someone or tell them they were wrong. I honestly think we'd have gotten more of that if they'd known that the option of playing other races was going to be a thing. Instead, I believe, they originally thought they'd only be able to do the human Inquisitor. And unfortunately, you can tell. There should be a lot more options for elves or dwarves or Tal Vashoth to be able to tell people off for being racist assholes. I will definitely agree with that. Yeah, it was nice to have those kind of options in Origins. In Inquisition, I would have liked to give Giselle a retort to her comments about the Chantry's destruction and occupation of the Dales. Or point out in a matter-of-fact way to Harding that the Dalish don't usually interact with Andrastians because humans try and kill the Dalish for being 'heathens', given how the Chantry outlawed the worship of the elven pantheon. Or tell Cassandra how offensive her suggestion was, as if my Dalish elf's religion was so meaningless that it could be molded to include her god on a mere whim. Having a legitimate discussion with Solas, Sera, and Vivienne about the Dalish, rather than a one-sided farce, would have also been nice. One of the ways that this lack of time?/planning?/understanding? is blatantly obvious to me is when Solas tells you the Evanuris were *only* powerful mages. This made me, a Pagan polytheist, crazy. Because what is a God but a powerful mage? Powerful mage is pretty much *the* definition of a God. Now, I'm not going to insist I know what religious background PW comes from, but this screams "monotheist who only has one definition of Deity as omnipotent and omniscient Universal creator". It certainly is not anything that would even make my Dalish polytheist blink or feel like this was any sort of revelation. "Mythal was a super powerful mage? That's pretty obvious. And?" There is nothing in that statement that would have shaken her faith. The only thing that would have, maybe, was that they weren't so nice all the time, and the irony of the meaning of the vallaslin. But again, this is the nature of Gods, they're not all sunshine and rainbows coming out of unicorn's asses. Honestly, I don't see the point in revealing that the Creators are actually one-dimensional villains called the Evanuris. What's the point in invalidating the religion of the Dalish? They already lost their homeland twice, they have to live as nomadic clans to avoid being attacked due to their religion being outlawed by the Chantry, templars hunt them down, and now we have the developers choosing to turn their gods into villainous caricatures. I would have much preferred it if Solas had censured the Evanuris for being petty or power hungry, or really, the actual thing that he doesn't like them for instead of tacking in the whole "they're not Gods" spiel. I wish there was a lot more nuance in the discussions revolving around divinity. We get a lot of that nuance with Andraste, I think, but the elves, no. And that's a huge shame because there are many many ways to understand Deity/ies, and many lenses with which They can be viewed. Monotheism and agnosticism/atheism aren't the only games in town. I know they've said that they wanted this game to make you think about faith. But the options are pretty much limited to three: Rah Rah Chantry!; I Just Don't Know; and You're All Delusional. If this was Obsidian, or even Bethesda, I think the ideological schism between the Creators and Fen'Harel would be much less black and white, and much more complicated and gray. In the same way that Bethesda positioned an ideological divide between the Eastern Brotherhood of Steel and the Railroad over unrestricted artificial intelligence without depicting either group as being villainous, or how Obsidian handled most of the factions in New Vegas and avoided the 'golden path' outcome. Finally, the effect of the "Evanuris are only powerful mages" crap is that now monotheist humans of Thedas can continue to live in their delusional "everything else is demons" fog and continue to persecute the Other, despite the very real shit that is about to go down. Also, it makes elf hating players even more insufferable, for which I could really just smack you, BW. Yeah, the release of Inquisition was a very unpleasant time for BSN; Solas was nice enough to welcome elven fans to the Solas thread to have a place to talk, free of the usual anti-elf trolls who made the rest of the BSN intolerable. Frankly, I strongly dislike how Bioware has handled the Dalish, dwarven, and Avvar faiths.
|
|
inherit
471
0
5,383
ladyiolanthe
3,967
August 2016
ladyiolanthe
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
591
695
|
Post by ladyiolanthe on Jan 28, 2017 1:40:49 GMT
I'm going to play Devil's advocate here for a moment in the "three mages" vs. "trading magically gifted children" debate. Here's a couple of scenarios that might explain the apparent retcon:
1. Minaeve's age at the time of her abandonment Minaeve was 7 years old when she was abandoned. Is it not possible that she didn't really understand why she was abandoned? That in order to fill in that gap of knowledge, that deep-seated pain of being abandoned alone in the wilderness at 7 years old she might have erroneously concluded that it was because she was a mage? Especially once she was taken into human culture and learned how poorly mages are viewed among humans, she might have internalized that and extended it to her clan. Perhaps they had an altogether different reason for abandoning her, or perhaps they didn't abandon her at all. She might have been left behind accidentally, she might have wandered too far on her own and the clan couldn't find her again before they had to move on. They are nomadic and who's to say there wasn't an immediate hazard to the clan that meant they could not linger where a little child was lost?
2. Dalish clans differ from one another Maybe Minaeve's clan does abandon children with magical ability if they have more than three in the clan at once - but that doesn't mean what Merrill told Hawke was wrong or that BioWare retconned that information. Merrill's clan might well trade excess magically gifted children to other clans who have none while Minaeve's abandons them. They're different clans. They have different cultures.
|
|
lobselvith8
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 426 Likes: 496
inherit
581
0
496
lobselvith8
426
August 2016
lobselvith8
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by lobselvith8 on Jan 28, 2017 1:47:21 GMT
I'm going to play Devil's advocate here for a moment in the "three mages" vs. "trading magically gifted children" debate. Here's a couple of scenarios that might explain the apparent retcon: 1. Minaeve's age at the time of her abandonment Minaeve was 7 years old when she was abandoned. Is it not possible that she didn't really understand why she was abandoned? That in order to fill in that gap of knowledge, that deep-seated pain of being abandoned alone in the wilderness at 7 years old she might have erroneously concluded that it was because she was a mage? Especially once she was taken into human culture and learned how poorly mages are viewed among humans, she might have internalized that and extended it to her clan. Perhaps they had an altogether different reason for abandoning her, or perhaps they didn't abandon her at all. She might have been left behind accidentally, she might have wandered too far on her own and the clan couldn't find her again before they had to move on. They are nomadic and who's to say there wasn't an immediate hazard to the clan that meant they could not linger where a little child was lost? 2. Dalish clans differ from one another Maybe Minaeve's clan does abandon children with magical ability if they have more than three in the clan at once - but that doesn't mean what Merrill told Hawke was wrong or that BioWare retconned that information. Merrill's clan might well trade excess magically gifted children to other clans who have none while Minaeve's abandons them. They're different clans. They have different cultures. If Merrill's own backstory involves addressing that the reason that mages are moved between clans is because magic is dying out among the Dalish, I don't think the recton can be properly explained within the context of the world that was established pre-Inquisition. By any measure, it's going to necessitate ignoring some level of previously established lore.
|
|
inherit
471
0
5,383
ladyiolanthe
3,967
August 2016
ladyiolanthe
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
591
695
|
Post by ladyiolanthe on Jan 28, 2017 1:50:30 GMT
And if you are correct in this assumption, that certainly negates the second scenario I proposed, but not the first.
|
|
lobselvith8
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 426 Likes: 496
inherit
581
0
496
lobselvith8
426
August 2016
lobselvith8
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by lobselvith8 on Jan 28, 2017 1:56:22 GMT
And if you are correct in this assumption, that certainly negates the second scenario I proposed, but not the first. True. There actually is a story involving Minaeve predicated on this very premise.
|
|
midnight tea
Twitter Guru
gateway beverage
Posts: 7,982 Likes: 19,475
inherit
gateway beverage
109
0
19,475
midnight tea
7,982
August 2016
midnighttea
|
Post by midnight tea on Jan 28, 2017 2:33:32 GMT
Well in Solas' case, he was definitely and obviously supposed to come off as a major hypocrite due to the (understandable, considering his backstory) fact that he desperately tries to see what he wants/needs to see. I feel Sera kind of gets away with a lot in comparison, but it possibly feels that way because we never really get a sensible basis for her extreme disdain for the Dalish, and it looks extremely silly considering she stands for sticking up for the oppressed at all costs. So it looks like she hates for no real reason and any time you try to call her on it or at least look for a true reason, she just dislikes you. And then yeah, Pride Cookies tm. It definitely could have been handled better. I also feel like Sera was kind of used as a mouthpiece for all the less than flattering views many players have about the Dalish. As in she was meant to be cathartic, in that way, thus you can't really argue much with her about it. I've seen many people say they dislike Sera for all but her ripping on the Dalish. Some people really just don't like the Dalish. But why use Sera as a mouthpiece at all? It's not like there was an overwhelming number of players who liked the Dalish, after all (something Gaider criticized in regards to players who sided with mages, for example). Sera's beef is not just with the Dalish per se. If it was, why would she criticize Solas, who's not fan of Dalish himself? Her beef is with anyone who forces certain stereotypes on people - she grumbles on anyone who even attempts to categorize her in any fashion, elf or human alike. She grumbles at elves for telling her how she should be as an elf. She grumbles at humans or else for making assumption about her just because she has pointy ears (which is about the same thing Solas does). She grumbles at Iron Bull for immediately telling her that she's not a Qun convert material. She even grumbles at Cassandra when Cass questions her approach to religion ("What, I don't belong because I never joined some holy whatever?"). Aaaand she grumbles at nobles for putting people in categories and thinking that they're in better one than 'little people'. Her argument has always been that ultimately all people are not really that different from one another. That she's highly opinionated about certain groups or not exactly eloquent on the matter doesn't really help her message, but that doesn't change the fact that in its heart it's not a bad message. Sera cares about people - she just dislikes when they create barriers between themselves. That's not to say that her assessment of the Dalish or elves is all fair and objective - and I will not ever understand why her comments about certain subject are treated as if the BW has specifically conspired to target the Dalish and hence make players dislike Dalish more. As if Sera didn't have any other controversial or polarizing opinions about anything - noooo, she absolutely LOVES magic, spirits and mages! She's entirely not blasphemous when it comes to her take on what it means to be an Andrastian! Sh doesn't make any insensitive comments about any other topic whatsoever! I mean, let's get real here - Sera is just an immature little brat, who ultimately has her heart in a good place, but needs quite a bit of guidance for it to grow and is no more a mouthpiece than any other companion. If Gaider was surprised that Leliana's pro-mage position didn't come across in DAO, then they didn't "change Leliana to be pro-mage" as much as they've corrected her not coming across as one. Basically, it's a wrong example. And Sera apologized to Dalish Inquisitor and figured she was too hard on the whole thing, while Varric literally tells Lavellan who saved her/his clan that he's working with Wycome to help the clan Lavellan gain political muscle... why do you bring Giselle, but omit that? Oh, you mean the same Elthina who was there to be blown up? The one Cleric we should feel sympathy for in order to make people less sympathetic or have more complicated feelings towards Andes - you know, the one who fought for mages? Basically, that's like a counter-argument to your whole position. ... As if people didn't express contempt for mages In fact I heard the EXACT same thing from staunchly pro-mage camp, especially on BW Prime: "why does BW hates mages so much now? Why does it keep introducing sympathetic Templars or mages with questionable motifs? Why are there mages that are reluctant to go with the whole revolution (nevermind that mages were never united in terms of their approach to Circle or relationship with Chantry)? Why is Vivienne here, with her contempt towards revolting mages, and why is SHE allowed to gain such powerful position?" Not to mention people readily comparing Solas to Anders, whose way to help mages/magic is considered to be bringing more harm than good, and so on and so forth. See, that's what you get for narrowing your focus to a specific group you care about - you lose a big picture and become convinced that it's YOUR favorite group that is being specifically targeted. Nevermind that Sera has as much, if not way bigger, problem with magic, mages and spirits, as she has with 'elfy elves' and we hardly ever see here coming to grips with that - nope, she obviously hates Dalish the most. Nevermind that we have already seen the Dalish exchanging mages among themselves, which opens the field to introduce three mage rule without violating the established lore. Nevermind all the positive portrayals in Inquisition, spanning from cautious, but friendly clan on Exalted Plains who is shown to behave honorably, to incredible sacrifice of Ameridan the existence of whom flies in the face of lies and scrubbing of history by the Chantry/human scholars from elves or mages alike, and of course who can forget: the Dalish PC who can become an exemplary leader - nope, all we get is stuff that vilifies the Dalish
|
|
lobselvith8
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 426 Likes: 496
inherit
581
0
496
lobselvith8
426
August 2016
lobselvith8
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by lobselvith8 on Jan 28, 2017 2:56:35 GMT
But why use Sera as a mouthpiece at all? It's not like there was an overwhelming number of players who liked the Dalish, after all (something Gaider criticized in regards to players who sided with mages, for example). Sera's beef is not just with the Dalish per se. If it was, why would she criticize Solas, who's not fan of Dalish himself? No one said Sera only took umbrage with the Dalish. That's not to say that her assessment of the Dalish or elves is all fair and objective - and I will not ever understand why her comments about certain subject are treated as if the BW has specifically conspired to target the Dalish and hence make players dislike Dalish more. People address that there are an incessant amount of negative comments aimed at the Dalish, and very little positive ones throughout the entire game, which is why I'm not the only person who has brought it up. That tends to be the reason why Sera is sometimes brought up. Bioware has shown that they will go out of their way to change things to try and make people feel differently about a particular person or a group when they want to. Players pointed out how Leliana came across as anti-mage in "Faith", and Gaider was genuinely surprised when it was pointed out to him; then, Leliana is depicted as staunchly pro-mage in Asunder and is the exemplary pro-mage option in Inquisition. If Gaider was surprised that Leliana's pro-mage position didn't come across in DAO, then they didn't "change Leliana to be pro-mage" as much as they've corrected her not coming across as one. Basically, it's a wrong example. If the example illustrates how Bioware will go out of their way for a particular Andrastian character, then it isn't a 'wrong example', particularly given Leliana's characterization in "Faith" years after DA:O. Giselle was heavily criticized over her comments about Dorian following the release of Inquisition, then Trespasser has her apologize for what she said to Dorian two years later simply to try and persuade the fans who disliked her to feel differently about her. And Sera apologized to Dalish Inquisitor and figured she was too hard on the whole thing, while Varric literally tells Lavellan who saved her/his clan that he's working with Wycome to help the clan Lavellan gain political muscle... why do you bring Giselle, but omit that? Because it's an example of Bioware trying to persuade people to feel differently about a character by having her retract the very statement that made some fans dislike her. That's also why I don't understand the point behind bringing up Varric. Varric has been generally liked across Dragon Age II and Inquisition, so I'm not sure why you even brought him up; it's not like people were criticizing him before. Sera's retraction in Trespasser could be the result of the response towards her in Inquisition, since the pre-release comments about Sera seemed to indicate that the developers thought she would be liked unanimously as someone who was not being your 'typical' elf, which wasn't the case. Even Alistair's condemnation of the Chantry over their use of lyrium (in a pro-templar commentary) was rectonned, with Grand Cleric Elthina (the face of the local Andrastian Chantry) positioned as the 'good guy' in the next game. Oh, you mean the same Elthina who was there to be blown up? The one Cleric we should feel sympathy for in order to make people less sympathetic or have more complicated feelings towards Andes - you know, the one who fought for mages? Basically, that's like a counter-argument to your whole position. So you tried to disagree with my point that the developers used her to change how people feel about the Chantry by saying the developers used her as someone who should elicit sympathy for the loss of the Kirkwall Chantry? That's not actually a counter-argument. Yet people have expressed contempt for the Dalish (sometimes for not buttering the butt of the main character like some groups will do), and Bioware doesn't do anything to try and persuade them to feel differently about them. They even go out of their way to introduce new lore that contradicts previously established lore to vilify them, as with the 'three mage' recton, which doesn't add anything to the story except provide reasons to dislike the Dalish over something that doesn't make any sense. For those of us who were hoping for three-dimensional portrayals and nuanced depictions, it's incredibly frustrating ... As if people didn't express contempt for mages In fact I heard the EXACT same thing from staunchly pro-mage camp, especially on BW Prime: "why does BW hates mages so much now? Why does it keep introducing sympathetic Templars or mages with questionable motifs? Why are there mages that are reluctant to go with the whole revolution (nevermind that mages were never united in terms of their approach to Circle or relationship with Chantry)? Why is Vivienne here, with her contempt towards revolting mages, and why is SHE allowed to gain such powerful position?" Not to mention people readily comparing Solas to Anders, whose way to help mages/magic is considered to be bringing more harm than good, and so on and so forth. Considering Gaider posted that he felt people sided with mages 'by default', that's not really comparable. It's not a matter for debate whether some developers dislike how a lot of players sided with the mages because the former lead writer expressed that very sentiment. There's also a stark difference between incessant negativity towards the Dalish, with very little positivity, and having two ideologically opposed groups who disagree with one another, as we see with the Mage-Templar War. See, that's what you get for narrowing your focus to a specific group you care about - you lose a big picture and become convinced that it's YOUR favorite group that is being specifically targeted. I haven't yet been brought to the point where I'm inclined to share your view, so I don't actually see it. Nevermind that we have already seen the Dalish exchanging mages among themselves, which opens the field to introduce three mage rule without violating the established lore. Except mage exchange between clans was explained as a result of magic dying out among the Dalish, so it does violate established lore. Nevermind all the positive portrayals in Inquisition, spanning from cautious, but friendly clan on Exalted Plains who is shown to behave honorably, to incredible sacrifice of Ameridan the existence of whom flies in the face of lies and scrubbing of history by the Chantry/human scholars from elves or mages alike, and of course who can forget: the Dalish PC who can become an exemplary leader - nope, all we get is stuff that vilifies the Dalish The issue is the lack of balance. Easy to miss wartable operations where Clan Lavellan can easily die are very, very different from incessant, repeated negative comments, many of which are mandatory, and with certain scenes where you're cut off from saying anything while the negativity continues uninterrupted. Also, Hawen is framed as being close-minded for not trusting your Andrastian ties or the Inquisition because the game never bothers to actually explain why his clan would be cautious about an Andrastian organization, much in the same way the introductory scene with Clan Sabrae completely ignores why the Dalish would be extremely apprehensive of strangers to instead mock them through dialogue from Varric and Fenris. It's the reason why some people still don't realize that the Dalish are nomadic as a matter of survival. Most importantly, Ameridan isn't Dalish.
|
|
melbella
N7
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: melbella
Prime Posts: 2186
Prime Likes: 5778
Posts: 8,196 Likes: 25,358
inherit
214
0
Sept 29, 2024 3:12:53 GMT
25,358
melbella
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
8,196
August 2016
melbella
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
melbella
2186
5778
|
Post by melbella on Jan 28, 2017 2:59:44 GMT
I'd use pre-Inquisition lore to ignore mage limitations, as with Merrill's codex and dialogues: "As each generation passes, magic becomes more rare among the Dalish. As the gift dies out, talented children are moved between clans so that every Keeper has a successor, and no clan is in danger of being left without guidance." Head-canon: whenever anyone thought they heard any Dalish speaking about 3 mages per clan, it wasn't in the context of wanting no more than 3, but actually wanting to have at least 3. So yeah, everyone in Thedas has poor hearing and listening skills.
Considering people like Sera and Vivienne hardly let you get a word in edgewise, it's not surprising they have no idea what they're talking about. And Dalish totally lied to Iron Bull about why she left her clan.
<end head-canon>
|
|
midnight tea
Twitter Guru
gateway beverage
Posts: 7,982 Likes: 19,475
inherit
gateway beverage
109
0
19,475
midnight tea
7,982
August 2016
midnighttea
|
Post by midnight tea on Jan 28, 2017 3:07:53 GMT
I'm going to play Devil's advocate here for a moment in the "three mages" vs. "trading magically gifted children" debate. Here's a couple of scenarios that might explain the apparent retcon: 1. Minaeve's age at the time of her abandonment Minaeve was 7 years old when she was abandoned. Is it not possible that she didn't really understand why she was abandoned? That in order to fill in that gap of knowledge, that deep-seated pain of being abandoned alone in the wilderness at 7 years old she might have erroneously concluded that it was because she was a mage? Especially once she was taken into human culture and learned how poorly mages are viewed among humans, she might have internalized that and extended it to her clan. Perhaps they had an altogether different reason for abandoning her, or perhaps they didn't abandon her at all. She might have been left behind accidentally, she might have wandered too far on her own and the clan couldn't find her again before they had to move on. They are nomadic and who's to say there wasn't an immediate hazard to the clan that meant they could not linger where a little child was lost? 2. Dalish clans differ from one anotherMaybe Minaeve's clan does abandon children with magical ability if they have more than three in the clan at once - but that doesn't mean what Merrill told Hawke was wrong or that BioWare retconned that information. Merrill's clan might well trade excess magically gifted children to other clans who have none while Minaeve's abandons them. They're different clans. They have different cultures. That Dalish differ from another is free to infer form all the different ways other clans treat their mages, or members. And if we play Lavellans, they *explicitly state* to Minaeve that their policy is different, and in fact more similar to Alerion/Sabrae clan tradition of exchanging gifted children. Hence I'm really not sure why there's so much controversy. Just because Inquisition is the first game we come in touch with such internal clan politics doesn't automatically make it a retcon. We know that clans differ between one another ever since DAO and some of them have highly questionable traditions or do questionable stuff - you just have to read codex entry on Dalish elves if the Warden is not Dalish: it's Genitivi's record of his encounter with the Dalish 'bandits', as he calls them, that just straightforward attacked a merchant caravan and killed nearly anyone, then looted as many valuables and supplies as they could carry. Now, I'm not saying that Genitivi ain't biased, but we know him as character and he ain't one to fabricate events. A codex on Zathrian also pokes fun of Dalish and Arlathven, humorously mentioning that the true reason why clans go their ways is because hahrens can't stand one another, and most councils actually end up with furious shouting, rather than corroborating lore. And that's what Dalish Warden's codex says, not the 'outsider' ones, so it's actually insider knowledge! Speaking of Zathrian - while his motives are fully understandable, nobody will really convince me that what Zathrian did is actually justifiable.
|
|
lobselvith8
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 426 Likes: 496
inherit
581
0
496
lobselvith8
426
August 2016
lobselvith8
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by lobselvith8 on Jan 28, 2017 3:14:13 GMT
I'm going to play Devil's advocate here for a moment in the "three mages" vs. "trading magically gifted children" debate. Here's a couple of scenarios that might explain the apparent retcon: 1. Minaeve's age at the time of her abandonment Minaeve was 7 years old when she was abandoned. Is it not possible that she didn't really understand why she was abandoned? That in order to fill in that gap of knowledge, that deep-seated pain of being abandoned alone in the wilderness at 7 years old she might have erroneously concluded that it was because she was a mage? Especially once she was taken into human culture and learned how poorly mages are viewed among humans, she might have internalized that and extended it to her clan. Perhaps they had an altogether different reason for abandoning her, or perhaps they didn't abandon her at all. She might have been left behind accidentally, she might have wandered too far on her own and the clan couldn't find her again before they had to move on. They are nomadic and who's to say there wasn't an immediate hazard to the clan that meant they could not linger where a little child was lost? 2. Dalish clans differ from one anotherMaybe Minaeve's clan does abandon children with magical ability if they have more than three in the clan at once - but that doesn't mean what Merrill told Hawke was wrong or that BioWare retconned that information. Merrill's clan might well trade excess magically gifted children to other clans who have none while Minaeve's abandons them. They're different clans. They have different cultures. That Dalish differ from another is free to infer form all the different ways other clans treat their mages, or members. And if we play Lavellans, they *explicitly state* to Minaeve that their policy is different, and in fact more similar to Alerion/Sabrae clan tradition of exchanging gifted children. Hence I'm really not sure why there's so much controversy. It's simple: it contradicts lore. If magic is dying out among the Dalish, and that's the stated reason why mages are moved between clans to make up for the absence of mages in certain clans, then that's very different than Inquisition's stance that the Dalish limit mages within a clan because they hold Andrastian views on mages. There's also the presence of multiple mages in Zathrian's clan, Velanna's remark about the Dalish holding every elven life as precious because of how few of them there are left, Ariane's comment about her clan accepting an elven Circle mage into her clan, and Merrill's numerous dialogues on the matter, including her finding it completely alien that humans would lock away mages where they can't do any good because that was the antithesis of how the Dalish treat mages since "magic is a gift of the Creators". Just because Inquisition is the first game we come in touch with such internal clan politics doesn't automatically make it a retcon. We know that clans differ between one another ever since DAO and some of them have highly questionable traditions or do questionable stuff - you just have to read codex entry on Dalish elves if the Warden is not Dalish: it's Genitivi's record of his encounter with the Dalish 'bandits', as he calls them, that just straightforward attacked a merchant caravan and killed nearly anyone, then looted as many valuables and supplies as they could carry. Now, I'm not saying that Genitivi ain't biased, but we know him as character and he ain't one to fabricate events. There's a difference between cultural schisms existing between clans who are still meant to be Dalish, and introducing lore to make the Dalish hold Andrastian-style views of mages because, as Iron Bull explains, they lack templars. Speaking of Zathrian - while his motives are fully understandable, nobody will really convince me that what Zathrian did is actually justifiable. I don't think anyone has said it was.
|
|
inherit
1923
0
6,858
Rynnju
1,417
November 2016
rynnju
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by Rynnju on Jan 28, 2017 3:24:44 GMT
Eh, Sera doesn't only take issue with Dalish elves, but the only thing that beats her beef with "elfy elves" is her beef with nobles. That says a lot. In no way does she dislike biased humans as much as she dislikes elves who stay with the elven ways. It's not really comparable. And it's not even truly about anyone trying to force anything on her or acting superior, as she gets angry over it before you ever try to force any "elfy" stereotypes on her. All you have to do is acknowledge her as another elf and she gets testy. Just the idea of Dalish beliefs gets her riled up. That kind of hair-trigger bristling really should have had a better explanation. On another note: since it sounds like I've been ragging on Sera these last few posts, I just want to say that I DO like her. I appreciate her character and the unique viewpoint she gives and I managed to make her my Inquisitor's friend. Sometimes I think that Sera's elf thing was solely there to make her a foil for Solas. I think it was discussed here before that many of the Inquisition team can be read as foils for Solas in a way, and I think I saw a Tumblr post that suggested maybe some characters were specifically crafted to do just that. I'm not sure that's true, but if there was a character that was crafted specifically to be a Solas foil, it's probably Sera.
|
|
lobselvith8
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 426 Likes: 496
inherit
581
0
496
lobselvith8
426
August 2016
lobselvith8
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by lobselvith8 on Jan 28, 2017 3:25:49 GMT
I'd use pre-Inquisition lore to ignore mage limitations, as with Merrill's codex and dialogues: "As each generation passes, magic becomes more rare among the Dalish. As the gift dies out, talented children are moved between clans so that every Keeper has a successor, and no clan is in danger of being left without guidance." Head-canon: whenever anyone thought they heard any Dalish speaking about 3 mages per clan, it wasn't in the context of wanting no more than 3, but actually wanting to have at least 3. So yeah, everyone in Thedas has poor hearing and listening skills.
Considering people like Sera and Vivienne hardly let you get a word in edgewise, it's not surprising they have no idea what they're talking about. And Dalish totally lied to Iron Bull about why she left her clan.
<end head-canon> Heh. It's See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Thedas Edition! I wonder if anyone saw that film...
|
|
inherit
Resident Diplomat
526
0
8,896
Natashina
In lurking mode, playing the ME games.
2,340
August 2016
natashina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights
16,553
19,139
|
Post by Natashina on Jan 28, 2017 3:29:03 GMT
lobselvith8 I did! It has two of my favorite all time comedic actors from the era, Richard Prior and Gene Wilder. I haven't seen it in years, but I probably should. It would be a nice memorial to Gene Wilder without seeing Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory again. Huh, I thought the movie was older but apparently it came out in '89. I think I'm getting old.
|
|
melbella
N7
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: melbella
Prime Posts: 2186
Prime Likes: 5778
Posts: 8,196 Likes: 25,358
inherit
214
0
Sept 29, 2024 3:12:53 GMT
25,358
melbella
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
8,196
August 2016
melbella
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
melbella
2186
5778
|
Post by melbella on Jan 28, 2017 3:35:25 GMT
Eh, Sera doesn't only take issue with Dalish elves, but the only thing that beats her beef with "elfy elves" is her beef with nobles. That says a lot. In no way does she dislike biased humans as much as she dislikes elves who stay with the elven ways. It's not really comparable. And it's not even truly about anyone trying to force anything on her or acting superior, as she gets angry over it before you ever try to force any "elfy" stereotypes on her. All you have to do is acknowledge her as another elf and she gets testy. Just the idea of Dalish beliefs gets her riled up. That kind of hair-trigger bristling really should have had a better explanation. Exactly. Sera doesn't break up with a noble girlfriend who stays a noble (and actually gains a new title thanks to Varric). She doesn't break up with a mage girlfriend who obviously doesn't ever stop being a mage. She only breaks up with an elf girlfriend who refuses to turn away from her heritage. It's definitely all about the elfy with Sera. She's the only character I didn't romance in DAI, and that's a big reason why.
|
|
inherit
Resident Diplomat
526
0
8,896
Natashina
In lurking mode, playing the ME games.
2,340
August 2016
natashina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights
16,553
19,139
|
Post by Natashina on Jan 28, 2017 4:02:32 GMT
With Sera, I don't dislike the character. Not at all. To be honest, I did really dislike her the first time around and that was playing as a dwarf. She kinda grew on me after that, as I started to find her more of an annoying "kid sister" rather than thinking of her as an adult.
I think the big moment was when I took her to do IWH for the first time and she ended up in the Bad Future. If you take her to that mission and find her in her cell, she's damned near in a panic.
Each party member has their own ways of staying sane. Varric hums Bianca's song; Cass has recites the Chant of Light. My favorite is Iron Bull, singing "99 Bottles of Beer on the Wall," which made me laugh despite the truly dark nature of the entire quest.
Poor Sera is trying to sing a nursery rhyme and keeps stumbling. She tells herself, "Stupid! Try to remember. You have your mind and they can't take that." The sheer and utter terror she has when she sees the IQ geninuely broke my heart. It struck me how young she really is and not just mentally. I took her estimated age from about 19 to possibly as young as 16.
That quest alone helped me deal with Sera better as a character. It's embarassing to admit, but the urge to kick her from the party was a purely an emotional response from me as a player after a rather harsh scene. I knew I'd get over it, and I mostly did.
My main problem with much of the current tone is not with Sera. Sera is a good counterbalanace to Solas. Despite her discrimination towards elves, I think she's a pretty progressive character in many ways. "Screw the past, screw submission, why don't we try being ourselves for a change?"
Where my problem is that there is no opposite view for the Dalish at all. Solas has almost nothing but disdain for the modern elves, especially the Dalish. Sera has her own reasons, which to be fair she starts to get over by the time Trespasser comes around.
As a side note, I think the devs intended for her to grow up during the 3 years after Cory was dead all along and that fan reaction had zero to do with it. If she joined the IQ at, say, 17 and defeated Cory at 18, then by Trespasser she's 21. Four years is a long time when you're young and plenty of time to mature.
There should have been a pro-Dalish party member to go along with Sera and Solas. While I loved the lore goodies that came from playing my Lavellan characters, I felt and still feel that the story suffered from a lack of a lot of balance in a point of view.
That being said, I need to remember that much of this information about how awful the gods were comes from Solas. Do I think he's lying? Doubtful, but he would be willing to exaggerate the truth some for his own goals. Or at least let his own emotions get in the way a bit. I also need to remember that Mythal doesn't say anything about the pantheon one way or the other, save that she was betrayed "as the world was betrayed."
The lore changes, well...yeah, they still bug me. Call it cherrypicking, call it what anyone wants to, but I don't like them. I do hope for more of a balance between the Andrastian and Dalish in future games.
|
|
midnight tea
Twitter Guru
gateway beverage
Posts: 7,982 Likes: 19,475
inherit
gateway beverage
109
0
19,475
midnight tea
7,982
August 2016
midnighttea
|
Post by midnight tea on Jan 28, 2017 4:58:33 GMT
Sera's beef is not just with the Dalish per se. If it was, why would she criticize Solas, who's not fan of Dalish himself? No one said Sera only took umbrage with the Dalish. Nobody said it, but certainly implied it. It is entirely wrong example - Gaider's surprise at people interpreting Leliana's stance as anti-mage means that it was a singular incident where her characterization didn't come across as it was intended. Portraying it as something intentional (what does it matter that it was years after DAO? And DA2 is known to be rushed) or making it seem as if later they've used Leliana only or predominantly to underline her pro-mage stance is disingenuous. I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine people occasionally accusing Varric of being racist. But that's beside the point. You've given your example of Giselle to show that either characters are being changed if something in it didn't click for the audience, or that they retract their stance or apologize if the matter at hand is anything other than Dalish. As it happens, Sera modified her stance towards elves and magic and have shown signs of growth. Whether it's "retraction" or just consequence of her maturing is beside the point - she is shown to have changed in positive light and be more positive towards the Dalish and elves in particular. Also - that's the first time I hear that the devs thought that Sera was supposed to be character that was thought to be liked unanimously. Her writing is confrontational from the start, her friendship arc is one of helping her grow up on pretty basic level and all the comments I've read from devs suggest that they expected her to be polarizing. It is - what I'm saying is that you've entirely ignored the context or role in the story in order to try and make it seem as if they've made some sort of bizarre retcons (what, there are no other sympathetic Chantry characters in DAO?) or to suddenly make whole of Chantry into "good guys" for no reason other than to paint them as the "good guys". As it happens, it was not the case. Elthina played a specific role in the narrative. I have a feeling you're not reading what I'm writing... again. If you actually read what wrote, you'd see that I'm not even contesting Gaider's comments. What I've pointed out that, whether Gaider felt that people sided with mages at one point, that is NOT a sentiment as prevalent as it was before and there are people who think that it's the mages who are incessantly shown in more negative than positive light, not the Dalish, never-mind if it's actually true or not. Also - you can't be serious in trying to characterize mages as just an 'ideologically opposed group', when Southern mages are a group that is dealing with TONS of oppression and discrimination ... Like, really? Magic dying out doesn't rule out more mages then necessary occasionally born in one clan or another, or whether Minaeve's clan even had a possibility to exchange mages. And let's not forget that Minaeve was established from the very beginning to be a weak mage - she can't control her gift even after years spent in the Circle and didn't even try to undertaking Harrowing, to which she readily admits. She's basically a 'runt' that has no chance to become First or Second, only a person with an uncontrollable gift and higher risk of possession. It's not really that hard to imagine why a more strict clan would want to get rid of her in favor of filling the quota with someone of more significant talent. It's interesting that you're mentioning "lack of balance", only to focus in 'easy to miss wartable operations' instead of everything else I've mentioned that is NOT a wartable operation. Also - which comments about the Dalish are "mandatory" and what uninterruptible scenes that specifically attack the Dalish and no one else are you talking about? There's a surprising amount of negativity you're finding, yet a complete lack of detail or example to be seen. This is getting absurd - how is Hawen's caution "never bothered to be explained" when you *can't* skip Harding's mandatory description of what happened on Exalted Plains where she mentions elves, we can find monuments of Exalted March on elves all over the place, the whole thing is a WAR ZONE and clan members are being shown both surrounded and fighting off the undead, demons or mentioning that soldiers are hunting their halla? Given the surroundings, it'd be bizarre to frame Hawen as overly-eager or welcoming to Inquisition - it's not like not even a new player doesn't understand immediately, but has basic observation skills, that they could be at least a little suspicious. And also - are you really going to just stubbornly stick to everything that is negative, and simply not acknowledge that both Hawen and the clan warms to Inquisitor if they're alright to them and is shown to be perfectly alright towards them, going as far as sharing secrets found in ruins, gracefully accepting historical records and literally offering an olive branch to people of Red Crossing (who are indeed shown to be close-minded, and the Chantry as manipulative, if we decide to take the documents to Chantry sister)? *sigh*... Even if you'd argue that he's not Dalish in a sense that he's not 'modern Dalish' I struggle to see how he reveal that he's an original Dalish that is a hero who has saved Thedas from terrible danger not something that is tremendously positive for all modern Dalish, both from standpoint of Thedas AND player audience. It is really hard to interpret Ameridan's sacrifice as anything other than heroic and the Chantry/human records wiping of who Ameridan was as injustice to both city elves and Dalish - to deny it strikes me as bizarre, and only seems to prove that you're not just uninterested in finding anything positive - you're actively avoiding it to create a convenient narrative. With such attitude, I'm afraid that there's very little that can be written without the whole argument becoming circular again, so the response will be dependent on the response...
|
|
inherit
2915
0
May 23, 2017 21:44:47 GMT
564
xilizhra
398
Jan 20, 2017 17:07:55 GMT
January 2017
xilizhra
|
Post by xilizhra on Jan 28, 2017 5:12:19 GMT
*sigh*... Even if you'd argue that he's not Dalish in a sense that he's not 'modern Dalish' I struggle to see how he reveal that he's an original Dalish that is a hero who has saved Thedas from terrible danger not something that is tremendously positive for all modern Dalish, both from standpoint of Thedas AND player audience. It is really hard to interpret Ameridan's sacrifice as anything other than heroic and the Chantry/human records wiping of who Ameridan was as injustice to both city elves and Dalish - to deny it strikes me as bizarre, and only seems to prove that you're not just uninterested in finding anything positive - you're actively avoiding it to create a convenient narrative. With such attitude, I'm afraid that there's very little that can be written without the whole argument becoming circular again, so the response will be dependent on the response... I admit, I must ask why he needed to be A. Andrastian, and B. a sucker of Drakon's empiredick.
|
|