inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Jun 22, 2020 22:20:03 GMT
The Avvar make it work, so did the Rivaini seers before the Chantry decided to fuck it up. The Avvar released a dragon-god-demon into the world that Chantry people had to stop. Twice.
And Rivaini seers rule communities of non-mages which is one of the things the Chantry is trying to avoid.
There's nothing inherently wrong with mages being in charge of a community, or with spirits crossing over into the physical realm. I don't give a shit if some individuals behave badly, it's not remotely the same as a system like the Chantry, which deliberately fosters hate and fear in order to maintain it's power, and is abusive by design. But I also have not said anywhere that Thedas should whole-heartedly and unquestioningly adopt the practices of either the Avvar or the Rivaini seers. |
|
Mithras
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 119 Likes: 141
inherit
11355
0
141
Mithras
119
Nov 19, 2019 14:29:21 GMT
November 2019
mithras
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by Mithras on Jun 23, 2020 3:51:47 GMT
There's nothing inherently wrong with mages being in charge of a community, That's very much debatable but we'd have to broach subjects such as a people's right to rule itself rather than be ruled by foreign forces. But, ultimately, without getting into that, you presented the Rivaini as an alternative to the Chantry's laws. However, since the Rivaini practice exactly what the Chantry fears, then they are no more a valid example than Tevinter would be of "mages making it work." If you want to prove that mages can live among non-mages without abusing their power, then you shouldn't cite a society where they automatically rule based on their inborn power.
And I didn't say "the Avvar summon benevolent spirits for a chat before they depart peacefully."
I said that the Avvar summoned a demon into the body of a dragon with the intent of attacking the Orlesian Empire while it was busy saving the world from the Darkspawn. Free mages nearly ended the world. Again.
You are right only in one aspect. A system like the Chantry is not remotely the same as free mages because the Chantry never produced a Corypheus, for one.
Other than that, not only are you wrong in your characterization of the Chantry, the only reason you are able to "not give a shit" if some individuals behave badly is because you don't live in Thedas and thus are in no danger of having your family torn apart by the undead because an 8 year felt bad and hey, look, demon. And you're in no danger of having a sister dragged to the Deep Roads and turned into a Broodmother because 7 mages decided that it'd be neat to check out what's in that city in the Fade. And you're in no danger of being bled out at a party because a Magister felt like performing a trick to entertain his guests. Should I go on?
And I didn't claim you did. Only that these supposed alternative societies where mages can live free without endangering others or ruling over them sure have a lot of mages endangering others and ruling over them.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Jun 23, 2020 4:34:23 GMT
That's very much debatable but we'd have to broach subjects such as a people's right to rule itself rather than be ruled by foreign forces. But, ultimately, without getting into that, you presented the Rivaini as an alternative to the Chantry's laws. However, since the Rivaini practice exactly what the Chantry fears, then they are no more a valid example than Tevinter would be of "mages making it work." If you want to prove that mages can live among non-mages without abusing their power, then you shouldn't cite a society where they automatically rule based on their inborn power. Uh, yes, I am putting forth alternatives to the Chantry, because the Chantry fucking sucks. What the Chantry wants is immaterial to my argument. I'm proposing that people reject the Chantry's supposed authority in the first place, so why would the fears of the Chantry be even remotely relevant, let alone do anything to invalidate my argument? I'm literally saying people should not listen to it anymore. I don't support "automatic rule" of any kind for any reason, but since establishing socialist-democratic republics and free elections across all of Thedas is not actually an option, I'm generally in favour of leaving peaceful, happy societies right the fuck alone, *whether their leaders are mages or not*. The Avvar we've met are happy enough, except they resent the encroachment of Orlais upon their land, and *why the fuck shouldn't they?*, and why shouldn't they use the tools at their disposal? Meanwhile, Rivain was happy to give nominal control to the Chantry and mind its own fucking business, only for their Circle to be annulled without provocation, for daring to let mages live with their own families. Nobody in Rivain was asking the Chantry to come and slaughter their mean spirit mommies. And the only reason there IS a world that humans can inhabit is because of magic and mages, so what's your point? By your logic, the Chantry and non-mages should be grateful to Solas for letting them borrow Thedas for a little while in the first place. For every atrocity committed by a mage or a group of mages, I can counter with exalted marches, multiple genocides, rampant sexual abuse, etc etc, and not just committed by the Chantry against mages, but against non-magical people of every race, by all manner of non-magical rulers, so clearly *magic isn't the problem, and lack of access to magic does nothing to prevent horrific abuse and mass violence*. Somebody resorted to demon summoning to attack the Orlesian Empire? Let me break out my tiny violin! How do you think empires become established in the first place? Did Kordillus Drakon plant a special seed, and his palace sprung up overnight? No, just armies and armies worth of regular, non-magical child murderers and rapists. What a relief. Just generations and generations of withered up, demented old hags declaring unprovoked crusades against anyone who dared to think differently from them. Lol. Now I'm curious. How do you imagine I've characterized the Chantry, and how am I wrong? Yeah, and? I don't see you shedding any tears for the many, many victims of the Chantry's Exalted Marches, or the expansionist wars of Orlais. Hey, guess what. The Chantry happily uses magic and mages to oppress and kill others when it suits them to do so, and given that they will elect Vivienne as Divine under the right circumstances, they clearly don't have any real problem with allowing mages to rule over and endanger others, as long as those mages work for them. So, again, what's your point? |
|
Mithras
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 119 Likes: 141
inherit
11355
0
141
Mithras
119
Nov 19, 2019 14:29:21 GMT
November 2019
mithras
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by Mithras on Jun 23, 2020 17:17:56 GMT
That's very much debatable but we'd have to broach subjects such as a people's right to rule itself rather than be ruled by foreign forces. But, ultimately, without getting into that, you presented the Rivaini as an alternative to the Chantry's laws. However, since the Rivaini practice exactly what the Chantry fears, then they are no more a valid example than Tevinter would be of "mages making it work." If you want to prove that mages can live among non-mages without abusing their power, then you shouldn't cite a society where they automatically rule based on their inborn power. Uh, yes, I am putting forth alternatives to the Chantry, because the Chantry fucking sucks. What the Chantry wants is immaterial to my argument. I'm proposing that people reject the Chantry's supposed authority in the first place, so why would the fears of the Chantry be even remotely relevant, let alone do anything to invalidate my argument? I'm literally saying people should not listen to it anymore. You are moving the goalposts of the conversation. Originally, ClarkKent said that mages are dangerous to which you replied that the Avvar and Rivaini societies work despite having free mages to which I pointed out that they don't work because Avvar and Rivaini mages have proven themselves to be dangerous. And now you've changed your argument from "the free mages of the Avvar and Rivaini aren't dangerous" to a simple "don't listen to the Chantry" without addressing the fact that history has proven that your original argument was wrong.
Now, this is just blatant hypocrisy on multiple accounts. First, you claim that one should leave peaceful, happy societies along and yet you argue for the dismantling of the Chantry despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of people in Southern Thedas, including the mages themselves, are happy with it such as here:
And now I imagine that you will point out to people like the Libertarians as evidence of small groups that are discontent and thus we should just tear society down. However, by that same logic, I can point out that there were likely a number of people in Rivain, such as in Darsmuid who were unhappy with the Seers and thus that justifies slaughtering them. And here is your second hipocrisy. You decry all texts by Chantry historians as suspect such as in here.
However, you are accepting the account of the Annulment of the Circle of Darsmuid as gospel truth despite the fact that it comes from the First Enchanter of that same Circle, who was not a neutral party and who had a vested interest in controlling and obscuring certain facts.
Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy.
No, just like I'm not grateful to Corypheus for creating the Darkspawn which weakened the Imperium enough to allow Andrastes' March to succeed. Just because the actions of evil people lead to good things, that doesn't mean we praise the evil people, but rather the good ones who created good out of their mistakes.
Ok, you seriously need to stop equating the Chantry with the Catholic Church. They are not one and the same.
The only instances of sexual abuse we know of for a fact were Alrik, Karras and someone Cole mentioned once. 3 rapists in 900 years is NOT rampant sexual abuse.
The difference is the ease with which normal people can harm each other compared to the ease with which a mage can do it.
A non-magical person needs to be born with or acquire immense wealth, natural charisma and social standing in order to raise an army, outfit said army and then raze a town to the ground, killing hundreds in a single day. This is awful, of course, but the people with the means of doing that are very few and they face many obstacles in order to accomplish it. It is impossible to police against people's ability to gather together and do bad things.
On the other hand, a mage child can have a bad dream, be possessed, raise an army of undead and kill hundreds by itself.
If a mage child can cause destruction the likes of which it'd take a small army of armed and armored soldiers to do in different circumstances without even meaning to, then obviously the child is the greater danger and people need to be kept safe from it.
Ok, first of all, if you don't give a damn about the lives of innocent Orlesian peasants, then desist on your attempts to claim the moral high ground.
Second, and most importantly of all, during the Second Blight, the forces of the Orlesian Empire were what saved the world from the Darkspawn alongside the Grey Wardens. In this instance, attacking Orlais is the same as helping the Darkspawn. You are literally defending the Blights right now.
And yet, the largest army that the Chantry ever gathered did not even come close to the danger that Corypheus represented to the world because they did not intend to tear down the Veil and release untold numbers of demons on the world while also poisoning it with Red Lyrium.
Corypheus alone is more evil and a greater danger to everyone than every non-mage who ever lived. The guy started the Blights!
Again "Crusades". The Chantry is NOT the Catholic Church.
Who has the Chantry really declared Exalted Marches against? The Dales but only after they had already sacked Val Royeaux and conquered half of Orlais thus killing potentially hundreds of thousands of humans. Not unprovoked.
The Darkspawn. I mean, it's the Darkspawn. Do I really need to explain why there were not unprovoked?
The Tevinter Imperium. These one are the iffiest because they were over religious differences. And yet, it is still the Tevinter Imperium, who has an history of attacking the South. So, these are debatable whether they were provoked or not.
The Qunari after they attacked all of Thedas with the intent of conquering it. Not unprovoked.
The truth is that, while the Chantry has committed crimes over its long history as any organization is likely to, for the most part, they have not ever forced different cultures to convert or die. Here is a quote from World of Thedas: Volume 1 which, btw, is written from off world perspective and thus trustworthy "The old ways are disappearing, but the Chantry does not demand their removal or promote hatred against the old deities. The Maker simply stands above them."
As far I can recall, there are only three instances of the Chantry demanding conversation or death. Two of those were after wars they had not started and one wasn't even really the Chantry but Emperor Drakon.
Spare me the condescension.
I've already explained how, unlike what you claimed, the Chantry doesn't call Exalted Marches for no reasons. Furthermore, the Chantry does not foster hatred or fear. People fear magic because there are good reasons to fear magic but the Chantry itself doesn't even teach people to hate magic, much less mages. They teach that pride is evil and that coupled with magical power can lead to the innocent being harmed, as Mother Giselle explicitly states. Finally, the Circle system is not inherently abusive and can, in fact, provide the mages with great quality of life than the peasantry enjoys if it is working as it should.
No, they don't. I challenge you to find me a single instance in all of the lore of a member of the Chantry ordering a member of the Circle to kill someone. Just one.
Here is what actually happens. Wealthy people in Thedas regularly purchase objects from the Circles, whether these be useful, enchanted ones or just works of art; you can find many examples of this in the lore. During times of war, secular authorities petition the Circle to send mages to fight on their behalf and the mages are free to accept or refuse these requests. The Chantry then intercedes to ensure that the number of mages fighting in that war remains reasonable and that they don't abuse their powers. The few times we've seen more that a couple of Circle-sanctioned mages fighting in wars were against the Darkspawn and Qunari which threatened the entire world. The Chantry has never used the Circle as an attack dog.
|
|
inherit
11247
0
1,639
Buckeldemon
Now stealin' more kidz.
1,200
July 2019
buckeldemon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Buckeldemon on Jun 23, 2020 21:10:07 GMT
Pardon me for swooping in... You are moving the goalposts of the conversation. Originally, ClarkKent said that mages are dangerous to which you replied that the Avvar and Rivaini societies work despite having free mages to which I pointed out that they don't work because Avvar and Rivaini mages have proven themselves to be dangerous. And now you've changed your argument from "the free mages of the Avvar and Rivaini aren't dangerous" to a simple "don't listen to the Chantry" without addressing the fact that history has proven that your original argument was wrong. I think you are missing the point. I took it as "because the Chantry says so" is not a valid argument, to which I agree. However, you are accepting the account of the Annulment of the Circle of Darsmuid as gospel truth despite the fact that it comes from the First Enchanter of that same Circle, who was not a neutral party and who had a vested interest in controlling and obscuring certain facts. You forgot to mention that the codex entry comes fom the F.E.'s diary and that she's dead. In the end, it boils down to confimations bias. Some players are more likely to give the benefit of doubt to one side, others to someone else. I'm more likely to distrust Chantry records because they control the majority of the knowledge and they have a vested interest in promoting their shitty ideology. Ok, you seriously need to stop equating the Chantry with the Catholic Church. Same for you in reverse, though I would expand it to any other christian denomination. The truth is that, while the Chantry has committed crimes over its long history as any organization is likely to, for the most part, they have not ever forced different cultures to convert or die. Here is a quote from World of Thedas: Volume 1 which, btw, is written from off world perspective and thus trustworthy That is your downplayed perspective. If you pulling a pretty vague pasage from secondary material in an attempt to justify cultural genocide, please state the page number as well (WoT1, p.46-47) and write the whole passage. Also, in geneal WoT is quoting codex entries verbatim at times, and otherwise its general style appears to be still subject to source bias to some extent. See the set of corrections in WoT, as it is meant to be written by Genitivi. Here's the complete pasage: The Chantry & Ferelden's animist roots Signs of Ferelden's Alamarri barbarian roots persist, even as the Chantry has taken firm hold of the nation's social order. While chantries stand in almost every village and town, signs of the old deities remains a common sight in Ferelden. Animist symbols still adorn artwork and clothing. Images of wolves commonly decorate military uniforms and flags. Village elders repurpose the old religion's teachings as cauntionary bedtime stories for children. Even some old statues and temples still stand, though many are falling apart or have been converted to other purposes.
The old ways are disappearing, but the Chantry does not demand their removal or promote hatred against the old deities. The Maker simply stands above them.
Notice the underlined parts. There are also various other signs, indirect or passive-aggressive as they might be. Calling others heathens for example.
|
|
Mithras
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 119 Likes: 141
inherit
11355
0
141
Mithras
119
Nov 19, 2019 14:29:21 GMT
November 2019
mithras
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by Mithras on Jun 23, 2020 22:58:52 GMT
I think you are missing the point. I took it as "because the Chantry says so" is not a valid argument, to which I agree. I understand the point he is trying to make, but that is not the original point that started this argument, hence he is moving goalposts.
In truth, I don't think that she is lying. Presenting a biased version of the events? Probably, but not lying. I was simply pointing out the other person's hypocrisy.
I did not feel the need to post the full passage because it does not contradict what I am saying.
You may consider the Andrastenization of Ferelden to be a cultural genocide but the fact is that the Chantry does not "declare unprovoked Crusades against anyone who dares to think differently from them" as the other poster claims.
I do not doubt that there is an air of understated superiority surrounding them but that is a far cry from the tall tales of slaughter being told by pessimistpanda.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Jun 24, 2020 0:17:32 GMT
I never said that magic wasn't dangerous. I said that the Avvar and the Rivaini get along fine without the Chantry swooping in to genocide them for their own good. I proposed that their cultures were worthy of independent study (as in study that doesn't involve the Chantry, because it cannot be trusted), in order to learn the techniques they use to interact with magic and spirits, and that their knowledge could be applied to make ALL OF THEDAS SAFER, without: - fostering an environment of hatred and fear through propaganda - stealing children from their families and communities, to never be seen again - locking them up under the (lol) 'protection' of hateful zealots with swords - subjecting them to a test at adulthood that results in enough deaths to make everyone afraid of undergoing it. (But how is the Circle 'inherently abusive', right?) Not to mention the general overall benefits that naturally come with better understanding of how the world works. The only reason to be against research, or insist that the Chantry oversee it, is if one is a moron who hates science. That the Avvar did a Bad Thing(tm) once upon a time is not actually relevant to the fact that they have, for the past 1000 years, continued to run a working, largely peaceful society that *somehow* manages not to steal children or commit genocide. It doesn't change the fact that there are worthwhile things to learn. Why shouldn't I equate the Chantry with the Catholic Church? It is clearly where BioWare has drawn their inspiration. "Ooh a lady wrote a thing in her diary, that's totally the same thing as the Chantry REMOVING THE CANTICLE OF SHARTAN FROM THE CHANT OF LIGHT AND BURNING TEXTS THAT THEORISE THAT ANDRASTE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A MAGE" "The Chantry has never used mages as an attack dog, except for all those times they totally did, which I'm fine with because even though the Chantry and Qunari are both violent evangelists who put non-believers to the sword, the Chantry resembles White Christianity, so I like it." If you're going to concoct imaginary people who were potentially unhappy with the structures of their native society, in order to justify Chantry interference and invasion, then I get to extrapolate that, in a system where zealots are put in charge of people they are taught to hate, fear, and see as lesser, *there's probably been more than three rapists over the course of 900 years*. "The Dalish had invaded half of Orlais and sacked Val Royeaux!" And Orlais never did anything bad to elves, right? Again, where the fuck do you think empires *come from*? What do you think empires do? You excuse unprovoked violence from the Chantry, and from the Orlesian Empire, and then condemn elves and "barbarian" tribes for retaliating. And you have the gall to lecture me about hypocrisy. Why should I care that more people would die, when you don't care about the people that have died? War kills people? You think I'm unaware? The Chantry and the Empire never vexed themselves about that, and now they enjoy the fruits of a garden fertilized by untold amounts of corpses, and continue to commit genocide to this day. Mages were slaughtered for daring to think they should be allowed to vote to leave the Chantry. Elves were slaughtered because Celene didn't like a play that they had no fucking involvement with. So yeah, I advocate for people fighting back against the Chantry and the Orlesian empire with every single tool at their disposal, including blood magic, including demons. I don't give a fuck if every single priestess and Orlesian in the entire world ends up dead. Hell, I don't give a fuck if Thedas gets nuked into a plain of black glass. If it can't be better than it is currently, it's not worth saving. |
|
inherit
104
0
Apr 14, 2024 23:12:36 GMT
6,849
The Elder King
5,733
August 2016
theelderking
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
19631
|
Post by The Elder King on Jun 24, 2020 0:43:08 GMT
So yeah, I advocate for people fighting back against the Chantry and the Orlesian empire with every single tool at their disposal, including blood magic, including demons. I don't give a fuck if every single priestess and Orlesian in the entire world ends up dead. Hell, I don't give a fuck if Thedas gets nuked into a plain of black glass. If it can't be better than it is currently, it's not worth saving. There lies the ‘problem’ with Thedas. It’s a setting full of injustice and inequalities, with literally every faction ranging from not good to straight out evil (I’d have said the Wardens could’ve categorized slightly better before DAI, but the ship sailed with that game). I do agree with your point on the Orlesian Empire. It’s not better then either the Qun or the Imperium, or, if Solas’ recollection is fully true (although Tevinter Nights kind of goes to confirm his assessment), the Evanuris. The only thing I’d say is that I don’t think BioWare intends to change the nature of the setting.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Jun 24, 2020 1:00:34 GMT
So yeah, I advocate for people fighting back against the Chantry and the Orlesian empire with every single tool at their disposal, including blood magic, including demons. I don't give a fuck if every single priestess and Orlesian in the entire world ends up dead. Hell, I don't give a fuck if Thedas gets nuked into a plain of black glass. If it can't be better than it is currently, it's not worth saving. There lies the ‘problem’ with Thedas. It’s a setting full of injustice and inequalities, with literally every faction ranging from not good to straight out evil (I’d have said the Wardens could’ve categorized slightly better before DAI, but the ship sailed with that game). I do agree with your point on the Orlesian Empire. It’s not better then either the Qun or the Imperium, or, if Solas’ recollection is fully true (although Tevinter Nights kind of goes to confirm his assessment), the Evanuris. The only thing I’d say is that I don’t think BioWare intends to change the nature of the setting. I'd go a step further and say BioWare isn't capable of changing the nature of the setting. The story isn't "complex" or "grey", it's juvenile. That the writers have characters like Loghain and Celene behave in the shockingly stupid ways that they do, while having other characters repeatedly assure me that these are the brightest military and/or political minds of their age tells me that BioWare literally cannot do better than this. |
|
inherit
104
0
Apr 14, 2024 23:12:36 GMT
6,849
The Elder King
5,733
August 2016
theelderking
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
19631
|
Post by The Elder King on Jun 24, 2020 1:47:37 GMT
There lies the ‘problem’ with Thedas. It’s a setting full of injustice and inequalities, with literally every faction ranging from not good to straight out evil (I’d have said the Wardens could’ve categorized slightly better before DAI, but the ship sailed with that game). I do agree with your point on the Orlesian Empire. It’s not better then either the Qun or the Imperium, or, if Solas’ recollection is fully true (although Tevinter Nights kind of goes to confirm his assessment), the Evanuris. The only thing I’d say is that I don’t think BioWare intends to change the nature of the setting. I'd go a step further and say BioWare isn't capable of changing the nature of the setting. The story isn't "complex" or "grey", it's juvenile. That the writers have characters like Loghain and Celene behave in the shockingly stupid ways that they do, while having other characters repeatedly assure me that these are the brightest military and/or political minds of their age tells me that BioWare literally cannot do better than this. Those are two different situations, though. Making characters acting stupid while they’re supposedly among the brightest in the setting is one thing, and is more related to the quality of writing. I am curious on what are the things that were shockingly stupid about Loghain, though. I mean, outside of the fact that he’d have condemned Ferelden to annihilation, but some of his plans, while I didn’t agree with, would’ve worked in his favours. Poisoning and killing Eamon would’ve lead the opposing faction to have no major supporter, and he did try to ally himself with Orzammar. if I recall. His most abhorrent act, the selling of elves to Tevinter, was meant to boost his finances. Those are evil acts, but not shockingly stupid to me. The fact that the various factions in the setting are all on different t layers of bad, or have huge flaws, to me isn’t related to a problem of writing (well, it is if someone would want some good factions in the game). I think a setting like DA, or a setting where there are clearly good and bad factions, can both be complex, as well as both being badly written. Neither idea is necessarily better or worse then the other. I do think that sometimes they push the narrative about making each faction have flaws when it’s not needed (like the Wardens only DAI), though. I don’t think it’s that difficult to change the nature of the setting, in the sense of shifting it and making clearly good and bad factions. I think the problems you find with their writing would be there anyway, though.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Jun 24, 2020 3:02:28 GMT
I'd go a step further and say BioWare isn't capable of changing the nature of the setting. The story isn't "complex" or "grey", it's juvenile. That the writers have characters like Loghain and Celene behave in the shockingly stupid ways that they do, while having other characters repeatedly assure me that these are the brightest military and/or political minds of their age tells me that BioWare literally cannot do better than this. Those are two different situations, though. Making characters acting stupid while they’re supposedly among the brightest in the setting is one thing, and is more related to the quality of writing. I am curious on what are the things that were shockingly stupid about Loghain, though. I mean, outside of the fact that he’d have condemned Ferelden to annihilation, but some of his plans, while I didn’t agree with, would’ve worked in his favours. Poisoning and killing Eamon would’ve lead the opposing faction to have no major supporter, and he did try to ally himself with Orzammar. if I recall. His most abhorrent act, the selling of elves to Tevinter, was meant to boost his finances. Those are evil acts, but not shockingly stupid to me. The fact that the various factions in the setting are all on different t layers of bad, or have huge flaws, to me isn’t related to a problem of writing (well, it is if someone would want some good factions in the game). I think a setting like DA, or a setting where there are clearly good and bad factions, can both be complex, as well as both being badly written. Neither idea is necessarily better or worse then the other. I do think that sometimes they push the narrative about making each faction have flaws when it’s not needed (like the Wardens only DAI), though. I don’t think it’s that difficult to change the nature of the setting, in the sense of shifting it and making clearly good and bad factions. I think the problems you find with their writing would be there anyway, though. I think those actions of Loghain's *are* shockingly stupid, particularly selling elves into slavery, because that's a massive, complex operation where a lot could go wrong, and he knows full well that fucking it up will cost him immensely. Not to mention, by the time he is doing that, he has hurt Ferelden as much as letting Orlais in potentially might have, rendering his efforts to keep them out entirely pointless. If by keeping out a tyrant, you become a tyrant, then you have gained nothing. If I'm supposed to believe that Loghain acted out of genuine love of Ferelden, and not to selfishly grab power for himself, then his actions are quite stupid indeed. But other actions I consider to be stupid: - Claiming the position of regent in the first place. If he had half a brain, he would have known that his actions, treasonous or not, would be easy to paint as treasonous. He could have put Anora forth as interim ruler (though she herself is shockingly stupid), and it would have at least looked less like he was trying to usurp the throne. - Allying with Howe. If you play as Cousland, then Loghain knows he is an untrustworthy backstabber (assuming Loghain wasn't directly involved), but even if you don't, there's no way the destruction of Highever can be concealed for long. Bryce is a Teryn for fuck's sake, at the landsmeet everyone should have been wondering where he was. - Not conceding when the Warden unites nearly all of Ferelden against him. - Just generally being an abrasive asshole instead of making any effort to learn how to be liked, and then being surprised when people he treats like shit don't just magically fall in line. |
|
inherit
∯ Alien Wizard
729
0
Sept 14, 2023 6:08:41 GMT
9,897
Ieldra
4,771
August 2016
ieldra
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
25190
6519
|
Post by Ieldra on Jun 24, 2020 15:29:34 GMT
I am, in principle, in favor of presenting "grey" morality, because it illustrates a simple fact: morality is never simple, except to the extremist. "Grey" morality, if done well, asks the question which undesirable actions are justified in the name of a desirable outcome. Or in more philosophical terms, it pits deontology against consequentialism.
The problem is that this is not so easy to do *well*, especially if you also want your heroes to be successful without sacrificing the tiniest bit of moral integrity. Where this is possible, the difference is a non-issue, and *no* undesirable action can be justified at key points in the story. Also, if you can't imagine scenarios where a moral dilemma naturally arises, the attempt to shoehorn one in is likely to backfire and result in stupidity, usually on the side of the consequentialist, who comes across as a needly cruel asshole or something similar, but also occasionally on the side of the deontologist who comes across either as a reality-blind idealist or a fanatic with no regard for the consequences of his actions.
Having said that, I'd rather have an imperfect attempt rather than black-and-white-morality, because that is, in my eyes, just not how the world works almost every single time. Take slavery, for instance. "Slavery is bad" is as close to a moral absolute as you can come these days, but it does not follow that any society with slavery is, on the whole, evil. Or would you say the Roman Empire was evil because it practiced slavery? Rather often, you can't even say that about a person outside of fiction.
So, I'd rather have my stories present a range of different stances with outcomes that are plausible regardless of morality. Some may be clear-cut within the situation, some won't be. Just like real life. Also, not everyone has a universalist morality, and those who don't have it aren't necessarily evil. That's probably harder to swallow these days but have a look at history and you'll see it's true.
In short, people are complex. I'd rather have my stories reflect that. That video games in general have been appallingly bad in reflecting this, with Bioware being among the few who deserve credit for the attempt, even if they often failed, doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to ask for it. I'd rather have that, than people asking for their pet peeves - and we all have them, do we not - to be turned into absolutes within the story, and get it.
|
|
bshep
N5
We destroy them or they destroy us.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: MasterDassJennir
Prime Posts: 1876
Prime Likes: 376
Posts: 4,444 Likes: 7,936
inherit
269
0
7,936
bshep
We destroy them or they destroy us.
4,444
August 2016
bshep
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
MasterDassJennir
1876
376
|
Post by bshep on Jun 24, 2020 22:06:01 GMT
So yeah, I advocate for people fighting back against the Chantry and the Orlesian empire with every single tool at their disposal, including blood magic, including demons. I don't give a fuck if every single priestess and Orlesian in the entire world ends up dead. Hell, I don't give a fuck if Thedas gets nuked into a plain of black glass. If it can't be better than it is currently, it's not worth saving. There lies the ‘problem’ with Thedas. It’s a setting full of injustice and inequalities, with literally every faction ranging from not good to straight out evil (I’d have said the Wardens could’ve categorized slightly better before DAI, but the ship sailed with that game). I do agree with your point on the Orlesian Empire. It’s not better then either the Qun or the Imperium, or, if Solas’ recollection is fully true (although Tevinter Nights kind of goes to confirm his assessment), the Evanuris. The only thing I’d say is that I don’t think BioWare intends to change the nature of the setting. Yeah. Everyone is shades of grey to pretty much evil.
Even when the Inquisition tried to do something better it ended up full of corruption from the Qun and Solas' elves.
And i prefer it like that.
|
|
theascendent
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
PSN: The Ascendent
Posts: 482 Likes: 629
inherit
9275
0
629
theascendent
482
Aug 28, 2017 10:17:49 GMT
August 2017
theascendent
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
The Ascendent
|
Post by theascendent on Jun 24, 2020 22:41:43 GMT
'Is this world worth saving' is the question every good RPG should be able to answer. Me personally? Thedas reads like an ancient classical tragedy, a good story, but not one I want to experience for myself personally. I feel bad for the characters, but most of the time they are suffering the consequences of their own decisions. That makes me sympathize with them, but it doesn't excuse them. People who use the 'victim card' often use that as an excuse to commit horrible actions. It doesn't matter if they are an Ancient Elf who created the Veil, an angry Qunari warlord stuck in a human city for years on end, or a Human general so obsessed with his past that he ignores the dangers of the present. While I might not care for the state of Thedas as it exists, the people in it make at least an interesting place to learn about.
|
|
Captain Obvious
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
Posts: 433 Likes: 431
inherit
10192
0
431
Captain Obvious
433
May 29, 2018 21:25:13 GMT
May 2018
forumking
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jun 25, 2020 7:11:59 GMT
A person in trauma isn't thinking right. He learns better and he tells the Inquisitor he joined because he wanted to help, and there are countless others who thought the same. Thrask, Greigor and so on. Thus i think 'not all templars' was a fair comment for characters to make in game.
I chose Cullen because he was the most well known example, I don't particularly like or dislike him. I just think he actually did become and remain a Templar because he wanted to help Mages and the rest of the population of Thedas. I'd probably want to kill the people who killed my friends too, were i in his situation.
Hard to argue that anything Cullen did in his decade of service at Kirkwall was to "help" mages. Cullen is an incredibly overrated character.
|
|
inherit
∯ Alien Wizard
729
0
Sept 14, 2023 6:08:41 GMT
9,897
Ieldra
4,771
August 2016
ieldra
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
25190
6519
|
Post by Ieldra on Jun 25, 2020 8:31:51 GMT
'Is this world worth saving' is the question every good RPG should be able to answer. I beg to differ. It should not, as a rule, be on the table. What kind of irredeemable hellhole must a world be that you would seriously consider destroying it, together with the lives of all who live in it? Maybe the world of Warhammer 40k is of that kind. Thedas certainly isn't. "Fiat justitia et pereat mundus" (approximately "Justice will be done, and if the world should perish"), in spite of its less dramatic historical origins, has come to describe an attitude that would see principles of justice enforced at any cost to society as a whole. I find it incredibly dangerous to think that way, and I do not think stories should present wholesale destruction as a standard solution to anything. If you *know* your actions will destroy the world, the default answer should be "I won't do it" almost no matter what you might hope to gain. On a smaller scale, an example: is it worth destroying Tevinter in order to end slavery there? I can only say that in the real world, slavery has been abolished almost everywhere without destroying a single civilization. Impatience is no excuse for genocide. I'd tell that to Solas, too. When he first sundered reality, he didn't consider all the consequences of his actions. Maybe he couldn't have known. He was certainly reckless, desperation or not. That's a failing, sure, but one which I can forgive. However, now he *knows* what will happen if he continues. He knows the cost in lives, in whole civilizations. He even risks old evils awakening. His past actions made him a tragic figure. His present actions... a dangerous zealot at the very least. Some actions cannot be redeemed. You, and the world, have to live with the consequences. So better think carefully before you act. Morality is not simple, except for the extremist.
|
|
theascendent
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
PSN: The Ascendent
Posts: 482 Likes: 629
inherit
9275
0
629
theascendent
482
Aug 28, 2017 10:17:49 GMT
August 2017
theascendent
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
The Ascendent
|
Post by theascendent on Jun 25, 2020 15:50:01 GMT
I always feel like that no matter what we do, what decisions we make or actions we take in the game, the setting constantly forces a status quo down our throats that feels like we made no lasting impression. Oppose the Chantry? Too bad, have to support it. Want to help those being marginalized in Southern Thedas like Elves or Mages? Too bad, the Circle is back, Elves are so annoyed at being kicked around they are joining an Ancient Elven Mage to literally end the world. I understand why they do it, to remind us of that nothing is permanent and we have to deal with the world in our own unique way, but I don't feel compelled to save a world where the character I play as (an elven mage in this case) is upholding a status quo that actively hurts his people and supports something that he genuinely dislikes (the Chantry and Orlesian empire in this case).
Now the next game deals with Tevinter, the Qunari, and who knows what else. I only hope we have more choice and nuance in the new game instead of being constantly forced to play a role. No matter how much you dislike something or play against public perception of you in the previous games you will always be the hero, the Warden, the Champion, or the Inquisitor.
|
|
wright1978
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Prime Posts: 8,116
Prime Likes: 2073
Posts: 1,632 Likes: 2,469
inherit
1492
0
2,469
wright1978
1,632
Sept 8, 2016 12:06:29 GMT
September 2016
wright1978
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
8,116
2073
|
Post by wright1978 on Jun 25, 2020 16:13:44 GMT
I always feel like that no matter what we do, what decisions we make or actions we take in the game, the setting constantly forces a status quo down or throats that feels like we made no lasting impression. Oppose the Chantry? Too bad, have to support it. Want to help those being marginalized in Southern Thedas like Elves or Mages? Too bad, the Circle is back, Elves so annoyed at being kicked around they are joining an Ancient Elven Mage to literally end the world. I understand why they do it, to remind us of that nothing is permanent and we have to deal with the world in our own unique way, but I don't feel compelled to save a world where the character I play as (an elven mage in this case) is upholding a status quo that actively hurts his people and supports something that he genuinely dislikes (the Chantry and Orlesian empire in this case). Now the next game deals with Tevinter, the Qunari, and who knows what else. I only hope we have more choice and nuance in the new game instead of being constantly forced to play a role. No matter how much you dislike something or play against public perception of you in the previous games you will always be the hero, the Warden, the Champion, or the Inquisitor. Inevitably with the concept of importing world states there’s going to be limits to big earth shattering diverging world state choices. i personally hope aren’t tied to the chantry inquisition and are free agents(thrown together by a job that goes sideways involving solas) as I really disliked the forced deityhood. for me i’d Be happy to lots of smaller more personal choices that we could see the consequences of rather than these great causes that end up in some homogeneity.
|
|
inherit
∯ Alien Wizard
729
0
Sept 14, 2023 6:08:41 GMT
9,897
Ieldra
4,771
August 2016
ieldra
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
25190
6519
|
Post by Ieldra on Jun 25, 2020 17:59:03 GMT
I always feel like that no matter what we do, what decisions we make or actions we take in the game, the setting constantly forces a status quo down or throats that feels like we made no lasting impression. Oppose the Chantry? Too bad, have to support it. Want to help those being marginalized in Southern Thedas like Elves or Mages? Too bad, the Circle is back, Elves so annoyed at being kicked around they are joining an Ancient Elven Mage to literally end the world. I understand why they do it, to remind us of that nothing is permanent and we have to deal with the world in our own unique way, but I don't feel compelled to save a world where the character I play as (an elven mage in this case) is upholding a status quo that actively hurts his people and supports something that he genuinely dislikes (the Chantry and Orlesian empire in this case). Now the next game deals with Tevinter, the Qunari, and who knows what else. I only hope we have more choice and nuance in the new game instead of being constantly forced to play a role. No matter how much you dislike something or play against public perception of you in the previous games you will always be the hero, the Warden, the Champion, or the Inquisitor.
It's a practical problem resulting from the necessity to avoid wildly divergent world states in a game series. If one player destroys a nation and the next one destroys a different one, and they both expect a sequel to preserve continuity, you're in an impossible situation as a game developer. It basically requires free storytelling, and that won't be possible in video games without strong AI, or a human GM.
The short-term solution to this: don't give the players the power to make a specific choice if all plausible consequences of their choice need to be nullified. If you make it possible to play someone whose faction will be disadvantaged by the outcome no matter what, don't pretend that player choice has an influence on this. I can live with some unpleasantness if the game is honest about it. What I can't stand is deception, or the attempt to sugarcoat a bad outcome as a good one.
|
|
theascendent
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
PSN: The Ascendent
Posts: 482 Likes: 629
inherit
9275
0
629
theascendent
482
Aug 28, 2017 10:17:49 GMT
August 2017
theascendent
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
The Ascendent
|
Post by theascendent on Jun 25, 2020 18:13:20 GMT
It's a practical problem resulting from the necessity to avoid wildly divergent world states in a game series. If one player destroys a nation and the next one destroys a different one, and they both expect a sequel to preserve continuity, you're in an impossible situation as a game developer. It basically requires free storytelling, and that won't be possible in video games without strong AI, or a human GM.
The short-term solution to this: don't give the players the power to make a specific choice if all plausible consequences of their choice need to be nullified. If you make it possible to play someone whose faction will be disadvantaged by the outcome no matter what, don't pretend that player choice has an influence on this. I can live with some unpleasantness if the game is honest about it. What I can't stand is deception, or the attempt to sugarcoat a bad outcome as a good one.
Well said. The dreaded 'illusion of choice', is a terrible one indeed, one that Bioware has made a nasty habit of in recent games. I've never been more thankful that BG3 is in Larian Studio's hands.
|
|
theascendent
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
PSN: The Ascendent
Posts: 482 Likes: 629
inherit
9275
0
629
theascendent
482
Aug 28, 2017 10:17:49 GMT
August 2017
theascendent
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
The Ascendent
|
Post by theascendent on Jun 25, 2020 19:04:47 GMT
At least the novel Tevinter Nights has given us plenty of 'grey' scenarios, factions and characters to speculate on.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Jun 26, 2020 23:43:27 GMT
It's a practical problem resulting from the necessity to avoid wildly divergent world states in a game series. If one player destroys a nation and the next one destroys a different one, and they both expect a sequel to preserve continuity, you're in an impossible situation as a game developer. It basically requires free storytelling, and that won't be possible in video games without strong AI, or a human GM. Or giving up on save imports.I think DA would be better if they'd never started with that. |
|
wright1978
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Prime Posts: 8,116
Prime Likes: 2073
Posts: 1,632 Likes: 2,469
inherit
1492
0
2,469
wright1978
1,632
Sept 8, 2016 12:06:29 GMT
September 2016
wright1978
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
8,116
2073
|
Post by wright1978 on Jun 27, 2020 9:08:52 GMT
It's a practical problem resulting from the necessity to avoid wildly divergent world states in a game series. If one player destroys a nation and the next one destroys a different one, and they both expect a sequel to preserve continuity, you're in an impossible situation as a game developer. It basically requires free storytelling, and that won't be possible in video games without strong AI, or a human GM. Or giving up on save imports.I think DA would be better if they'd never started with that. I don’t, I find the illusion of your own world-state valuable.
|
|
inherit
∯ Alien Wizard
729
0
Sept 14, 2023 6:08:41 GMT
9,897
Ieldra
4,771
August 2016
ieldra
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
25190
6519
|
Post by Ieldra on Jun 27, 2020 12:01:43 GMT
It's a practical problem resulting from the necessity to avoid wildly divergent world states in a game series. If one player destroys a nation and the next one destroys a different one, and they both expect a sequel to preserve continuity, you're in an impossible situation as a game developer. It basically requires free storytelling, and that won't be possible in video games without strong AI, or a human GM. Or giving up on save imports.I think DA would be better if they'd never started with that. That wouldn't solve the problem. If one game is another's sequel, and you make decisions that affect the world-state in a way that results in some plausible visible changes, anyone who plays the sequel while having made incompatible decisions will feel deceived.
There are two ways to resolve this:
(1) Do not allow the player to make meaningful decisions that affect the world-state.
(2) Don't make one game a sequel of another.
Neither of which is easy to bring across to players if the game worlds are similar enough that they are naturally perceived as the same.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,161
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,818
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Jun 28, 2020 13:40:32 GMT
Why would I feel cheated? If I'm playing DA2 and the Warden in that continuity wasn't one I played, it isn't rational to expect choices any of my Wardens made to exist in the setting. None of them were there. It's not like BG2, where I'm playing the same character and yet things that character did either never happened at all or were retconned to happen differently.
(Understanding this may require an emotional reaction I just don't have.)
|
|
