DA 4 Romances! New info for real this time!!! Zom-bangin'?

This. I always got the impression that Leliana knew the truth about Blackwall all along, and keeping his secret is well within her character; Softened Leliana could support Thom Rainier's quest for redemption, while Hardened sees him as a convenient tool to use and discard if necessary.

In dead seriousness, it’s a bit less worldbreaking in Thedas due to shades. Chances are, the Fade is farting out a lot more shades than we think it is. Cole didn’t know he was a spirit at the beginning. He was extraordinarily lucky to befriend a spirit healer, probably one of the few Andrastians in Thedas who could figure that out.

Suppose a shade didn’t have Rhys to explain. They’d probably figure, welp, I’m a normal person, now time to use my normal person powers to teleport onto the ceiling so I can ambush travelers.

If there are a bunch of shades wandering about, there could be lots of adults who leapfrogged right over childhood.

First of all, kids should voice kids. I have a huge pet peeve about hiring adults to voice kids; it always sounds fake.

And yeah, I agree it's IMMENSELY world-breaking to have no kids in a game. Now I know some of y'all hate kids, and it's like, the super cool thing to be all "ew, babies!" or whatever. But seriously. Children exist. It's just the nerds who make video games seem to have as hard a time making kids as they do shit like hair and eyebrows.

I love the kids in Skyrim. They're just running around, playing, being dumb kids. Some are sweet, some are jerks. Kids can be part of a quest. Have to rescue the kid or something. Or isn't there a kid in DAO with the cat demon? Or something.

I love animals, too. For once I'd like a pet cat as opposed to a pet dog though. And useful horses, and that actually look and move like horses. Not sure anyone at BioWare's ever actually seen a horse. Again, Skyrim horses are the best. I love it when they look at you with their big goofy eyes, and stomp the ground, and swish their tails.

I don't think the Nightmare suggested anything of the sort. After all, the plan never was to end the Blight. That was just the story given to the Wardens by Erimond when they all thought they were hearing their Calling, which was a false calling amplified by the Nightmare demon. The whole plan was to get Corypheus a demon army under his control and that would create an enormous amount of fear as they conquered across the south, which the demon could feed on.



It is possible that he doesn't have the same objection to demons, which are spirits that have already been corrupted from their true purpose, but the fact that Solas is so upset about what the Wardens were thinking of doing with them does suggest that he both knows the truth about the Blight and killing the last two arch-demons would be a very bad idea.

Maybe the blight made everyone sterile!.

Dragon Age: Obstetrician

Look, I don't know all the names for the different kinds of doctors.

In all seriousness, I have no problem with child characters, they can be written well or poorly, just like adults. I play a lot of JRPGs, where children are often part of the main party, or even make up most of the party, if you consider "children" to be anyone under 18.

Frankly, this time around, I'd rather the main cast skew younger than older. I don't really relate to all the hyper-successful individuals in DAI who are all heads of their own organizations and shit. I ate two bowls of jell-o today.

There are plenty of adult NPCs in the games that we cannot interact with one way or the other, should Bioware get rid of all of them? There are plenty of houses with nothing we can use, should Bioware delete those too? Since the devs won't program proper swimming, should they delete all the lakes and oceans? Interactivity is a good thing in video games, but not when it comes at the expense of believable, living world. Even if you personally have nothing to do with them, the noticeable existence of children in a large and epic story is part of that. 

Good point, BW games should learn how to talk to strangers, steal brooms, and swim, before they decide to have kids. But only if they want to.

So which is it? Do you want more Chosen Ones and inherently special people? Or normal human beings, when thrust into extraordinary circumstances, could possibly rise to the occasion? Why can't we have both?



Opinions vary. I think Xander rules .

TWO whole bowls?! I hope I'm that spry at your age #lifegoals

I don't see how I've contradicted myself, though I'll concede that Buffy, being a chosen one, was a poor example for comparison. I do not like stories about chosen ones. My point was that Buffy has a lot going on, character-wise, while in every episode of the show that I ever saw, Xander did not (the excuse for his presence being that he is the 'heart' of the group, which I do not like).

I don't like stories that focus on the upper echelons of society, as if only they have anything interesting going on in their lives. I don't like stories about prophesied chosen ones either. That is NOT the same as saying I don't want characters to ever be "special". Major characters, and protagonists in particular, should ALWAYS be special. There is a reason the protagonist is the protagonist: because they have the capability to do what the story requires of them. That is literally their entire function.

"Special" does not have to mean high-born or prophesied. A character can be special because they see a problem and decide to be proactive about solving it. They can be special because they are skilled or talented, or because they are uniquely brave or compassionate. Ideally, these characters are never chosen, rather they choose themselves. They get involved because they have a personal stake.

The problem with Blackwall isn't that he lacks any of these characteristics, (he clearly possesses at least a couple), it's that he has no personal stake, which is already true of at least half the party. That's what I mean when I say "what the hell is he even doing here?" I'm not confused about his character motivations, I'm confused about why the story needs him, and why he needs the story. Dorian, Vivienne, Solas and Varric all have a personal stake in the game; something specific they hope to acheive by joining the Inquisition. A case can also be made for Iron Bull, but it's weak in my opinion. Cassandra, Sera, Cole and Blackwall's motivations can essentially be boiled down to "It's the right thing to do (tm)", and out of those characters, only Cole has an interesting enough character hook for me to want to keep him around. Obviously other people disagree, and 'disgraced knight on the lam' is a character hook I could potentially get behind in other circumstances, but even though I dislike over-acheiving, super-special characters, Dragon Age unfortunately HAS them, and they hog my attention because of course they do, that is what they were made for.

To sum up, my criteria for a good major character are as follows:

1) A character hook that makes them interesting in their own right.
2) A personal motivation that is directly tied to the core conflict; a reason for them to be there.
3) Something that makes them indispensable to the protagonist (and thus the story), ie, unique skills, knowledge or tools.

Whether Blackwall satisfies criteria 1 is entirely subjective, but given that he is a totally optional character, it's basically impossible for him to satisfy the other two.

Ergo, I dislike him. As I dislike the vast majority of Inquisition's main cast. I do not possess particular hate for Blackwall. It's just that he was the topic of conversation at the time.