Dragon Age News Thread

I can have both, in this case, actually. The fact that you seem determined to stick to false equivalence ain't making me pointing out that false equivalence 'an excuse'.

The 'official lorebook' status also doesn't make WoT or WoT2 100% factual. That's like saying that codices in game are 100% factual information - which we know they aren't, since basically all the lore in Dragon Age franchise, whether codices or lorebooks, is written from in-universe perspective, not meta-perspective. We are supposed to consider them to be biased, or incomplete sources, akin to RL historical sources.

Nevermind that we can't put equality sign between all the topics touched upon by characters or in-universe authors. Magic or blood magic or Veil are faaaaaaar wider and more nuanced topics we keep learning new things about (that often fly in the face of what's been previously considered true in-story), which is harder to fully encompass than establishing the identity or whereabouts of, say, something as recent to the world and story as Inquisition's Inner Circle. And even those are incomplete or form wrong conclusions if you read WoT2.

For example, Wot2 author dismisses the possibility that Cole is a spirit, or puts in doubt that he was a companion in the first place, then continues to detail a rumor of a Ghost of the Spire - a rumor we know is actually true thanks to "Asunder" and Inqusition (which were written/released before WoT2).

So yes, of course I can have both. The lorebooks are there to flesh out the world, compile existing lore in convenient format and share interesting tidbits and rumors that we may never be sure are 100% true (or sometimes what they even are about...). We can corroborate the evidence and records and come to certain conclusions that may be correct, but whether they are true is usually verified by story in actual games/books/comics - not the other way around.