Dragon Age II, Part 2: The Qun is pretty deep, you wouldn't understand it.

[Giggling Ghast]

The second thread dedicated to Dragon Age II, the second game in the popular Bioware franchise! This is the place to discuss chest hair, blood magic, friend fiction, that goddamn Anders and how all qunari are hipsters.

Feel free to press a button and see something awesome happen, but don't bother searching for the Ruined Forever (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuinedFOREVER) switch; we had to take it out due to over-use.

You can ask about DA: Origins here, but there's a separate thread for that.

If you're curious about the title, the following might shed some light:

http://thepunchlineismachismo.com/comics/2011-04-18.jpg

[Honest Tiefling]

Either I missed something by not playing Origins (yet), but do Qunari decide who is in charge because of horn size? Biggest horns are best horns, obviously.

[Spartacus]

Qunari had a definite lack of horns in Origins, actually.

[Joran]

Either I missed something by not playing Origins (yet), but do Qunari decide who is in charge because of horn size? Biggest horns are best horns, obviously.

Funnily enough, Horns on a Qunari were a ret-con/correction between Origins and DA II.

The only Qunari you met in Origins was Sten, who had no horns.

[Giggling Ghast]

What importance qunari place on horn size is not fully known, but it's likely very little. Some qunari are born without horns (like Sten in Origin) and are regarded as "special" within qunari society. Some Tal-Vashoth also remove their horns.

Keep in mind that qunari are appointed to their roles for life. The Arishok was the leader of the qunari because he was their best warrior.


The only Qunari you met in Origins was Sten, who had no horns.

There were Tal-Vashoth mercenaries who were hornless. Armass was a notable example. But you are technically correct, since the Tal-Vashoth are "no longer qunari."

[Cristo Meyers]

You know, I've heard of that, but in three play throughs of the game I've never actually had it happen. Weird considering how many people seem to have experienced it.


I've only experienced the "2 flirts or a rebuff" sequence once so far, and it only came up because I'd flirted with the boy before. And considering the game's hatedom I've got to question how often, if at all, it comes up without flirting beforehand.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I don't get the hatedom, honestly. Sure the game's not PERFECT, but I considered it worth the price of a pre-order.

[Honest Tiefling]

Weird. I got it on the first playthrough with no previous flirts. Maybe the character's gender influences it? Or Anders hit on Hawkes with the nice personality?

Yeah, I forgot about the retcon. DAII really needed more models, because the Arishok was the only one who was...Well, shall we say, well endowed? Because he was the only one with a unique model.

[Psyren]

I like Anders. >_<

I haven't beat DAII yet, so I'll be exiting now...

[Douglas]

The thread title needs to have another 2 in it - as is, it's not clear that this isn't the second thread for Origins.

[Zevox]

Was it inside his clinic in Darktown?
Of course. That's the only place you can have an actual conversation with him.


Weird. I got it on the first playthrough with no previous flirts. Maybe the character's gender influences it? Or Anders hit on Hawkes with the nice personality?
In my three play throughs I've done two female Hawkes and one male, and had all three different personality types, so if nothing else it's not just one of those. (Though in my first play through - female sarcastic - I did flirt with him intentionally after his recruitment quest, but then broke it off at the start of part 2 when he went all emo about how Justice would cause him to hurt me.)


The thread title needs to have another 2 in it - as is, it's not clear that this isn't the second thread for Origins.
Aye, make it II-2 or something. Also, a period at the end, please. The grammar there is going to make my eye twitch every time I come here otherwise...

Zevox

[VanBuren]

Male Hawke picking the Diplomatic options is what it takes, I think.

[Zevox]

Male Hawke picking the Diplomatic options is what it takes, I think.
Maybe. My one male Hawke had the confrontational personality type, so that would explain how I missed it anyway.

Zevox

[Honest Tiefling]

That can't be it, he flipped out on my Lady Hawke. I still think he'll do it if you are diplomatic either in an earlier event or try to reassure him after his first quest. Zevox may not have triggered it if his Hawke tried jumping Ander's bones without provocation beforehand.

It would be hilarious if this conversation was random.

And Pyren, don't feel bad. Anders I feel had a good concept, just a lot of lines out of place. If nothing else, different romance options/squad mates for different people.

[Zen Master]

Ok .... this game has gotten very favorable reviews, and has been mercilessly axed by users (on metacritic).

Which is it? Personally I have no problems with the game being different from DA:O, as long as the story, background fluff and gameplay is solid.

[Zevox]

Ok .... this game has gotten very favorable reviews, and has been mercilessly axed by users (on metacritic).

Which is it? Personally I have no problems with the game being different from DA:O, as long as the story, background fluff and gameplay is solid.
Personally, I'm of the opinion that DA2 is superior to Origins. Most of the complaining from guys like metacritic users consists of idiotic "they changed it now it sucks" style complaints from what I've seen, though some users here have made more reasonable arguments as to why they personally consider it inferior to the original (but still good, in all cases I can remember).

Zevox

[Zen Master]

Personally, I'm of the opinion that DA2 is superior to Origins. Most of the complaining from guys like metacritic users consists of idiotic "they changed it now it sucks" style complaints from what I've seen, though some users here have made more reasonable arguments as to why they personally consider it inferior to the original (but still good, in all cases I can remember).

Zevox

Thanks =)

I've tried to mentally sort the user reviews - putting the fanboi rage in one pile, and the more lucid and coherent reviews in another. There's close to 2000 tho, and there are just *so very many* with a rating of 0 or 1.

So ... I want to play more Dragon Age, but I don't want to spend money on a truly subpar game - if that is what it is.

[Edge]

Subpar? Definitely not. As far as I was concerned, it was Origins with more over-the-top combat animations (which I liked, and just put down to Varric's narration), a more likeable/relatable main character (purely because of the voice) amongst other stuff.

Anyone who says that it was dumbed down is missing the fact that pretty much all the tools you had in Origins (crafting aside) is there for you to use in 2.

Of course, it has its problems, most apparent ones being it's borderline character derailment of Anders and the overly reused areas - but if you hold that against it, you need to hold it against Mass Effect 1 just as much.

[Dienekes]

Ok .... this game has gotten very favorable reviews, and has been mercilessly axed by users (on metacritic).

Which is it? Personally I have no problems with the game being different from DA:O, as long as the story, background fluff and gameplay is solid.

You're going to get a lot of varying answers here but I'll add in my opinion as well.

DA:O and DA2 are fairly different games, when it comes to story, characters, and gameplay.

Now since this is a game I'll start with gameplay. Which mostly comes down to combat, in this there is little comparison to be made DA2 is faster, more vicious, and more entertaining to watch. As far as class abilities goes I think this is Bioware at it's best, every level for every class I felt like I had something new and exciting to get my hands on. But there is a tone problem to the combat. DA2 is toted as the story of a schmuck in the DA world who steadily rises to power. Unlike the more generic hero arc of DAO this was grounded in one cities politics and grime, yet the main character is shown to hit so hard the opponents literally blow up. While I like the abilities I would have preferred if the smaller scale realism was demonstrated throughout the games design. A second problem comes from how the combats are set up: also called let's find the spawning points. Simply every combat will have multiple waves of enemies that come through the same spawn points. It gets old. If they varied it up a bit the waves could have been a surprising and scary occurrence, but in DA2 they are just run of the mill.

Story then. DAO is about uniting a kingdom to stop the generic evil race of evil. The main storyline is a bit weak while the different pieces on how to get there are very interesting, such as maneuvering around dwarven politics, and trying to undermine Loghain. DA2 takes a different approach, now the main focus just isn't present. There is no set story or problem to motivate your character you either like the game and want to see it through to the end or not. However each act has it's own central storyline which are just as interesting as the best DAO missions. Personally I think the best main story mission from either game is Act 2 of DA2. The other problem a lot of folks have, beyond lack of initial focus, is that unlike DAO where you could make wide ranging decisions that affect multiple aspects of society for years to come, DA2 has far less important decisions for you to make. At times this makes it appear that your character is not really the main focus of the game, taking a back seat to the real shakers in their predestined acts of destruction.

Now to characters. I'll be upfront here, I prefer DAO's companions to DA2. I didn't really connect with any of the DA2 companions accept Varric and Aveline, several times I wished to shake/slap/or punch the other companions for their stupidity. However I am in the minority here as people seem to think that Merril is cute for whatever reason, and not a teenage she-child stomping her feet at her parent and dealing in things she has little to no understanding about because she thinks she's a big girl now, as I tend to view her as. Really this category comes down to your opinion on the matter. However another problem I have with DA2 is the new friend/rivalry system. In DAO if you say or do the wrong thing a companion can hate you, disrespect your leadership, and potentially leave. In DA2 the more a character should hate you the more they gain Rivalry points which tend to make them just as loyal as Friendship points. This leads to the awkward situation where you can spit on a guys beliefs to their face, and claim everything they know is stupid and wrong, and they will still be loyal to your every action and likely will want to get into bed with you.

And finally art design. All I have to say is this: What the hell are the Skeleton's holding? How would that weapon even work? How would you swing that thing? It makes no freaking sense. And why am I in the same cave again? I remember the entry point to the cave last time. I did not go in it again. This is lazy Bioware.

[Zen Master]

Snip

Thank you, that was very comprehensive and helpful. Frankly, as I read it, DA2 ... isn't an rpg, but one of those action-games-with-rpg-elements. Like .... Fallout 3, which I didn't like - though mainly because the story was so bad.

I'ma get Witcher 2 instead. Everyone seems to love Witcher 2 =D

[Cristo Meyers]

Ok .... this game has gotten very favorable reviews, and has been mercilessly axed by users (on metacritic).

Which is it? Personally I have no problems with the game being different from DA:O, as long as the story, background fluff and gameplay is solid.

In the three games so far that have had pretty distinct differences between the critics and the users, I've always gone with the critics and never regretted it.

[Divayth Fyr]

I'ma get Witcher 2 instead. Everyone seems to love Witcher 2 =D
Out of these two, it is definately the better game (although the final act shows that they didn't have enough time to finish it properly) and much closer to being an RPG.


Frankly, as I read it, DA2 ... isn't an rpg, but one of those action-games-with-rpg-elements.
That's definately the feel I've got after playing the game.


Which is it? Personally I have no problems with the game being different from DA:O, as long as the story, background fluff and gameplay is solid.
IMHO the biggest problem (storywise) with DAII is that it was supposed to be the tale of Hawke, but when you play the game, you don't feel your decisions influence anything. Most things happen no matter what you do, and if you can change something, it most certainly is a minor thing (looking on the whole picture). Dienekes pointed out the problems with gameplay and art design, so I won't repeat them.

[Spacefarer]

IMHO the biggest problem (storywise) with DAII is that it was supposed to be the tale of Hawke, but when you play the game, you don't feel your decisions influence anything. Most things happen no matter what you do, and if you can change something, it most certainly is a minor thing (looking on the whole picture). Dienekes pointed out the problems with gameplay and art design, so I won't repeat them.

This. I felt no real connection to my character. I was playing someone else's story and not once did it feel like my own, which in my opinion is the essence of an RPG. It's why I play them.

A third ending would have been nice at the very least. As the conflict built it became clear to me that the best way to solve it would be to kill Meredith and Orsino and take the crown of Kirkwall myself.

Plus, the entire game I anticipated the Seeker catching up with me and becoming key to the ending. Not so. She was nothing more than a framing device.

These are just two of my complaints, but hey, I've been told more than once that I'm an elitist, grumpy ol' gamer so take it for what it's worth.

Most of my gripes are about the story, not the gameplay. And I don't want to hear that I didn't understand the scope. There's nothing wrong with the scope and everything wrong with the lack of impact I felt I had on the city of which I was Champion.

[Zevox]

Thank you, that was very comprehensive and helpful. Frankly, as I read it, DA2 ... isn't an rpg, but one of those action-games-with-rpg-elements.
Um, no, DA2 is very much so an RPG. Very little was changed in terms of fundamental gameplay from the first game, so if you consider that an RPG, there's no reason you wouldn't consider DA2 an RPG, at least not if you have a coherent definition of the term.

Edit: Heck, here's an interesting observation: DA2's gameplay is still much less action-y than another of Bioware's games that I've never heard anyone claim isn't an RPG, Jade Empire.

Zevox

[Joran]

Thank you, that was very comprehensive and helpful. Frankly, as I read it, DA2 ... isn't an rpg, but one of those action-games-with-rpg-elements. Like .... Fallout 3, which I didn't like - though mainly because the story was so bad.


I don't understand this sentiment. DA2 is a Western RPG.

To me, RPG elements can be divided into two parts:

1) RPG game elements
2) RPG story elements

RPG game elements is having character customization, character progression, and tactical combat options. So, in DA1 and DA2, the player can decide which class the main character is, customize gear and abilities, pause the game mid-combat to determine what they want to do. This screams RPG game elements to me.

RPG story elements is allowing the player to make meaningful decisions that impact the world, usually through dialogue and actions. DA1 and DA2 allow you to do this also, building a party with companions, influencing the world (albeit less so in DA2), and more importantly, letting you craft a consistent character with a consistent world view.

It's the same crap I heard from ME1 to ME2. ME2 streamlined a bunch of the RPG game elements, but when I play, it's the story elements that matter and ME2 got those exactly right.

[Dienekes]

Thank you, that was very comprehensive and helpful. Frankly, as I read it, DA2 ... isn't an rpg, but one of those action-games-with-rpg-elements. Like .... Fallout 3, which I didn't like - though mainly because the story was so bad.

I'ma get Witcher 2 instead. Everyone seems to love Witcher 2 =D

I would not be that harsh. Now is it more action-y than DAO? Yes, it partly has to do with speeding up combat actions and getting cooler abilities.

But the RP elements are definitely still there. You can still build your character fine, and even be effective without patching different bits of it. Really for character building it's awesome. For roleplaying I definitely think you're given the options to make and act as a distinctive character. Personally I felt closer to acting with Hawke than I did with Commander Shepard partially because of the superior dialogue labeling system. I love the dialogue labeling system and hope they implement it into ME3 or DA3 or whatever other game they have. No longer will I accidentally romance someone, huzzah!

The only aspect that takes a step back from a roleplaying perspective is world spanning decisions. All games do something similar in this, on the big missions there are important choices that you are not allowed to choose. In DAO, can I not do the Joining? Can I just leave the Archdemon? Do I have to oppose Loghain? You are streamlined into acting as the game designers intended with the lure of making smaller decisions along the way, such as saving elves or werewolves, or who to place on the throne. DA2 allows you to make decisions, even important ones, but nothing nearly as earth shaking as in DAO. Now there are some times when the railroading is particularly obvious in DA2, admittedly. But I don't know how that compares to Witcher 2 because I have never played it.

[Honest Tiefling]

The fact that the main plot was firmly welded to things was a bit of a problem in DAII. I hope they fix this issue with DAIII. Sure, you could decide the fate of side characters, but the main plot needed a more choice to it. Maybe a lot more choice.

DAII had a lot of other issues, but I did like some features they added. Making the dialogue wheel easier to use with pictures was great. Having Hawke's dialogue change depending on what options you picked was also awesome and definitely something I hope to see again.

Through, having the main character be set is fine by me. I liked Hawke's family, and got to know most of them. (Gamlen could have used a bit more, in my opinion, but I am the sort to open every single cupboard in games in the off chance something is there.)

I am so confident in my manhood that I will admit that a single tear crawled down my stoic, square jawed face. Okay, maybe not, but I did honestly feel for what happened to Hawke's family at a certain point. Having one set main character allows more exploration of the background of that character, and their standing to be able to be programmed in the world.

I don't know if it is feasible for games to put in that many NPC conversations and have a voice over for each and every single possible choice for a main character. A part of what drew me to Hawke was the great voice acting, which I hope will continue to be present in DAIII.

[Zevox]

The fact that the main plot was firmly welded to things was a bit of a problem in DAII. I hope they fix this issue with DAIII.
I hope not, seeing as that "issue" is one of the things that I think was an improvement over DA:O (and most western RPGs in general). But I'm sure most of you don't want to me get into another lengthy discussion of that again, seeing as I seem to be the only one here with that personal preference in storytelling.

Zevox

[Honest Tiefling]

Well...I honestly did not mind the fact that DAII was about Kirkwall, and some random person trying to fend off whatever feels like stabbing innocent people today. I liked the fact it was about some random nobody who basically went 'Oh ****' and fought long and hard to defend their hometown.

A plot can be like DAII, with the set pieces of...

1. Running from Lothering
2. Earning money/place to live
3. Qunari Invasion
4. Chantry being asploded, Templar and Circle fighting

While still giving choice. I rather liked the fact that you couldn't bugger off and come back and the invasion will still be on hold, waiting for you. I liked the fact that you were defending your new home. That doesn't mean that a game has to be open world to allow choice.

Say, for the Deep Roads Expedition. Instead of only using one way to earn money for your family, they could have allowed several. Maybe instead of the Deep Roads, you did serious bounty hunting. Another option would be exploring the underworld of Kirkwall, given how many muggers are running about. Each one sorta leads to the same place, but in one you are the shady noble, the other the ruthless noble who hunts down criminals, and in the last, a fearless explorer and defeater of darkspawn. Each could easily be referenced later on in the game, and open different options. Each one might change Kirkwall in different ways, which was another issue with the game.

Personally, and I know this is an opinion few others hold, but I rather a single, changing, dynamic city to a bunch of cities and towns I pass through. I want to know the gritty details and be attached to my home more then explore. And if I do want to explore, that's what wilderness is for.

I hope I did not misinterpret what you liked about DAII.

[Zevox]

While still giving choice. I rather liked the fact that you couldn't bugger off and come back and the invasion will still be on hold, waiting for you. I liked the fact that you were defending your new home. That doesn't mean that a game has to be open world to allow choice.
I believe you're misinterpreting my statement (and I'm guessing that means you haven't seen my previous discussions on the matter). It had nothing to do wit the game not being an open-world sandbox - none of Bioware's game ever have been. It had to do with your inability to alter most significant events in the story (i.e. how you cannot prevent the **** from hitting the fan at the end there).

I much prefer a set story designed to explore the characters and themes important to it like a novel would than a choose-your-own-adventure-book type of story. This is why I tend to prefer JRPGs, where you either cannot change the story at all or can just choose between a few different endings (and where the main character is almost never a player-created blank slate), to WRPGs that take the more choose-your-own-adventure-book style of storytelling, which results in a much less focused, usually much less interesting story.

For instance, the options you outlined would be something I would rather not see, since then if you didn't take the Deep Roads expedition you wouldn't have the Idol introduced into the story. While that was admittedly underused and not explored much in the game as-is, I would much rather see a focused exploration of something like that and how it could impact this story and setting than a bunch of options for how to make your character become rich. (And I am hoping that it will be better explored in future DLC or Dragon Age 3 - after all, there's no way that Meridith's statue is just going to be left alone forever.)

Zevox

[Honest Tiefling]

Ah, okay. Sorry if I misinterpreted your statements. Through I have to wonder, if there were a few options of different paths to pursue, would they be appealing to you if they explored different characters? I am not trying to criticize what you find good in a game, I just want to understand better. :smallsmile:

Say, the Deep Roads leads to the Idol, exploring Meredith and Bartand. Pursuing the underworld of Kirkwall explores a few gang leaders and their victims. Fighting bounty hunters explores why these people became bounty hunters, either due to choice, desperation, or a need for power, and why certain people want them dead out of revenge or a need for justice.

It is probably unlikely, but I can dream.

And in response to the white text...
And now I have an image of addicted Templars trying to lick the Meredith statue.

[Zevox]

It is probably unlikely, but I can dream.
"Unlikely" is precisely the problem with the idea. Trying to split the writers' attentions like that is unlikely to produce a story with as much quality as a more focused one - plus it'd be hard to tie so many other stories into a single larger plotline. While this has usually been the thing that makes me like Bioware games when I usually don't much like other WRPGs - they've managed to at least make their sub-plots interesting even when the overarching story isn't - I'd rather see a more interesting and focused main story which each of the subplots contribute to, rather than some branching story that becomes very different depending on choices you make. The latter more or less just results in the writers needing to write multiple stories for one game.

Plus this also helps when it comes to introducing plot hooks for sequels. For instance, the ending to DA2 will obviously significantly impact any future DA games and DLC set after DA2's main story. It has a huge impact on the setting. But what about DA:O? The biggest plot hooks there were Morrigan's ritual, which you could turn, and the Architect in Awakening, who you could kill. Those choice options will make implementing those plot hooks in future games much more difficult, either relegating them to optional sub-plot status, forcing them to be designed in a way that your choice on the matter doesn't change events, or forcing a retcon that removes the choice entirely. No matter what, actually exploring those interesting ideas in the future becomes a problem precisely due to the options you were given. And I really don't like that, as I'd love to see full games based around those plot hooks.

Zevox

[Wing]

Essay ahead.

I feel like the problem I have with the changes from DA:O to DA2 is that they didn't put as much in as they took out - it was an uneven trade-off. People are right in saying DA2 had just as much depth as DA:O's story and choices; and this right here is the problem.

The choices in DA:O may not have been too meaningful, but there was a myriad of them taking place across an entire nation and several cultures. And choices don't always have to matter to be entertaining - along with the major two-sides decisions of Elves/Wolves, Mages/Templars and Bhelen/Harrowmont, there were little options like whether to let Jowan live, or the dying soldier in the Wilds, or the deserter prisoner in Ostagar, and whether to help the girl-dwarf who wanted to see the Circle, and whether to attempt escape from Fort Drakon or await rescue - and if the latter, who should rescue you, and how. It would've been excellent to have those choices make larger consequences than they did, but that was neither expected nor feasible; it was immediately enjoyable just to have the option. Not to mention all the people you can lie to, butter up, or double-cross - options sorely missed in the dialogue-wheel. In this way DA:O gave you lots of superficial choices, many on an epic scope.

The story and choices of DA2, though on par with those in DA:O, took place in the tightly closed concentric circles of Champion, Family, and City. I remember being pretty excited when they were promoting this stuff before the release, because intuitively a character should be able to make a much bigger impact to their immediate surroundings - especially their personal and home life - than to the politics of the four far-flung corners of the world. The devs stressed their departure from the typical fantasy epic, and I agreed that this was good.

Spoilers after this point.

But those choices were just that - on par with DA:O's. There was no trade-off of 'epic' for 'depth'. We got both the superficiality of the choices as well as the additional limitation of a small sphere of influence - the worst of two worlds. Prime example is not being able to stop Bethany getting dragged away, or Carver leaving for the templars - particularly in the latter.

Sometimes it felt like the writers had geared themselves up to present a significant choice and then just gave up, like in giving us the red herring of Gascard DuPuis. Essentially I saw this as a test of faith - how far were you willing to give this man the benefit of the doubt? But ultimately, this decision had no impact on Leandra's fate (which was ridiculous, by the way). There is even an option to allow DuPuis to magically help you track down your mother. If the option to let DuPuis live and help had saved her life, that would've been a brilliant reward for seeing the best in people, and a lesson on the moral ambiguity of magic in both ruining and saving lives. I'm almost convinced that was how the story was meant to go in its original conception. But as it stands, you will never get there in time to save her, all blood mages are lying and evil, and it doesn't matter who you trust.

Similarly, I expected - since we have one city instead of four to deal with - that the politics would be more complex and in-depth. The closest we got was the Qunari/Chantry conflict. It was refreshing to see a culture posed as an alternative to Western individualism and liberalism, especially in such an ambiguous way. They succeeded in making Saemus sympathetic, and Petrice a totally :smallyuk:, and the Qun was right in condemning the chaos and selfishness of a place like Kirkwall, and how it breeds the kind of decision-making that leads Isabella to plunge a city into war. It rightfully questioned our assumptions about our values as well as showing the disadvantages of a restrictive communitarian society.

Act 3 was rubbish, of course. The mage/templar conflict leaned very heavily on contemporary issues of potentially unconstitutional (or not!) terrorism legislation ongoing in nearly all the major liberal democracies. Except, of course, all this brilliant set-up is irrelevant, and which side you pick as a result of these considerations is irrelevant, because both bitches be crazy. This is not morally ambiguous in a difficult, thought-provoking, morally gray kind of way. This is morally irrelevant. Morally disco-pink.

So in these political plots, what seems to be the problem is not the plots themselves but the choices within them. The conflicts would always have borne out, much like you were always going to slay the Archdemon - you should have better things to do than play an RPG with the express purpose of avoiding its central conflicts. But what you do to get there should've been richer and more meaningful in DA2.

Ultimately, Dragon Age 2's story and roleplaying choices were in the majority not any worse than its predecessor's - but it should've been better, and in fact needed to be, in order to match the first game's epic feel and exploratory freedom. It would've been a worthy trade-off had the other side fully repaid what we lost in those areas, and a breath of fresh air in a genre dominated by "epic" and starved of "personal". The rewards of a "personal" story were those that Bioware, a group that admirably gives so much weight to its writers, had a birthright to reap - but they ultimately failed to pull it off.

For these reasons I prefer Dragon Age: Origins to Dragon Age 2.

[Aux-Ash]

I too think DA2 is the better game and it is certainly an rpg. While it has a lot fewer story-choices, ultimately I feel that DAO gave us a lot of choices we never should have had. It let us decide not one but two monarchs, wether to prop up the greater religion or destroy a priceless artifact and three ways to settle what basically is a blood feud.
Yes, it gives the player agency... but robs the world of it. It feels, to me, like in DAO I'm the only one doing anything ever. That people can only be competent if I am involved (and on their side).

DA2 doesn't give us those choices. It props us right in the middle of those situations, asks us how our Hawke feels about it. Gives us something to work for. But ultimately, there's more people than us doing stuff. We get to decide what we feel and what we want to do, but we never get to decide what happens.

And I, personally, think it's much much better.

Not because I dislike choices. But because ultimately, there's only one character that I should control. The protagonist.
I shouldn't been allowed to decide who rules the dwarves. I should be allowed to say my meaning and work for those I want to support, yes. But not decide whom gets to be king. The assembly should have.
Not even Loghain felt like he did anything at all outside of cutscenes. The only time I felt I wasn't the one deciding the future of the world (as opposed to influencing/working hard for it) was in the circle tower, there it was Gregoir and Irving that actually decided.

I think perhaps DAO spoiled us a bit with choices we never should have had, and then removed them for the sequel. Which is why the rpg aspect might feel less to some.

In a way. DAO lets you change the world the way you want, but ultimately you can only succeed at it. DA2 sets up situations where you can decide what you want to do, do everything you can to stop it... and still fail. It isn't about what you could do... but how you felt about it.
And that's why to me, it's the greater rpg.

[Nero24200]

While I agree that some of the hatedom is exaggerated there are a few legitimate gripes in there. When playing the game I feel that there is a lot less options available than DA:O.

I'll give an example. The quest gained after meeting Isabella requires you to retrieve some crates from the docks. This first requires you to talk to the harbor master to find where the crates are then talk to the guards guarding the warehouse they're located in.

This quest annoyed me quite a bit. When you talk to the harbor master you're given 3 options - leave (which doesn't further the quest at all), threaten him or bribe him. It should be noted that threatening him does nothing since he knows you won't kill him in broad daylight in a public place, leaving you really with two options. This bugs me because in Origins you could tell this scene would allow intimidation to work if you had decent strength and took the Coercion ability, it would probably also allow some kind of bluff or persuade option. Regardless there would be more than two - one of which is don't bother with the quest.

Go to the warehouse after getting the information and you come across some guards. While you're given several options such as asking who owns the place nothing actually seems relevent. You are once again only really given two options - leave the quest or fight. Yes...that's right, kill some people in broad daylight in a public place, the very thing that you couldn't do to the harbor master.

That's just a quest example really, there are other ways in which I feel you have less options. In Origins there were two mages you could party with - Morrigan the power hungry "Do what I want to get my way" kind of mage and Wynn the level-headed "Circle life isn't so bad" mage, two radically different characters. However Kirkwall doesn't seem to house a single Non-Blood mage except maybe Anders (if he counts, he is routinely possessed by a spirit bent on destruction against his will, so in many ways he could be considered an Abomination). The only two mages you can have in your party seem to be anti-circle and anti-templar to a heavy extreme.

[Zevox]

This quest annoyed me quite a bit. When you talk to the harbor master you're given 3 options - leave (which doesn't further the quest at all), threaten him or bribe him. It should be noted that threatening him does nothing since he knows you won't kill him in broad daylight in a public place, leaving you really with two options.
Actually you simply didn't learn everything about that quest. Choosing to leave will further it, if you have Isabella with you - she'll suggest coming back at night and stealing a look at the manifest you need, which you can then do. Also, intimidation will work, if you have the confrontational personality type. I'd guess that's supposed to represent the kind of reputation you build - someone with the diplomatic or sarcastic personality types the guy won't believe will actually kill him openly like that, but someone with the confrontational personality type has the kind of reputation that makes him believe the threat could be genuine, and he'll thus crack then and there.


Go to the warehouse after getting the information and you come across some guards. While you're given several options such as asking who owns the place nothing actually seems relevent. You are once again only really given two options - leave the quest or fight. Yes...that's right, kill some people in broad daylight in a public place, the very thing that you couldn't do to the harbor master.
Again, I'm pretty certain there are more options there, though my memory is hazier. I think one of them may be, once again, returning at night, when those guards won't be around, and I think there was also a way to talk your way past them, you just only got one shot at it. (Edit: checking the wiki, it mentions you can trick the guards into leaving, though if you have Merril in the party you'll end up fighting because she'll mess up your attempt at lying to them.)

Zevox

[VanBuren]

Nothing you do matters. Whether you get there quickly or not, whether you use magic or old-fashioned sleuthing, you will ALWAYS be just too late to save your mother.

I don't see that as a "realistic" choice stemming from only controlling the protagonist. If it was, there should have been a difference between the route that gets you there fast and the route that doesn't.

And where was my neutral choice in the endgame?

Meredith: Hawke, the mages have all gone rogue, we must eliminate them.
Orsino: What? She's crazy, it's the Templars that need to be wiped out!

Hawke: I should go.

Orsino: Wait, what?
Meredith: But... but who's going to decide the victor?
Orsino: Well, now I just don't feel like it anymore.

[Aux-Ash]

Nothing you do matters. Whether you get there quickly or not, whether you use magic or old-fashioned sleuthing, you will ALWAYS be just too late to save your mother.

To be honest, I'd argue that this was in fact the main point of that quest. That simmering realisation that despite the best you can do... it's still not enough. That feeling of: "No... nonononononono..." as you realise who the woman in white is.

[VanBuren]

To be honest, I'd argue that this was in fact the main point of that quest. That simmering realisation that despite the best you can do... it's still not enough. That feeling of: "No... nonononononono..." as you realise who the woman in white is.

Which would have been fine if real choice had existed elsewhere. Without that, it just feels like another slap in the face.

Dragon Age II is an exercise in fatalism.

[Aux-Ash]

Which would have been fine if real choice had existed elsewhere. Without that, it just feels like another slap in the face.

Dragon Age II is an exercise in fatalism.

There were plenty of choice elsewhere. All on a personal level, sure. But plenty of choice.
Feynriel's future depends on your choices. Who you bring with you to the deep roads have three different outcomes depending on your choices. You can support or oppose Petrice's plan. That's just a couple of examples.

Just because theyre not big and world changing does not mean they don't exist or that they aren't meaningful.

DA2 isn't fatalistic, you're just involved with people who have a whole lot more people backing them in the big decisions.

And need I remind you; there was no neutral option in DAO either. In any choice.

That said... I did find act 3 a bit short and lacklustre. It had so much potential to be just as good as act 2, if it only had been quite a bit longer.

[VanBuren]

There were plenty of choice elsewhere. All on a personal level, sure. But plenty of choice.
Feynriel's future depends on your choices. Who you bring with you to the deep roads have three different outcomes depending on your choices. You can support or oppose Petrice's plan. That's just a couple of examples.

Just because theyre not big and world changing does not mean they don't exist or that they aren't meaningful.

DA2 isn't fatalistic, you're just involved with people who have a whole lot more people backing them in the big decisions.

And need I remind you; there was no neutral option in DAO either. In any choice.

That said... I did find act 3 a bit short and lacklustre. It had so much potential to be just as good as act 2, if it only had been quite a bit longer.

Big difference. In DA:O, none of those scenarios were the "big choice", and it was made very clear from the beginning that you needed help to fight the unstoppable evil that will kill everything. You needed to pick sides, because it was clearly laid out that you needed at least one of the sides to help you. Not so in DA2. In this game, the sides aren't means to an end but the end in themselves. There's no convincing reason that I can't just skip town or refuse both sides. Even if that means I have to take them both on, it would be nice to have that.

Of course, what that says to me isn't that it's a failing of game design. After all, But Thou Must is fairly common and at least necessary to BioWare's style of game. So I suspect that it's an issue of writing, in that I didn't find the railroading believable in the endgame, and while the concept of the aforementioned suckerpunch was good, the execution just left me feeling cheated.

[Honest Tiefling]

I think its a choice between Depth and Breadth. Breadth allows you to run off and leave Kirkwall to its fate, Depth would (hopefully) make Kirkwall interesting by providing little details regarding the areas, people and history. Just seems like different styles of play to me.

I think the idea is that Hawke is unwilling to leave Gamlen, Leandra, and Bethany/Carver behind. Even if Hawke is not on good terms with all of them, they are also held to the old family name. I think that was the idea of it, but it could have used some exploration so it doesn't feel like Hawke is just too lazy to move.

[VanBuren]

I think its a choice between Depth and Breadth. Breadth allows you to run off and leave Kirkwall to its fate, Depth would (hopefully) make Kirkwall interesting by providing little details regarding the areas, people and history. Just seems like different styles of play to me.

I think the idea is that Hawke is unwilling to leave Gamlen, Leandra, and Bethany/Carver behind. Even if Hawke is not on good terms with all of them, they are also held to the old family name. I think that was the idea of it, but it could have used some exploration so it doesn't feel like Hawke is just too lazy to move.

I don't think Hawke is really worrying about Leandra at that point, and there's good chance that his siblings are with the Grey Wardens by then. Even still, the writing should have really established that.

[Honest Tiefling]

Yeah, well...I was too lazy to put in spoilers. So mommykins does die, but I guess Hawke likes the family crest and stuff? But agreed, there needed to be more of a reason. If a game is going to be so limited to one area, I think it is best if it really establishes that one area

Like Potion Lady. Whatever her name was. Seemed weird that she was either buddy buddy with you or horribly snarky (I couldn't tell which) and then never seemed to say anything later...

[Aux-Ash]

. Not so in DA2. In this game, the sides aren't means to an end but the end in themselves. There's no convincing reason that I can't just skip town or refuse both sides. Even if that means I have to take them both on, it would be nice to have that.

Oh there I can agree with you to some extent. The only reasons is that it's happening now and you might have a sibling in danger. But overall I agree that there's a lack of a proper buildup to the endgame. Act III really needed to be longer.
A proper become-the-viscount questline in a couple of steps would have been proper methinks. As well as more evidence and hints of Orsino's foul play.

And not being forced too fight them both as bosses, regardless of whom you side with.Meredith as last boss had been fine to me if Orsino had been replaced with say... another templar

[ShinyRocks]

Still only on Act 2 on my first playthrough, so trying to avoid spoiling myself, but I have two gripes.

On the 360, the text is even more illegible than Mass Effect 2 if you don't have a high-def TV. I'm picking one up soon, I expect, but it still bugs me.

Also bugs me: putting the DLC achievements together with the main game ones so that I can't 'complete' the game without doing them. I haven't got Sebastian and wasn't really intending to, but the completionist in me demands it.

I know it's not the first game to do this, but having looked at all the other achievements, they seem eminently doable. I don't try for 100% on most games (including any that require online play because it's just not my thing) so it's annoying to see it and I think 'I could do all those!' but still have to fork out for an extra character who looks like he'd just annoy me anyway.

[C-Lam]

So, there's a new DLC for Dragon Age II, and it's coming out soon.
(http://dragonage.bioware.com/da2/addon/legacy/)
I think it looks pretty good so far from what we see. The story seems interesting enough, and leaving Kirkwall is always a pluss. And hopefully that means new map designs. Wondering how long it will be though.

Although I probably won't buy it right away. Mainly because I want to do a DA:2 playthrough with a DA:O save imported, and use that save to play the DLC, but that's just me.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Wait, who is that guy in the background up there. Is that the Architect?! :smalleek:

[Giggling Ghast]

Wait, who is that guy in the background up there. Is that the Architect?! :smalleek:

Looks a bit like him, doesn't it? But I don't think that's him. I won't rule out a connection to the Architect, however.

I'm going to throw out a theory ...

That's one of the ancient Magister Lords, one of the first darkspawn.

I'm all up for defeating ancient evils, so I'll probably get it.

[Nero24200]

snip

Isabella wasn't in my party. It seems a bit much to cut out the only other options if a specific member isn't in your party. Besides it's the logic behind it as well.

"You won't get an option to kill me because it's too public, but these others are fine to kill in public". If choosing only nice options didn't allow for violent options why do I still need to initiate a fight?

[Cristo Meyers]

Looks a bit like him, doesn't it? But I don't think that's him. I won't rule out a connection to the Architect, however.

I'm going to throw out a theory ...

That's one of the ancient Magister Lords, one of the first darkspawn.

I'm all up for defeating ancient evils, so I'll probably get it.

Connection, maybe, but it's definitely not him. Part of the Architect's face is warped, it's why he wore a mask. This guy's eyes are where they should be.

Eh, first DLC (not counting the Item Packs :smallsigh:) is usually a given for us. I know it's kinda like saying "maybe this hot iron won't burn me when I touch it" but we usually give them a chance before writing off the rest of them.

Though with some of the crap we got for Origins, heaven knows I'm tempted to...

[Giggling Ghast]

Return to Ostagar was the only DLC I thought was a bit lacklustre, though it's always fun slicing up darkspawn. I played it once I gained all the treaties, so it was a bit of emotional closure for my PC.

[Zevox]

So, there's a new DLC for Dragon Age II, and it's coming out soon.
(http://dragonage.bioware.com/da2/addon/legacy/)
I think it looks pretty good so far from what we see. The story seems interesting enough, and leaving Kirkwall is always a pluss. And hopefully that means new map designs. Wondering how long it will be though.

Although I probably won't buy it right away. Mainly because I want to do a DA:2 playthrough with a DA:O save imported, and use that save to play the DLC, but that's just me.
Huh, that page tells us remarkably little. I think I'll wait until more information is available before I decide whether to pick it up.


Wait, who is that guy in the background up there. Is that the Architect?! :smalleek:
I don't think so. The Architect has a pretty distinct, oddly warped face. That character just looks like a cross between a rather brutish human and a darkspawn.


Isabella wasn't in my party. It seems a bit much to cut out the only other options if a specific member isn't in your party. Besides it's the logic behind it as well.

"You won't get an option to kill me because it's too public, but these others are fine to kill in public". If choosing only nice options didn't allow for violent options why do I still need to initiate a fight?
First, you don't need to initiate a fight - as I said, there are ways around that.

To answer your question about the logic though, it's because your threat with the first guy was just a bluff. Killing an assistant to the docks' manager in the middle of his workplace, surrounded by witnesses no less, wouldn't get you the answers you were trying to get out of him, and would get you all sorts of trouble. Killing some rather shady guards in a back alley corner who are all that stand between you and the warehouse you need to enter, on the other hand, is less risky (as far as law enforcement troubles go) and does accomplish your objective of getting into the warehouse. The assistant just calls your bluff if you don't have the reputation to back it up.

Zevox

[Giggling Ghast]

Of course, that could be the Architect's new appearance. Possibly.

EDIT: I guess that squat, muscular creature with the skull-face and the shield is the new genlock. Well, colour me impressed. Dude's been working out.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Of course, that could be the Architect's new appearance. Possibly.

EDIT: I guess that squat, muscular creature with the skull-face and the shield is the new genlock. Well, colour me impressed. Dude's been working out.

They sort of previewed it in Dragon Age Legends when you encountered genlock enemies. Though there they didn't use shields and such, and instead moved like gorillas.

[Psyren]

Okay - still in Act 1, so I'm stepping warily around the spoiler minefield, but I'm far enough in that I can start commenting on this game vs. DA:O.

Positives: Adding a voice to Hawke was hands-down a great move by Bioware - it's really drawing me into the game. Especially since they took it a step further than Mass Effect, and gave you what I'll call a "latent personality."

I'll explain what I mean: In DA2, if your Hawke tends to pick the same kinds of reply/tone in conversations repeatedly, he will use that tone when addressed even without player input, or where the tone of a given conversation option isn't set in stone. Mass Effect had a little of it, but nowhere near the depth of it that this game does.

A couple of spoiler-free examples (spoilered instead for length):
My Hawke - a mage, naturally - is going the very honorable/diplomatic, "Paragon-ish" route. What really clued me in that this was going on was when I took control of one of the other party members (I believe it was Varric, to disable a trap at one point) and decided to try to talk to Hawke to see what would happen. I didn't expect to get any kind of answer from him since his personality is supposedly a blank slate until the player sets it with conversation options.

Imagine my surprise when Hawke started spouting lines like:
"Let's make Kirkwall a better place for everyone."
"There is no time to delay! We have much to do!"
"When in doubt, run away, and let ME handle it."

Needless to say, my inner Paragon was squeeing at this point, because those are exactly the kinds of things I would have had Hawke say in a conversation. I have no doubt that being a bastard or a jokester would provoke different sound-bites from Hawke.

Then there was a side-quest where I had to rescue a runaway half-elf apostate from some slavers that had "rescued" him themselves, and planned to sell him off to Tevinter. When my party stormed the room, the slaver pulled a sword on the boy and told us to surrender or he'd kill him. One of the response options was "I'll risk it" with the combat icon so I couldn't tell the tone, but I decided to try it (as common sense said they were just bluffing and wouldn't kill their meal ticket) to see what Hawke would say. I was expecting Hawke to say "go ahead!" possibly with a racist slur thrown in and that I'd have to reload my save. Instead, my Hawke called the bluff by saying "Go limp; I will not let him harm you" - getting the message across in a very paragon way.
So yeah, big, big points for immersion from DA2.

The other big pro is the combat. I'll never get tired of the new attack animations, particularly for mages and rogues. Combat feels a lot more dynamic. It's lost a bit of strategy though; pretty much every ability has a cooldown now, so you're pretty much just rotating through your repertoire once everything is on cooldown, repeating attacks until the enemies die. You'll need more strategy at the higher difficulty levels, but I'm not about to play those on the console version; all the pausing is annoying enough on Normal without having to carefully set up shattercombos to beat the enemies too.


Negatives: The inventory/customization system. Yeah it's nice that you don't have to put armor on your party members (meaning as soon as I get any helms, plate, greaves etc. that they head right to the vendor bin), but I'm already tired of Anders' feather boa and Aveline's guard digs, and its only Act 1. At least let us find whole suits we can swap their armor out with if you want to keep companion gear simple, while still letting us feel like our party members aren't wearing symbiotic auto-improving nanosuits.
And the other problem I have with the inventory is the sheer amount of JUNK (http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Junk) you find EVERYWHERE - and it ALL takes up bloody space. If you ever forget to hit that Y button when you stop at a shop - hell, if you forget to shop at all for longer than two quests in a row - your bags will full faster than you can say "omnigel." Sure it's easy to get rid of, but even dropping a page of the stuff barely nets you a few silvers, at least at the point in the game I'm at. Was it really necessary to code in that much crap?

That was a minor quibble though. In truth I find the system simpler than DA:O, I just think the solution they chose was a bit clunky. The bigger problem I have is the pacing.

I'm in Act 1, getting ready for that Deep Roads expedition, supposedly so I can duck some Templars who may have gotten wind there's an illegal mage running around Kirkwall righting wrongs. Or at least that's what Carver told me at the start of the Act, and that issue seems never to come up again. There are no Templars asking suspicious questions, no wanted posters, no sense of pressure at all. Even molasses-Oblivion did a better job at making me feel like something was at stake, even if they only did it by opening a few random hellgates in the countryside that nothing ever came out of if I started dallying. But not Kirkwall - I can walk right into the gallows in robes and staff, chat up the Templars, kill some while recruiting a party member, and cast spells in front of more (including Cullen - yes, THAT Cullen!) all without feeling the slightest bit of urgency or fear. I presume if you're not a mage, the same excuse is given, but only for Bethany? Coupled no doubt with the same lack of hurry. And the quests themselves have no rhyme or reason to them. I'm playing with a walkthrough, not because the quests are hard to follow, but because I hate to have to visit the same area of town 10 times because I didn't grab the quests in the most optimal order. DA:O didn't have this problem - you went somewhere, cleared it out, got the treaty signed by [survivor], and moved on. Clear goals, clear progression, and urgency from the impending Blight.

All in all, I think DA2 is an improvement. I just hope DA3 has a much clearer focus.

[/essay]

[Giggling Ghast]

I agree with your points, Psyren. I don't know how anyone can complain about the dialogue system in DA2, which is quite frankly amazing.

While your second point has some credence, I will note that in regards to Bethany …

... if you don't take her on the Deep Roads expedition …... the templars come and haul her away. :smallfrown:

[Cristo Meyers]

The Junk system kinda bothered me too, until I realized that really all they did is start calling all the useless crap you inevitably acquired through the adventure "junk" instead of giving you yet another piece of armor/weapon that is completely outclassed by what you already have.

[Aux-Ash]

It's lost a bit of strategy though; pretty much every ability has a cooldown now, so you're pretty much just rotating through your repertoire once everything is on cooldown, repeating attacks until the enemies die.
I find this an interesting thing to point out. In this regard, there's no difference whatsoever to Origins. They were on cooldown then too. You rotated through your repertoaire then too. The only real difference being that the cooldown is now shorter, so you spend less time just doing autoattack.
I can understand it feeling differently... but less strategical? The only thing they took out of the combat system is dead time. In fact... given the combos... I'd argue that it's far more critical to make sure connected abilities are off cooldown roughly at the same time... adding a cooldown management layer to strategy (for more classes than just mages).


The inventory/customization system. Yeah it's nice that you don't have to put armor on your party members (meaning as soon as I get any helms, plate, greaves etc. that they head right to the vendor bin), but I'm already tired of Anders' feather boa and Aveline's guard digs, and its only Act 1. At least let us find whole suits we can swap their armor out with if you want to keep companion gear simple, while still letting us feel like our party members aren't wearing symbiotic auto-improving nanosuits.
While I agree with you. Adding several swappable suits of unique outfits for the companions demands quite a bit of resources. I don't think it's really feasible to expect it to go beyond the "nice to have"-category (and thus very low priority).


And the other problem I have with the inventory is the sheer amount of JUNK (http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Junk) you find EVERYWHERE - and it ALL takes up bloody space. If you ever forget to hit that Y button when you stop at a shop - hell, if you forget to shop at all for longer than two quests in a row - your bags will full faster than you can say "omnigel." Sure it's easy to get rid of, but even dropping a page of the stuff barely nets you a few silvers, at least at the point in the game I'm at. Was it really necessary to code in that much crap?

This is a case of a compromise. The community is split in people that loves loot and people who think it is unneccessary with useless items. One group wants to see lots of stuff to sort through, one would rather just have the money. So they made the Junk system... a soloution that satisfied neither side.

Amusingly though... many of the "junk" items of DAO can be found as junk in the later game. Including many of the weapons that would invariable be sold at first opportunity.



There are no Templars asking suspicious questions, no wanted posters, no sense of pressure at all...But not Kirkwall - I can walk right into the gallows in robes and staff, chat up the Templars, kill some while recruiting a party member, and cast spells in front of more (including Cullen - yes, THAT Cullen!) all without feeling the slightest bit of urgency or fear.
This is because of Bioware having it to be almost sacrosanct never to inconvenience the player.
Yes, if the game adhered to the lore fully you wouldn't be able to fight a single fight without the templars swarming the place a couple of minutes later. Your home would be stormed at first notice. Your family probably arrested or killed.
Not only would it massively derail the plot and punish you from picking mage, but even if they allow you to survive it.:They'll still firmly and utterly place the Templars in the camp of Antagonists and Enemies. And a big part of the game is that this is at leat a little ambigous.

In a way... it's kind of asking for something you don't want, since the easiest way to get the templars to react the mages "properly" is to remove -all- mage options for the player.
Because the way the game is designed and the lore is built up... you either handwave why the templars don't notice you, make mages unplayable and unrecruitable or make a separate game entirely for mages.

Just like we never suffer disease or have to suffer our character staying home with a broken leg for weeks, never get arrested for comitting violence inside the city walls and other logical and realistic restrictions... you don't get boarded up in the Gallows as a mage.
Because it restricts your freedom in the game as a player.

And it's nothing new... it's just like that the party could have Bastila with her lightsaber in hands running about on Taris in KotoR, that you never get sick in NWN or that you cannot be lost in Sloth's dreamprison or possessed in DAO.

[Zevox]

Negatives: The inventory/customization system. Yeah it's nice that you don't have to put armor on your party members (meaning as soon as I get any helms, plate, greaves etc. that they head right to the vendor bin), but I'm already tired of Anders' feather boa and Aveline's guard digs, and its only Act 1. At least let us find whole suits we can swap their armor out with if you want to keep companion gear simple, while still letting us feel like our party members aren't wearing symbiotic auto-improving nanosuits.
I don't think that was to keep the gear "simple," but rather for the purpose of giving the companions each unique looks, as opposed to the interchangeable generic armor most of them spent most of the first game wearing. Bioware just decided against a gameplay-story separation deal where you could alter their equipment without it impacting their appearance. Personally I'd probably prefer that alternative myself, but given the choice between DA1 and DA2's approaches, I'll take DA2's.


And the other problem I have with the inventory is the sheer amount of JUNK (http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Junk) you find EVERYWHERE - and it ALL takes up bloody space. If you ever forget to hit that Y button when you stop at a shop - hell, if you forget to shop at all for longer than two quests in a row - your bags will full faster than you can say "omnigel." Sure it's easy to get rid of, but even dropping a page of the stuff barely nets you a few silvers, at least at the point in the game I'm at. Was it really necessary to code in that much crap?
I agree there. For as annoying as filling your inventory with useless loot could be in 1, at least there you could sometimes randomly find a useful item, or at least an item worth more than a handful of coppers. All the "junk" items in DA2 are worthless for anything but selling and don't even sell for much, which is much more annoying.

Edit: Trailer for Dragon Age: Legacy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr0afwgEGrI&feature=player_embedded) (the recently announced DLC).

My reaction: meh. Like all too many video game trailers these days, it comes across as just a generic action movie trailer to me. I think I've become inured to those.

Zevox

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Watched the trailer. Was that Jennifer Hale's voice as the Grey Warden lady?

[TheLaughingMan]

This is because of Bioware having it to be almost sacrosanct never to inconvenience the player.
Yes, if the game adhered to the lore fully you wouldn't be able to fight a single fight without the templars swarming the place a couple of minutes later. Your home would be stormed at first notice. Your family probably arrested or killed.
Not only would it massively derail the plot and punish you from picking mage, but even if they allow you to survive it.:They'll still firmly and utterly place the Templars in the camp of Antagonists and Enemies. And a big part of the game is that this is at least a little ambigous.

In a way... it's kind of asking for something you don't want, since the easiest way to get the templars to react the mages "properly" is to remove -all- mage options for the player.
Because the way the game is designed and the lore is built up... you either handwave why the templars don't notice you, make mages unplayable and unrecruitable or make a separate game entirely for mages.

Just like we never suffer disease or have to suffer our character staying home with a broken leg for weeks, never get arrested for comitting violence inside the city walls and other logical and realistic restrictions... you don't get boarded up in the Gallows as a mage.
Because it restricts your freedom in the game as a player.

And it's nothing new... it's just like that the party could have Bastila with her lightsaber in hands running about on Taris in KotoR, that you never get sick in NWN or that you cannot be lost in Sloth's dreamprison or possessed in DAO.

I really wouldn't say it's like not getting a cold in a videogame. The mage-templar is the crux of the entire plot - Playing a mage in Templar City is kind of asking for it. At least throw a few Templars at the player for every time they flagrantly abuse their plot-armor.

For example, say that we have a city under quarantine. The Virus has infected quite a few citizens, and awakened in them some psychic powers. In an attempt to keep control, the government places those citizens under heavy lock-down, and the (army, navy, spase mahrines) has/have been ordered to take down potentially dangerous infectees with extreme prejudice. Now, imagine we are the protagonist of such a setting. And we're pretty much throwing cars, lighting birds on fire, and kicking the asses of whichever party has looked at us funny. Now, imagine the spase navarmy doesn't even bat an eye. Exaggeration? Probably. But you get my point.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I really wouldn't say it's like not getting a cold in a videogame. The mage-templar is the crux of the entire plot - Playing a mage in Templar City is kind of asking for it. At least throw a few Templars at the player for every time they flagrantly abuse their plot-armor.
But that's not apparent right at the start of the game, when you're fleeing the darkspawn. Your mother suggests going to Kirkwall because you have family there, which means its your best bet of finding a place to stay, as opposed to "wandering aimlessly" as Bethany puts it. Your status as a mage isn't as much an issue as finding a home. In fact, the templar/mage conflict only takes center stage in the third act. In the first act, it's more along the lines of "world-building" for Kirkwall, the different quests introducing you to your companions and showing you the status quo that's going to get shaken up in subsequent acts.

In the second act, not only are you rich and powerful enough that the Order can't touch you without getting on the bad side of the nobles (including the Viscount who is likely very grateful to the person that saved his son from the Winters), but the qunari are more of a pressing concern anyway.

Once the qunari are gone as a threat, the conflict that you brought to light in the first act (by revealing Tahrone's scheme to subvert the templars) takes center stage, but then you're the Champion and you're too powerful to touch. Moreover, the templars WANT you on their side by that point.

Really the only point where using magic in public would be an issue is in the first act, but I imagine that word travels slowly in Kirkwall (case in point, I received a letter from Meeran of the Red Iron telling me about a potential job, but the letter had apparently been sent AFTER I refused to kill Lord Harriman, prompting him to tell me he wouldn't help me find work again, and then attacking me and getting himself killed), and even if templars can sense you're a mage, you're doing things they can't, helping them. They likely feel this gets you at least a brief reprieve, as you've clearly shown you're not an abomination or a maleficar (at least until you hit level 7, anyway). Furthermore, Meredith is only just coming into power and is still much more lenient than when she goes off the deep end in the final act.

Sure, it's handwaving, but really, would anyone want to play a mage if they stuck to the lore? And besides, as you see even in the first act, Kirkwall's crawling with maleficarum anyway that the templars are doing nothing about. They're clearly more interested in keeping the mages they've got under control, not seeking out ones that cause trouble. In short, they're looking for trouble in the wrong places.

EDIT: Apparently it's now canon that the Warden didn't side with the Reavers and destroy the Urn of Sacred Ashes, and that he/she found, activated and restored the memories of Shale, as both Wynne and Shale are major characters in the upcoming novel, Dragon Age: Asunder. This personally doesn't bother me because that's how my game turned out anyway, but I figure it'll spark some discussion here. And to be fair, the idea that the Urn was destroyed was already established as non-canon by Leliana's presence in the game anyway.

Also, the protagonist of Asunder, Rhys, has been revealed to by Wynne's son that she mentioned was taken from her during the game. Mother and son will be teaming up to solve a murder mystery in Orlais.

[Giggling Ghast]

That trailer was VERY interesting, particularly when it mentioned this powerful darkspawn has been imprisoned for two thousand years. I cross-referenced the official timeline and discovered something interesting.

If the Chantry is correct, the Golden City was invaded by the Magister Lords just over two thousand years ago.

I think this might actually be one of the first darkspawn.


EDIT: Apparently it's now canon that the Warden didn't side with the Reavers and destroy the Urn of Sacred Ashes, and that he/she found, activated and restored the memories of Shale, as both Wynne and Shale are major characters in the upcoming novel, Dragon Age: Asunder. This personally doesn't bother me because that's how my game turned out anyway, but I figure it'll spark some discussion here. And to be fair, the idea that the Urn was destroyed was already established as non-canon by Leliana's presence in the game anyway.

Also, the protagonist of Asunder, Rhys, has been revealed to by Wynne's son that she mentioned was taken from her during the game. Mother and son will be teaming up to solve a murder mystery in Orlais.

Doesn't bother me in the slightest, as that's how my game turned out as well.

It should be noted that the books aren't purely canon.

[Divayth Fyr]

That trailer was VERY interesting, particularly when it mentioned this powerful darkspawn has been imprisoned for two thousand years. I cross-referenced the official timeline and discovered something interesting.

If the Chantry is correct, the Golden City was invaded by the Magister Lords just over two thousand years ago.

I think this might actually be one of the first darkspawn.

Actually (if the timeline at DA Wiki is correct) the darkspawn came to be about 1200 years ago - so the creature shouldn't be one at all. And there would also be no Grey Wardens at that time either...

Also, what kind of darkspawn should be more powerfull than an archdemon (the GW killed those, but this they had to imprison)?

[Giggling Ghast]

Ah. I see where I made my mistake. You are correct.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

That trailer was VERY interesting, particularly when it mentioned this powerful darkspawn has been imprisoned for two thousand years. I cross-referenced the official timeline and discovered something interesting.

If the Chantry is correct, the Golden City was invaded by the Magister Lords just over two thousand years ago.

I think this might actually be one of the first darkspawn.
...Daaaaaamn, Hawke's family may be even more heroic than I expected!

Doesn't bother me in the slightest, as that's how my game turned out as well.

It should be noted that the books aren't purely canon.
True, but they're pretty damn close. But I liked Wynne and Shale, and am glad to see them having more adventures. And teaming up with Wynne's son to solve a murder mystery? This sounds like it'll be the most awesome Dragon Age novel yet! They've been getting better and better as they go along.

[Arbitrarity]

Real reason friendly fire in DA2 is so devastating on Nightmare:

Idiotic number imbalance.
"Oh hey guys, let's give PC's about 2-300 health"
"Sounds good"
"Ok, now they should be able to do lots of damage"
"But then how do we make trash mobs not instant die?"
"Easy, give trash tier mobs 500 health, normal ones 1100, and bosses 2-3000"
"So how much damage should fireballs do?"
"Oh, say 150"
"I can see no problem with this design, in that trash mobs take 3-4 AOE attacks to kill, while these same attacks will nearly instagib a player character"

[Honest Tiefling]

...Daaaaaamn, Hawke's family may be even more heroic than I expected!

Little preemptive but should various theories pan out, I think we might have the next forum thread title. Hawke: Fereldan for ***-kicker!

Of course, it is hinted that this is either wrong, or the chantry is wrong. Or really bad with numbers. (2000? 1200? Eh. It has a two in it)

While is is rampant speculation, I sorta wonder how people view the chantry. How many would prefer for the Chantry to be correct, possibly validating that religion, vs. the Chantry being wildly inaccurate with some details and all that would imply?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Little preemptive but should various theories pan out, I think we might have the next forum thread title. Hawke: Fereldan for ***-kicker!

Of course, it is hinted that this is either wrong, or the chantry is wrong. Or really bad with numbers. (2000? 1200? Eh. It has a two in it)

While is is rampant speculation, I sorta wonder how people view the chantry. How many would prefer for the Chantry to be correct, possibly validating that religion, vs. the Chantry being wildly inaccurate with some details and all that would imply?
Honestly, I'm not sure. I want to respect the Chantry, as they're a strong community binder and many of them are great people (Elthina, Thrask, etc.). But on the other hand, they also produce horrible zealots both for and against them (Petrice, the Qunari, Anders etc.). While I acknowledge the dangers of magic, you've got to admit that, in terms of how it was run, Kirkwall had PROBLEMS.
Here's some more random speculation about Legacy in general though. What if this mysterious darkspawn we're hearing about is the "He" that Sandal mentions rising? If the suspicions that he was one of the original darkspawn (which seems to be coroborated by him saying "I seek the Light!" which could well mean the Golden City) turn out to be correct, it may be that Sandal wasn't talking about the Mage/Chantry conflict at all! :smalleek:

[Honest Tiefling]

While I acknowledge the dangers of magic, you've got to admit that, in terms of how it was run, Kirkwall had PROBLEMS.

I greatly suspect that a theme of Dragon Age is that if people are born with tremendous destructive powers, it really isn't the world's best idea to isolate them from positive social interaction.

Hug your local mage before they turn into abominations!

Through I think the worst thing to do would be to make the Chantry wrong and diminish the good they have done, and the good they tried to do. Yes, lots of bad apples, but not all of them were bad. Now that I think about it, I hope Templars get enough screentime to show off more good templars in future games/DLC, actually.

And you have made Sandal several times scarier...So I wonder if he's affected by 'his' return at all. I would be sad, as Sandal was a surprisingly likable character.

[VanBuren]

Little preemptive but should various theories pan out, I think we might have the next forum thread title. Hawke: Fereldan for ***-kicker!

Of course, it is hinted that this is either wrong, or the chantry is wrong. Or really bad with numbers. (2000? 1200? Eh. It has a two in it)

While is is rampant speculation, I sorta wonder how people view the chantry. How many would prefer for the Chantry to be correct, possibly validating that religion, vs. the Chantry being wildly inaccurate with some details and all that would imply?

I'd be happy with a situation where the Chantry got it right in broad strokes, but lost something in the details

[Aux-Ash]

I really wouldn't say it's like not getting a cold in a videogame. The mage-templar is the crux of the entire plot - Playing a mage in Templar City is kind of asking for it. At least throw a few Templars at the player for every time they flagrantly abuse their plot-armor.

For example, say that we have a city under quarantine. The Virus has infected quite a few citizens, and awakened in them some psychic powers. In an attempt to keep control, the government places those citizens under heavy lock-down, and the (army, navy, spase mahrines) has/have been ordered to take down potentially dangerous infectees with extreme prejudice. Now, imagine we are the protagonist of such a setting. And we're pretty much throwing cars, lighting birds on fire, and kicking the asses of whichever party has looked at us funny. Now, imagine the spase navarmy doesn't even bat an eye. Exaggeration? Probably. But you get my point.

First of all: Yes, I agree with you in principle. I'm the kind of DM that does that to my players (and I tell them that). I think a player should face the consequences of their choices

But I also understand why Bioware do not do this. It basically devolves to one very simple reason: the only true way to resolve a conflict is to fight. Yes, sometimes you do indeed get the opportunity to resolve something peacefully, but most conflicts can only be won if fought. You can't really choose not to fight.
Mages are a very integrated part of the games necessary tactics. Choosing not to fight with a mage is seriously handicapping yourself, especially since they provide the healing.

In a way... when a fight happens, the player does not choose to abuse their plot-armour. It's forced upon them. Consequences are good, but consequences fopr something you did not choose is not. That's just frustrating.

That's why you got plot-immunity against the Templars, just like you got plot immunity against the law (no, seriously. Given how often Hawke fights in public you'd expect a number of manslaughter, murder and disturbing the peace charges. Yet no guards try to arrest me... even before Aveline gets promoted).
The only way we'll ever see true consequences would require two major paradigm shiftes from Bioware: 1) That combat is no longer the primary challange-resolution method and 2) that bioware starts hitting you with consequences of what you choose on a meta-level as well.

[Nero24200]

There are better ways to handle plot immunity with regards to the templars. You couldn't use magic in the city in Baldur's Gate 2 but they did a good job of handling it.


You could have it that some of the thugs jumping you at night are actually templars who waited till they had reinforcements.
They could maybe have a small quest where you obtained forged documents claiming you have permission to leave the circle for some form of study (which seems plausable considering some mages do have permission to leave the circle for some tasks, as in Awakening you are given a quest to find a mage on leave to study botany.
You could have a quest during which you bribe one of the higher ranking templars (possibly with lyrium) and he orders some templars to "look the other way" as long as you don't go too overboard with your spells.

There were ways to handle the whole templar mage thing better, they just didn't bother.

[Callos_DeTerran]

Edit: Trailer for Dragon Age: Legacy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr0afwgEGrI&feature=player_embedded) (the recently announced DLC).

My reaction: meh. Like all too many video game trailers these days, it comes across as just a generic action movie trailer to me. I think I've become inured to those.

Zevox

...SONUVA!!! I just spent the majority of the rest of my points getting the Exiled Prince! Sebastian better be worth it...

....Also, is it just me or does the new Warrior/Hawke specific weapon look a lot like the Lyrium Broadsword that Meredith has?........I know it can't be that, cause Meredith has the blasted thing from Act II on, but that sword looks suspiciously like the blasted thing.

[Aux-Ash]

There are better ways to handle plot immunity with regards to the templars. You couldn't use magic in the city in Baldur's Gate 2 but they did a good job of handling it.
The difference between the Cowled Wizards and the Kirkwall templars is that the former were wizards trying to maintain their monopoly/control of magic in a city. You could easily bypass that by obliging to their terms and pay them a fee (or do a job for them) or scare them off, regardless it was not a main plot point. The latter is a order led by a paranoid fanatic that wants to see all mages brought into a massively controlled facility or, failing that, dead. The cowled wizards just don't want you to disturb their sense of control, the templars want to control -you- (or your companions)


You could have it that some of the thugs jumping you at night are actually templars who waited till they had reinforcements.
I see three problems with this: 1) Why attack you in an ambush at night when they could storm your home and hold your family at swordpoint, they clearly know who you are after all. 2) Your protagonist armour would mean that despite outgunning, outnumbering and outinfluencing... they can't touch you and 3) firmly place the templars as antagonists.

Instead of making them oblivious towards/unaware of you they'd be stupid, weak and the biggest problem: the plot needs them to be not outright hostile towards you. A big part of it consists of that free mages aren't much better after all. If the templars outright attack you (and they would, seeing all parties more or less needs a mage) then they're firmly in the enemies camp. Certain choices in the end would turn out to be very very easy (and not in the Templar's favour).
Not to mention that instead of the templars not reacting to you being hard to explain... it would make Meredith's, Cullen's and Thrask's dealings with you even more inexplicable. Because as bad as it is now... at least you haven't been mass murdering their collegues/men/friends (to their knowledge).


They could maybe have a small quest where you obtained forged documents claiming you have permission to leave the circle for some form of study (which seems plausable considering some mages do have permission to leave the circle for some tasks, as in Awakening you are given a quest to find a mage on leave to study botany.
It'd be a neat way to solve it, sure. But I did cover this solution above: It falls in the category of "making a second game just for mages". Before you'd be allowed to leave the circle you'd have to join/be forced into it. Which means a harrowing, a cell and a templar always on your tail. It'd cause a whole slew of trouble when he reports back to Meredith... I'd expect a tranquilisation... or just being locked into said cell.


You could have a quest during which you bribe one of the higher ranking templars (possibly with lyrium) and he orders some templars to "look the other way" as long as you don't go too overboard with your spells.
Going overboard with spells. You mean like openly using them against citizens, taking up blood magic and attacking the odd templar? :smallwink:
The problem is that we are going overboard with them. If we were subtle it'd be a whole lot easier to explain and accept this issue.


There were ways to handle the whole templar mage thing better, they just didn't bother.
As I said... there's six options:
Handwaving it for player conveniece at the expense of immersion.
Restricting players from having access to mages
Making mages irrelevant in combat so you don't need to have one in the party.
Toning down the combat aspect so much that you don't need to openly use magic.
Rewriting the plot and/or lore entirely.
Making a separate plot only for mages.

The first one they did. The second one would probably have been intolerable to the community (and playing a mage can be fun/interesting). The third one is a very unattractive option. The fourth requiring a new engine and/or a paradigm shift in the design. The fifth is a bit unattractive since it is a interesting conflict and the intolerance to mages is one of the most interesting parts of DA lore. The sixth is a resource issue.

It is the easiest solution. Is it a poor one? Yes. But the other ones are either expensive or worse.

But it's no different form that the long arm of the law ignores you walking about heavily armed, randomly starting fights and killing people. Even despite that you probably make a magistrate furious. Why is the templars not going after you unacceptable when the city guards does even less and have a lot more reason to do so. You are a danger to people in the city. You ought to have been arrested a long time ago... and probably executed.
The reason: you are a player. It'd be difficult to grant you freedom to play the game while at the same time making the law immersive.

[Callos_DeTerran]

As I said... there's six options:
Handwaving it for player conveniece at the expense of immersion.
Restricting players from having access to mages
Making mages irrelevant in combat so you don't need to have one in the party.
Toning down the combat aspect so much that you don't need to openly use magic.
Rewriting the plot and/or lore entirely.
Making a separate plot only for mages.

The first one they did. The second one would probably have been intolerable to the community (and playing a mage can be fun/interesting). The third one is a very unattractive option. The fourth requiring a new engine and/or a paradigm shift in the design. The fifth is a bit unattractive since it is a interesting conflict and the intolerance to mages is one of the most interesting parts of DA lore. The sixth is a resource issue.

It is the easiest solution. Is it a poor one? Yes. But the other ones are either expensive or worse.

But it's no different form that the long arm of the law ignores you walking about heavily armed, randomly starting fights and killing people. Even despite that you probably make a magistrate furious. Why is the templars not going after you unacceptable when the city guards does even less and have a lot more reason to do so. You are a danger to people in the city. You ought to have been arrested a long time ago... and probably executed.
The reason: you are a player. It'd be difficult to grant you freedom to play the game while at the same time making the law immersive.

Just want to bring up a couple points about a rather well-thought out argument here.

1) I've gone without using a mage in the party at all. Granted, I play on Normal, so take this with a grain of salt, but it's perfectly possible to make it to Act II (where the Templars can't go after you easily) without exposing yourself as a mage or mage harborer.

2) Even then, there's a LOT of apostates and blood mages running around who are actively doing actually demon-y...things. Hawke, even confrontational Hawke, is at best a criminal force and not an evil one, barring the use of Blood Magic. And, unless you use Maker's Sigh, it's actually a bit difficult to get to the noticeable blood-magic spells before Act II, so it's distinctly possible that they don't find out that you're a blood mage. Even then, there's bigger fish to fry with abominations and evil blood mages. This is less a case of 'Templars are ignorant' as much as 'templars are busy with mages who are an actual threat' Note at the end of Act II (if you play a mage) Meredith even says she'll postpone dealing with you in favor of the city and this is AFTER she acquires some of the Sealed Evil in a Can. Even the most fanatical (if well-intentioned) of the templars is willing to let you slide since you don't make yourself a big problem and other mages do. Though she does mention in the Third Act, only if you take certain dialogue options though, that she's still perfectly willing to lock you in the Gallows if you stop being helpful or something like that, consequences be damned.

3) Half the time, how do they know Hawke's the mage doing it? As said, there are a LOT of illegal mages in Kirkwall and the deeds of Hawke, Merril, Bethany, and Anders could be confused as the deeds of another mage. Especially since Anders does take pains to avoid the templars, Merril...doesn't leave her house much after a certain point, and Bethany is resolved one way or the other. And I think, don't quote me, that Aveline/Varrick/Someone informs the Hawke family whenever a templar raid is about to happen so they can properly hide themselves.

4) On the guard, Aveline looks out for Hawke, even before becoming guard captain. This probably includes telling her old captain that Hawke is working for her if Hawke does something shady and questions are asked. After she's guard captain, it's a simple matter that Hawke is doing good. Aveline might not like some of the stuff Hawke does, but she can't argue with the results most of the time, is Hawke's friend, and would prefer Hawke was out and about since good will be accomplished one way or the other. Plus, Hawke does useful jobs for Aveline.

[Mx.Silver]

Mages are a very integrated part of the games necessary tactics. Choosing not to fight with a mage is seriously handicapping yourself, especially since they provide the healing.

Which kind of raises the question why they bothered going writing the background about mages the way they did. It's not like it adds a whole lot to the setting anyway (particularly if you're familiar with Warhammer Fantasy) and it might have enabled more interesting options for mage origins back in DAO. Then again, background and setting have always been my least favourite aspects about the DA games (that and the lack of spears and other polearms) so feel free to take this with a grain of salt.

[Aux-Ash]

1) I've gone without using a mage in the party at all. Granted, I play on Normal, so take this with a grain of salt, but it's perfectly possible to make it to Act II (where the Templars can't go after you easily) without exposing yourself as a mage or mage harborer.
Indeed, it's not like it's difficult to make the handwave seem plausible. I did the same. It's only if you openly use distinct blood magic in public this becomes a problem. If you actually try to hide that it's really no issue at all.
And as you do mention, there is some reaction to your nature. Meredith in particular extorts you with it and openly threatens Anders that it is only Hawke's name that protects him.


Even then, there's a LOT of apostates and blood mages running around who are actively doing actually demon-y...things. Hawke, even confrontational Hawke, is at best a criminal force and not an evil one, barring the use of Blood Magic. And, unless you use Maker's Sigh, it's actually a bit difficult to get to the noticeable blood-magic spells before Act II, so it's distinctly possible that they don't find out that you're a blood mage. Even then, there's bigger fish to fry with abominations and evil blood mages. This is less a case of 'Templars are ignorant' as much as 'templars are busy with mages who are an actual threat' Note at the end of Act II (if you play a mage) Meredith even says she'll postpone dealing with you in favor of the city and this is AFTER she acquires some of the Sealed Evil in a Can. Even the most fanatical (if well-intentioned) of the templars is willing to let you slide since you don't make yourself a big problem and other mages do. Though she does mention in the Third Act, only if you take certain dialogue options though, that she's still perfectly willing to lock you in the Gallows if you stop being helpful or something like that, consequences be damned.
(spoilered for brevity)
Again, agreed. Like mentioned above, even if they do handwave a case of no consequence they do indeed give some plausible reasonings behind it.


Half the time, how do they know Hawke's the mage doing it? As said, there are a LOT of illegal mages in Kirkwall and the deeds of Hawke, Merril, Bethany, and Anders could be confused as the deeds of another mage. Especially since Anders does take pains to avoid the templars, Merril...doesn't leave her house much after a certain point, and Bethany is resolved one way or the other. And I think, don't quote me, that Aveline/Varrick/Someone informs the Hawke family whenever a templar raid is about to happen so they can properly hide themselves.
Yes. I seem to recall Merill even acknowledging that it'd be dangerous to out herself as a mage in the alienage and actually refrains from using it when not in your presence. And if Bethany stays home, she is indeed taken.
Meredith does learn of Anders, but only after Hawke's name start to mean something (or perhaps they actually tolerated him because of the good works he did with the clinic)

The only real way to run into this issue is to throw the lore out the window and openly and visibly use blood magic as if it was the most natural thing to do.
Basically.. it's not much of an issue if you try to immerse yourself. There's some instances were it can come across as odd. But if you try to be subtle it's certainly possible.


On the guard, Aveline looks out for Hawke, even before becoming guard captain. This probably includes telling her old captain that Hawke is working for her if Hawke does something shady and questions are asked. After she's guard captain, it's a simple matter that Hawke is doing good. Aveline might not like some of the stuff Hawke does, but she can't argue with the results most of the time, is Hawke's friend, and would prefer Hawke was out and about since good will be accomplished one way or the other. Plus, Hawke does useful jobs for Aveline.

Still... the reason vigilanteism isn't tolerated is that it makes people lose respect for the law. And that can make society break down. Blood feuds happens when people take the law into their own hands. Even if you only target criminals, those people have families too... Hawke's actions around the city is civil unrest waiting to happen. Families will demand vengence for lost kin, criminal groups will pressure the corrupt elements of the city to get Hawke out of the picture... criminals will start to hire muscle and be heavily armed.

Contrary to popular belief... killing criminals does not make the streets safer. It makes them into warzones.

Any society caring for it's continued existance would never let a person like Hawke run about. And while Aveline's presence would help, sooner or later even she would be forced to act or be replaced.


Which kind of raises the question why they bothered going writing the background about mages the way they did. It's not like it adds a whole lot to the setting anyway (particularly if you're familiar with Warhammer Fantasy) and it might have enabled more interesting options for mage origins back in DAO. Then again, background and setting have always been my least favourite aspects about the DA games (that and the lack of spears and other polearms) so feel free to take this with a grain of salt.

Because mechanics should serve the setting, not the other way around.
In the setting, a sword can kill with a single stroke. Magic is damn exhausting to use and magical healing a lot less certain. It's just as dirty, lethal and dangerous as the real world.
The mechanics add a simplification that's easy to follow and adds enough protection to make things challenging and interesting. Having combat be so dangerous as in real life seldom works well because by flinching it could all be over for you. Which can be very frustrating.
The game is designed to be a party-based semi-strategical rpg in the DnD vein. Just like there's hitpoints, every class has a role to fill tactically. It is the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate in that the design of the game is built on similar assumptions and goals.

How mages are treated is also a very logical extension on how mages would be treating if they could shoot fire from their hands, control people's minds and become monsters at no warning at all...
They'd be feared, shunned and locked up. People wouldn't find them cool or fascinating, but very very frightening.

[Mx.Silver]

Because mechanics should serve the setting, not the other way around.
Regardless of whether that's actually true (in game design, mechanics can often be designed before the fluff is written) the point is in this case there's an obvious clash when your combat revolves around magical support in a setting where mages are feared and reviled. Changing the setting would probably have been easier to implement than a change in the core mechanics.




How mages are treated is also a very logical extension on how mages would be treating if they could shoot fire from their hands, control people's minds and become monsters at no warning at all...
They'd be feared, shunned and locked up. People wouldn't find them cool or fascinating, but very very frightening.
Again, depends on how you write the setting. I would imagine that someone being able to shoot fire from their hands would be less of a big deal if it's fairly commonplace. Making it so that mages are all potential abominations in waiting who have an entire military order dedicated to killing any who aren't part of the registration probably isn't a good decision for a game where most fights will feature magic users. Particularly when that's held as a defining feature of your setting that's supposed to stop it from being 'generic medieval-esque fantasy world number 272' (and no, the Darkspawn alone aren't enough for that).

[Zevox]

While is is rampant speculation, I sorta wonder how people view the chantry. How many would prefer for the Chantry to be correct, possibly validating that religion, vs. the Chantry being wildly inaccurate with some details and all that would imply?
I think it would be much more interesting for the Chantry to be largely wrong. Perhaps with a kernel of truth to their myths (say for instance that the Tevinter Magisters actually did attack the Black/Golden City, but for very different reasons than the Chantry believes), but with them having changed (intentionally or not) nearly all the important details to suit their purposes. Besides, the Dragon Age is supposed to be a period of great change for Thedas, and what greater change could be wrought to the world than proving that the Chantry was a farce all along?

Zevox

[JadedDM]

Eh, I hope not. The whole 'the main religion turns out to be false' is so overdone in RPGs these days. One of the things I really liked about Dragon Age was that the validity of the Chantry was so up in the air. Was Andraste the bride of the maker, or just a powerful mage? Did her ashes have healing properties because of divine power, or because they were buried around so much lyrium? Is the Maker a god? A very powerful fade spirit? A very powerful demon? Completely non-existent?

I would be rather disappointed if the beliefs of the Chantry were proven without a doubt, either to be true or false.

[Dienekes]

Personally I'd rather they not touch the truth behind the Chant at all. Let the players own biases determine how they feel about the various religions the game describes.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Eh, I hope not. The whole 'the main religion turns out to be false' is so overdone in RPGs these days. One of the things I really liked about Dragon Age was that the validity of the Chantry was so up in the air. Was Andraste the bride of the maker, or just a powerful mage? Did her ashes have healing properties because of divine power, or because they were buried around so much lyrium? Is the Maker a god? A very powerful fade spirit? A very powerful demon? Completely non-existent?

I would be rather disappointed if the beliefs of the Chantry were proven without a doubt, either to be true or false.

Got to agree here. Prove it either way, and you raise a great number of questions about the nature of the world and how it got to be that way. Dragon Age's moral ambiguity crumbles in the face of D&D-style religion where the gods are a tangible and verifiable thing.

Still, anyone else have an opinion on whether this super-darkspawn we're hearing about is the "He" Sandal mentioned rising?

[Delusion]

That decides it. My next playthrough will be with superstitious warrior, without a mage in party, on hard (or normal on some fights that might prove too hard. I am looking at you ancient rockwraith!).

[Edge]

Got to agree here. Prove it either way, and you raise a great number of questions about the nature of the world and how it got to be that way. Dragon Age's moral ambiguity crumbles in the face of D&D-style religion where the gods are a tangible and verifiable thing.

Still, anyone else have an opinion on whether this super-darkspawn we're hearing about is the "He" Sandal mentioned rising?

Having never heard this line from Sandal, I looked it up on the DA wiki. The context makes it sound more like he's talking about the god baby. But, of course, he won't exist in every playthrough.

Also, the leaked achievements (http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Achievements_(Dragon_Age_II)#Legacy) for Legacy possibly hint at this talking darkspawn's name. Potential spoiler warning, to be fair.

[Giggling Ghast]

Hey, is that Jerrik Dace in the trailer?


Watched the trailer. Was that Jennifer Hale's voice as the Grey Warden lady?

No, it's the same actress who voiced Mistress Woolsey from Awakening, unless I'm mistaken.


Got to agree here. Prove it either way, and you raise a great number of questions about the nature of the world and how it got to be that way. Dragon Age's moral ambiguity crumbles in the face of D&D-style religion where the gods are a tangible and verifiable thing.

Still, anyone else have an opinion on whether this super-darkspawn we're hearing about is the "He" Sandal mentioned rising?

I think it's rather inevitable that the truth behind the Chant of Light will be revealed, as I think we're heading towards the return of the Maker. I feel it in my gut.

Because I believe Sandal's cryptic prophecy is related to the return of the Maker, I don't think this 'Corypheus' and Sandal's prophecy are related.

[Aux-Ash]

Regardless of whether that's actually true (in game design, mechanics can often be designed before the fluff is written) the point is in this case there's an obvious clash when your combat revolves around magical support in a setting where mages are feared and reviled. Changing the setting would probably have been easier to implement than a change in the core mechanics.

Dragon age was in development for five years though, the way I understood it was that the mechanics changed a lot during those years. If I recall correctly for instance, originally the mages had a lyrium addiction mechanic that grew worse the more magic/mana potions they used. The writing was tweaked too of course, but there was a lot of it by the time game development proper started.

The problem as a whole to changing setting to serve the mechanics is that the mechanics are only supposed to be a interface, They're supposed to let you interact with the world in a fun way, not define it. IN a lot of cases the mechanics as is are also compromises, not a "this is what we wnated" but a "this is the best we could do in the time we had". Changing the setting to accomodate something you ended up with would be a poor move.

Now as for the usefullness of mages. Mages are so useful because the underlying core of the game is that is party-based. A good move would therefore be to make very partymember contributeable. Including the mages.
This also ties in to the setting. Mages are useful. They provide very valuable solutions to mundane problems. That's why they're being kept alive by both Qunari and Chantry in the first place.


Again, depends on how you write the setting. I would imagine that someone being able to shoot fire from their hands would be less of a big deal if it's fairly commonplace. Making it so that mages are all potential abominations in waiting who have an entire military order dedicated to killing any who aren't part of the registration probably isn't a good decision for a game where most fights will feature magic users. Particularly when that's held as a defining feature of your setting that's supposed to stop it from being 'generic medieval-esque fantasy world number 272' (and no, the Darkspawn alone aren't enough for that).

In my opinion, the core theme of DA is clashing beliefs and moral dilemmas. The Chantry and the Imperial Chantry. The Chantry and the Qun. Humans and Dalish. Casteless and Noble dwarves. Grey Wardens and the king of Anderfels. Circles and Apostates. Loghain and Eamon. Orlesians and Fereldans. Meredith and the Viscount. Meredith and Orsino.
And that there's no object truths to any of these.

Having the mages feature in one is good. And the core dilemma with mages is that they're so very useful. Is it right to lock them away if you depend on them so much. That is the core question regarding mages in DA. Just one of many clashes.

Again, in my opinion; The world would be so much less interesting if noone batted an eyelash at mages just because the interface to the world makes them useful in combat.

[Mx.Silver]

The problem as a whole to changing setting to serve the mechanics is that the mechanics are only supposed to be a interface, They're supposed to let you interact with the world in a fun way, not define it.
I can think of several Genres of videogame were that doesn't seem to hold true (e.g. RTS, 4X TBS) but whatever, that's not really the matter at hand.


Changing the setting to accomodate something you ended up with would be a poor move. If it would improve the cohesiveness of the game experience, how would it be a poor move.





In my opinion, the core theme of DA is clashing beliefs and moral dilemmas.
The Chantry and the Imperial Chantry. The Chantry and the Qun. Humans and Dalish. Casteless and Noble dwarves. Grey Wardens and the king of Anderfels. Circles and Apostates. Loghain and Eamon. Orlesians and Fereldans. Meredith and the Viscount. Meredith and Orsino.
And that there's no object truths to any of these.
I'm not talking about core themes, I'm talking about distinguishing features. Moral dilemmas are nothing out of the ordinary these days, and the ones in DA for the most part aren't anything special (the Urn of Ashes and Werewolf Curse do stand out, but for entirely the wrong reasons).
The point being, having moral ambiguity on it's own doesn't stop Fereldan being 'generic medieval-esque fantasy world number 272'. The mage situation is at least a distinguishing feature (albeit with marked similarities to Warhammer Fantasy). Yes, The Fade is more original but it's so under-utilised it doesn't really count.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

No, it's the same actress who voiced Mistress Woolsey from Awakening, unless I'm mistaken.
You sure? Because she sounded like Bastila to me.

I think it's rather inevitable that the truth behind the Chant of Light will be revealed, as I think we're heading towards the return of the Maker. I feel it in my gut.

Because I believe Sandal's cryptic prophecy is related to the return of the Maker, I don't think this 'Corypheus' and Sandal's prophecy are related.
I'm not so certain I like that theory. Definitively showing what the Maker truly is and such creates an entirely different dimension to the games. We start getting into Silmarillion territory where our initial games have been more like the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit respectively.

It takes us out of the realm of mortal politics and down-to-earth stuff and into the realm of pure mythology. While I like games that are pure mythology, that just doesn't feel "Dragon Age" to me.

[Zevox]

Re: The mage story/gameplay discussion - This is honestly an instance where I say it's best to simply accept the story/gameplay separation as-is. The way mages work and how they're treated is an extremely important part of the setting - heck, the entire crisis DA2 sets off is based around that - so changing that would be out of the question, but there's also plainly the desire to let players actually play as a mage without making that massively harder than playing as the other classes. Either alternative, at least from where I'm sitting, would be a much bigger problem than simply off-putting some people with the existing story/gameplay separation.

Zevox

[Aux-Ash]

Indeed. The intolerance of mages adds a lot of conflict to the setting. Some of the most thought provoking and engaging ones too. I don't see how it could be any better by making mages tolerated just because the mechanics are set up to allow them to be useful. In fact... removing the intolerance of mages would probably make the setting even more generic. At least the world react to their powers now.

But yes. I don't think getting hung up on mechanics in a rpg is a good idea. It's like arguing that people shouldn't be afraid to fight because they've got hp to take a few hits... talk about a immersion killer.

[NeoSeraphi]

I didn't like that they made Fenris an elf. To me, Fenris was really a Qunari who was disguised as a pretty-boy elf to appeal to the female fanbase a bit more. But from everything that DA 2 has presented (And in DA 2, races and classes tend to stick very closely to their provided templates, with a few exceptions like Thrask)


I mean, even Orsino used blood magic at the end of the game

Understood the Qun
Was very stoic and respectful
Warrior Class, used a two-handed weapon
Any time Fenris actually comments on an elf, it's usually anti-elf and shows how disgusted he is with them. Absolutely no sympathy at all.
Never speaks a word of Elven, though he recites the Qun in the Qunari language in a few scenes
Extremely obedient and servile


To the point where he slaughtered every last Freedom Fighter who had taken him in and taken care of him while Danarius was gone, just because Danarius showed back up and told him to do it


Is completely opposed to mages and supports the templars
Begins following you (in his own words) because he feels he owes you a debt

All of these qualities remind me of Sten. They do. And I think it would have provided a much more interesting climax in Act 2 (which was already a really good climax) if Fenris had been a Qunari the whole time.

Here are the qualities that elves display in DAO and DA 2. See if you can spot the Fenris in any of them:

Generally tolerant of magic
Generally racist against humans (Fenris never even acknowledges that you're a human)
Frequently sprinkle Elven words into their sentences, to the point of it being noticeable when they go an entire conversation without using any elven
Respond well to acts that benefit elf-kind (Merrill, occasionally Zevran)
Respond poorly to acts that oppose or oppress elf-kind (Merrill and Zevran)
Elf warriors in DA 2 (the very very few of them that exist) use sword and shield style, with those weird four-leaf clover shields

[Giggling Ghast]

1) You have no idea how many fans wanted to romance Sten in Origins, or how many still want to see a qunari romance.

2) If Fenris was so obedient and servile, then why did he escape?

3) Several of your points apply to Zevran as well as Fenris. Zevran never spoke a word of elven, was not prejudiced against humans and did not use a sword and shield.

4) The qunari are not prejudiced against elves. They are prejudiced against everyone who is not qunari.

[Zevox]

The reason Fenris doesn't seem like other Elves is because he comes from a background that isolated him from any sort of Elven culture. Particularly due to the amnesia his lyrium tattoos gave him, he doesn't remember anything other than his time as a slave, so of course he feels no connection to and doesn't act like others of his kind. On the flip side, after his escape he spent some time among the Qunari, thus learning a little about them.

Fenris' central character trait, being an escaped slave with all kinds of baggage due to that, just doesn't transfer over to a Qunari. The Tevinters are at war with them - they kill them, not enslave them (and I'd imagine most Qunari would rather die than put up with serving a non-Qunari they don't respect, so that's not a surprise). So no, he couldn't have been a Qunari.

Zevox

[NeoSeraphi]

1) You have no idea how many females wanted to romance Sten in Origins, or how many still want to see a qunari romance.

2) If Fenris was obedient and servile, then why did he escape? And he worked with Hawke because the latter helped him.

3) Several of your points apply to Zevran as well as Fenris. Zevran never spoke a word of elven, was not prejudiced against humans and did not use a sword and shield.

1) That's why I don't see any real reason for Fenris to have been an elf. He's tall, brooding and physically powerful, and the party didn't have a Qunari to begin with.

2) I was using a direct quote from the game, when Fenris says in Act 3 "I joined with you in part because I felt like I owed you my life"

After the quest Alone, maybe only after you spare his sister's life, I've never let him kill her

3) First of all, Zevran is a rogue. I said elven warriors. And I said elven warriors in DA2. Secondly, the rest of your statement is valid, but Zevran was in DAO, where all the characters were pretty independent. They had morals and racial ties, but those only served as guidelines for how they actually felt and thought. In DA2, most of the characters and NPCs morals come from their jobs and races. (Warriors side with templars, mages hate templars, rogues don't care. With a few exceptions. I mean, Fenris even gives you disapproval for telling Merrill you'll come see her after you recruit her.) Fenris is the one elf who doesn't show a trace of elven quality, other than being ashamed of other elves for being poor or obsessed with how elven they are. (Arguably, a nice change, but not as nice as it would have been to have a Qunari in the party)


The reason Fenris doesn't seem like other Elves is because he comes from a background that isolated him from any sort of Elven culture. Particularly due to the amnesia his lyrium tattoos gave him, he doesn't remember anything other than his time as a slave, so of course he feels no connection to and doesn't act like others of his kind. On the flip side, after his escape he spent some time among the Qunari, thus learning a little about them.

Fenris' central character trait, being an escaped slave with all kinds of baggage due to that, just doesn't transfer over to a Qunari. The Tevinters are at war with them - they kill them, not enslave them (and I'd imagine most Qunari would rather die than put up with serving a non-Qunari they don't respect, so that's not a surprise). So no, he couldn't have been a Qunari.

Zevox

I see your point, but that doesn't mean they had to take all of the traits that made Sten likable and dump them onto an elf who already had a perfectly good backstory and actually has some really nice character development later.

With his memories coming back and his sister being alive

I just wish they had provided us with a Qunari companion for DA 2, especially considering how much more developed the Qunari and the Qun are in DA 2 than they were in DAO

Edit: On the willing Qunari enslavement thing:

We learned later that he chose to be a slave for his sister and his mother's sake. I know Qunari don't have those kinds of families, but perhaps they could have made that his one shame, going against his teachings and the Qun for the sake of other Qunari and therefore becoming Tal-Vashoth because of emotional weakness

[Giggling Ghast]

Ketojan was actually slated to be a qunari companion, but he didn't make the cut.

Fenris' backstory wouldn't have meshed well with a qunari character. Even if he was a Tal-Vashoth, why would he enter the service of a Tevinter magister?


1) That's why I don't see any real reason for Fenris to have been an elf. He's tall, brooding and physically powerful, and the party didn't have a Qunari to begin with.

First you say that Fenris was made an elf to satisfy the fangirls. Then you agree with me that plenty of people would have liked a qunari romance. Which is it?

[NeoSeraphi]

Ketojan was actually slated to be a qunari companion, but he didn't make the cut.

Fenris' backstory wouldn't have meshed well with a qunari character. Even if he was a Tal-Vashoth, why would he enter the service of a Tevinter magister?



First you say that Fenris was made an elf to satisfy the fangirls. Then you agree with me that plenty of people would have liked a qunari romance. Which is it?

Wow, Ketojan? I wish you hadn't told me that. Now I'm depressed because he would have had a permanent spot in my party. (I keep trying Merrill, but without access to Heal, Haste or Heroic Aura she doesn't balance my reckless playstyle very well, and we all know what keeps Bethany from sticking around. So I'm stuck with Janders.)

I wonder what Ketojan's banned school would be? Anders doesn't get Entropy, Merrill doesn't get Conjuration and Bethany doesn't get Nature...maybe the Spirit school?

I agree with you that many people would like a Qunari romance. I am not on the Bioware development team. What the fanbase actually want and what marketers/developers think they want can be different things.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Do qunari even have romances? I know the notion is pleasant, but it would seem that the Qun would consider things like love and beauty the way Morrigan does, fleeting and with no purpose. Duty and the demands of the Qun are all that matter to a true qunari. Even if they knew what love was, which is questionable at best, they'd likely say "Love is a distraction at best and a vice at worst. There is no room for it under the ordered authority of the Qun."

And before someone questions how qunari would reproduce if love isn't allowed to come into the equation, I assume that the Qun dictates arranged marriages and such.

[NeoSeraphi]

Do qunari even have romances? I know the notion is pleasant, but it would seem that the Qun would consider things like love and beauty the way Morrigan does, fleeting and with no purpose. Duty and the demands of the Qun are all that matter to a true qunari. Even if they knew what love was, which is questionable at best, they'd likely say "Love is a distraction at best and a vice at worst. There is no room for it under the ordered authority of the Qun."

And before someone questions how qunari would reproduce if love isn't allowed to come into the equation, I assume that the Qun dictates arranged marriages and such.

You have raised interesting points for me to think about, which is why I enjoy coming to this forum, so firstly, thank you for that.

Secondly, I agree that perhaps a qunari romance would not function in the normal way, but still, just because the Qunari doesn't flirt back with you doesn't stop you from hitting on him and hearing his deadpan reactions (which I would find very amusing, personally)

[Archpaladin Zousha]

In other words like how a female character could sometimes talk to Sten in the first game:

"I do not understand. You look like a woman."

"Why, Sten, are you flirting with me?"

"Flirt? What is this "flirt?" Speak the common tongue!"

[NeoSeraphi]

In other words like how a female character could sometimes talk to Sten in the first game:

"I do not understand. You look like a woman."

"Why, Sten, are you flirting with me?"

"Flirt? What is this "flirt?" Speak the common tongue!"

Exactly. Didn't you enjoy that?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Not really. The only female Warden I ever played had the hots for Alistair the entire time.

[Dienekes]

Do qunari even have romances? I know the notion is pleasant, but it would seem that the Qun would consider things like love and beauty the way Morrigan does, fleeting and with no purpose. Duty and the demands of the Qun are all that matter to a true qunari. Even if they knew what love was, which is questionable at best, they'd likely say "Love is a distraction at best and a vice at worst. There is no room for it under the ordered authority of the Qun."

And before someone questions how qunari would reproduce if love isn't allowed to come into the equation, I assume that the Qun dictates arranged marriages and such.

This is true and all, but part of the fun in making characters is to alter them from their societal norms in some way, which makes them distinct from just another dwarf/elf/qunari. Because the Qun may be against romance does not mean that an individual qunari could not be brought to have feelings for Hawke. Oddly I think that for the fanbase this may even make the qunari love interest more appealing to them.

Really though, all I want out of another Qunari squadmate would just be Sten again. Sten was awesome.

[VanBuren]

You could totally romance Sten. You just had to know how to see it. I'm pretty sure it's stated somewhere that Qunari don't express romantic affection like others do. I'm pretty sure, for instance, that sex is for procreation solely, and that for emotional purposes is considered pretty deviant.

[Aux-Ash]

Do qunari even have romances? I know the notion is pleasant, but it would seem that the Qun would consider things like love and beauty the way Morrigan does, fleeting and with no purpose. Duty and the demands of the Qun are all that matter to a true qunari. Even if they knew what love was, which is questionable at best, they'd likely say "Love is a distraction at best and a vice at worst. There is no room for it under the ordered authority of the Qun."

And before someone questions how qunari would reproduce if love isn't allowed to come into the equation, I assume that the Qun dictates arranged marriages and such.

They do have love, romances and reproduction. The former two are often within castes but often stay strictly platonic. Qunari are often very tight with the people they work with (it is essentially their family after all). And there's nothing wrong with this at all according to the Qun.

Reproduction is however the purview of the Tammasarrans. They decide who you mate with, they care for you during pregnancy and they raise and decide where your immaskari (child) goes.
This system is even evident in the full qunari names (which we have never seen). In addition to rank and position in society, it contains a 3 generation pedigree.

That said. They aren't robots. Sometimes a pair of Vashoth may choose to have a child together.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

They do have love, romances and reproduction. The former two are often within castes but often stay strictly platonic. Qunari are often very tight with the people they work with (it is essentially their family after all). And there's nothing wrong with this at all according to the Qun.

Reproduction is however the purview of the Tammasarrans. They decide who you mate with, they care for you during pregnancy and they raise and decide where your immaskari (child) goes.
This system is even evident in the full qunari names (which we have never seen). In addition to rank and position in society, it contains a 3 generation pedigree.

That said. They aren't robots. Sometimes a pair of Vashoth may choose to have a child together.
I was under the impression that qunari society was all about "optimization," so to speak. That the goal of the Qun is to constantly strive towards optimizing society into the most efficient and effective "machine" possible. People are bred to optimize particular traits, and are sorted into positions where they will be the most effective.

I'm not exactly certain what qunari actually DO when they have free time. It seems like their society is "Work, work, work. Are you done? Get back to work."

I know Sten said something about revelry, but I find it hard to imagine that qunari would tolerate such a waste of time that could be spent doing something productive.

[Aux-Ash]

I was under the impression that qunari society was all about "optimization," so to speak. That the goal of the Qun is to constantly strive towards optimizing society into the most efficient and effective "machine" possible. People are bred to optimize particular traits, and are sorted into positions where they will be the most effective.

I'm not exactly certain what qunari actually DO when they have free time. It seems like their society is "Work, work, work. Are you done? Get back to work."

I know Sten said something about revelry, but I find it hard to imagine that qunari would tolerate such a waste of time that could be spent doing something productive.

The way I understand the Qun, the core of the philosophy is that you can only find true happiness by accepting your place in the world. Your place in the world is the position you have among the Qunari. And it is your duty to do your very best to fulfill that position.

But they aren't robots, they do have emotions. They too need sleep and rest. I'd imagine their spare time (what little there is in a pre-industrial world) contains things like praying, reading, shopping for groceries.
Remember, female qunari rather often have service-based positions in society. Such as merchants, priests and artists. Such positions would be rather pointless in a society where noone can interact with them.

Also... the only thing we have seen is the Antaam, the armed body. So the stoic, rigid discipline is not neccessarily a qunari trait as a whole (allthough they are described as much more held-back than non-qunari) but of their soldiers.

As for revelry. As I said, the Qunari too have reasons to express their joy. And grief. And artistry.

It's not about being a worker ant. It's to accept your role in the universe, the one you were born with, and doing your very best to fulfill it. But you can't do that by rejecting your emotions. That would be to struggle against what you are (human, for lack of a betetr word) and that would be against the Qun.

[NeoSeraphi]

The way I understand the Qun

*glances at the title and at the OP* Uh huh. :smallamused:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

The way I understand the Qun, the core of the philosophy is that you can only find true happiness by accepting your place in the world. Your place in the world is the position you have among the Qunari. And it is your duty to do your very best to fulfill that position.

But they aren't robots, they do have emotions. They too need sleep and rest. I'd imagine their spare time (what little there is in a pre-industrial world) contains things like praying, reading, shopping for groceries.
Remember, female qunari rather often have service-based positions in society. Such as merchants, priests and artists. Such positions would be rather pointless in a society where noone can interact with them.

Also... the only thing we have seen is the Antaam, the armed body. So the stoic, rigid discipline is not neccessarily a qunari trait as a whole (allthough they are described as much more held-back than non-qunari) but of their soldiers.

As for revelry. As I said, the Qunari too have reasons to express their joy. And grief. And artistry.

It's not about being a worker ant. It's to accept your role in the universe, the one you were born with, and doing your very best to fulfill it. But you can't do that by rejecting your emotions. That would be to struggle against what you are (human, for lack of a betetr word) and that would be against the Qun.

So it's like the Way of the Open Palm from Jade Empire?

[ShinyRocks]

So I've finally finished it. I ... really liked it, I think. I enjoyed the new combat style, but I was playing as a rogue, which I think probably lends itself best to a more rapid fighting.

I thought the plot was great. It was really interesting that it was so political, for want of a better word, as opposed to just 'here are big evil'.

Kind of annoyed that my Hawke's whole argument was 'Just because they're an apostate, doesn't mean they're a blood mage' and then, oh, look, pretty much everyone except Bethany and Anders IS a blood mage. And Anders is just a mass-murderer/terrorist instead.

Annoyed that Isabela left me; I swear there was a problem with the friendship score on mine. I didn't tend to have her on my team (I was already a two-weapon rogue) but I did sidequests and gave her presents and so on, and she barely moved down the scale at all. I got friendship (or rivalry in Merril's case. Stupid Merril) with all the rest of them even though I mostly kept the same team of me, Aveline, Anders and Varric the whole time.


Probably doing a mage playthrough next; then finally a warrior one.Is it worth getting Sebastian? I don't think I can be bothered.

Sorry about spoilers; really incosiderate of me. I come to games so late I forget people will come after me.

[NeoSeraphi]

snip

Congratulations on finishing the game. Really. But as you've probably just realized, there are plenty of people out there who haven't, and some of what you've posted is MAJOR spoiler. Could you please edit your post and put the stuff about Anders and Isabela and blood magic into a spoiler tag? Just in case, you know?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Having mostly finished another playthrough of DAII (I've stopped right before the finale because I'm waiting for the Legacy DLC, which takes place before that), I found myself thinking a bit more about the larger structure of the plot and such and I've a few musings I'd like to toss out here for candor:
First off, is it just me or is Kirkwall the most hateful, xenophobic little cesspit on Thedas?! It seems a lot of the enemies encountered in the game are native Kirkwallers motivated by hatred. Granted, a lot of times its a single person stirring up trouble, like Mother Petrice, former Guard Captain Jeven, or the Coterie leader Brekker. But it seems like there's just a whole lot of racism and xenophobia among Kirkwallers in general. Mother Petrice is understandable, at least, she's a fanatic and the Qunari are obviously alien to anybody in the city. But people like Brekker and Jeven, they seem to bring up Hawke and Aveline's Ferelden heritage as justification for their actions. It makes little sense to me. the only reason people from Ferelden are IN Kirkwall is because of the Blight, and many Free Cities took on refugees. What is it about Ferelden people in Kirkwall that makes everybody want to hate them? Come to think of it, Kirkwall apparently has a low opinion of Ferelden itself in general. Consider the Loose Ends sidequest involving Meeran of the Red Iron. You're sent to kill Lord Harriman because the other nobles don't want to send economic aid to a destroyed city. Wouldn't the nobles be pleased at sending aid to Denerim and improving diplomatic relations with a nation struggling to get back on its feet, meaning Ferelden would owe them one? Even the traditional racism against elves doesn't seem to be on display as much in Kirkwall because everyone's hatin' on Fereldens!

Secondly, I'm a bit confused as to why the incident involving the viddithari elves was what caused the Arishok to essentially snap. One would think after the incident with Saemus would be the time to strike, after the grandest, most public slap in their proverbial face. The elves thing seems like an afterthought to get you to go to the Arishok after the bit with Isabela and the book. Furthermore, why is Aveline taking such a pushy attitude towards this when you actually DO meet with the Arishok? She doesn't explain her position or rationale behind this to the Arishok. She just demands the elves after the Arishok demands to keep them. She says why she needs the elves: they're murderers, and if going to the Qunari effectively grants them amnesty, not only will other criminals try the same thing, but the people those criminals wronged will be angry and attack the Qunari, and Aveline, as captain of the city guard and a dedicated proponent of the law anyway, is trying to prevent that. But she doesn't say ANY of that to the Arishok. She seems to stubbornly order the Arishok to hand them over because she knows he's going to refuse anyway. It just seems like a poorly handled way to trigger the end of the second act.

[Dienekes]

Heh, if you think that Kirkwall is somehow special in it's hatred you have a much higher opinion of your fellow humans than I do. Off the top of my head I can think of a few non-board appropriate parallels to the Fereldan hatred, and let's be honest no one really likes seeing what appears to be an entire Qunari army show up one day and just sit there, honestly the fact they didn't react worse is impressive.

As to the slap in the face for the Arishok, you have to realize that he'd been planning something for awhile now. Maybe he wasn't prepared when the boy was killed.

Also it was obvious that Saemus thing was organized by Petrice, even the high priest lady turned her back on Petrice when the plot was uncovered. He could have written it off as the actions of the lone lunatic, while everyone else involved acted fairly honorably by the Qun.

For the elves thing. The city guard was there with orders from the government to do something the Qunari found evil and unjust. Moreover he was expected to hand over the elves. For Saemus, the boy was already dead there was nothing to do but get revenge (which he did), for the elves he was asked to throw away what he saw as honorable to pander to the unjust city. He chose his honor which inevitably would lead to conflict so he went ahead and started it.

As for Aveline being pushy, well she isn't the most subtle and diplomatic of your companions also what else was she supposed to do? As the law of the land you have to establish some dominance or you will not be taken seriously. Hers was not the position to plead to get the elves to be brought to justice, hers was to go there and get the elves. In the end no matter what flowery language you use you are ordering the Arishok to do something completely against what he believes in. Honestly I kind of think the whole meeting would have gone worse if Aveline tried to butter the Qunari up first. I just don't think he takes well to that kind of flattery.

[Giggling Ghast]

Heh. Just listen to some of the comments you pick up wandering around Kirkwall.

I think the prejudice against the Fereldans comes from two sources:

1) Ferelden is regarded poorly in Thedas. The entire country is generally viewed as a dirty backwater filled with dogs that's only a bad day away from total barbarism.

2) Many of the refugees that came to Kirkwall stayed there instead of going back home. Those that stayed were likely seen as a burden on the city's resources; they're dirt poor, so they need to be supported through charities and government programs, and they take away jobs from the native Kirkwallers. (Or not, since no one will hire Fereldans.)

As for the qunari, well, they're a large military force from a strange foreign culture that previously occupied the city. I can forgive a little paranoia over their presence.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

[QUOTE]1) Ferelden is regarded poorly in Thedas. The entire country is generally viewed as a dirty backwater filled with dogs that's only a bad day away from total barbarism.
I never got that impression from Ferelden. Kirkwall seems more like the dirty backwayer one bad day away from barbarism, and there's a surprisingly large canine population there too given how many Mabari you fight over the course of the game. And wouldn't Ferelden have gained SOME respect as the first nation to beat back a Blight all on its own without getting completely totalled? It seems like the opinions of Ferelden's doesn't change until the third act, because you, the Champion, are Ferelden.

2) Many of the refugees that came to Kirkwall stayed there instead of going back home. Those that stayed were likely seen as a burden on the city's resources; they're dirt poor, so they need to be supported through charities and government programs, and they take away jobs from the "native Kirkwallers."
But most of the people who complain about the Ferelden presence are criminals already, people who don't really have a good opinion of the government anyway, and who don't rely on charities because they simply take money from others.

As for the qunari, well, they're a large military force from a strange foreign culture that previously occupied the city. I can forgive a little paranoia over their presence.
I thought I mentioned that already. That's why the people of Kirkwall, though they hate the Qunari, give them space, and it's only Petrice's group and foreigners like the Winters (I never got the reason for their attitude, or what their agenda was, the Seneschal said their leader's looking for a "foothold" in Kirkwall, but what kind of "foothold" does a band of mercenaries need?) that give them trouble.

[Giggling Ghast]

You don't regard Ferelden as a backwater because Origins was set there. You know better. I would hazard a guess that most Free Marchers have never been to Ferelden.

What would the average Kirkwaller know about the country? Well, Andraste came from there. Only half of the land is settled, and the kingdom has only really existed for a couple of centuries when its first king brought together a bunch of barbarian tribes. Up until about twenty years ago, it was ruled by the Orlesian Empire. Oh, and the people there really like dogs for some reason.

What kind of opinion would you form with that much information? And Zousha, the citizenry of Kirkwall throw plenty of insults at Hawke (and the Ferelden refugees in general) if you listen to the background chatter. You get this in Lowtown, Hightown, the Docks and even Darktown.

As to its victory over the darkspawn, there are a few indications throughout the game that some people believe the Fifth Blight wasn't a "true" Blight because it was defeated so quickly.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

What would the average Kirkwaller know about the country? Well, Andraste came from there. Only half of the land is settled, and the kingdom has only really existed for a couple of centuries when its first king brought together a bunch of barbarian tribes. Up until about twenty years ago, it was ruled by the Orlesian Empire. Oh, and the people there really like dogs for some reason.

What kind of opinion would you form with that much information?
That it's a place I've only heard about and thus I shouldn't judge? At the very least it wouldn't make me want to KILL people for just being from there.

And Zousha, the citizenry of Kirkwall throw plenty of insults at Hawke (and the Ferelden refugees in general) if you listen to the background chatter. You get this in Lowtown, Hightown, the Docks and even Darktown.

I know this, but other people use it as a justification to ATTACK you. To quote Brekker, "Some Fereldens don't have the courtesy to know when to bloody die!"

As to its victory over the darkspawn, there are a few indications throughout the game that some people believe the Fifth Blight wasn't a "true" Blight because it was defeated so quickly.
The only person I've heard posit that was the Talkative Man, and he's a loony.

[Giggling Ghast]

That it's a place I've only heard about and thus I shouldn't judge?

Good on you, Zousha. But not everyone is that open-minded.


The only person I've heard posit that was the Talkative Man, and he's a loony.

I remember reading it in at least one of the Codexes as well.

[Honest Tiefling]

I was under the impression that the Mabari were brought over or were feral descendents of trade from Ferelden. I sorta thought the Dog Lords gang were Fereldens who were sick and tired of being oppressed and found Mabaris to train. I would have sympathy for them, were they not trying to busily introduce their knives to Ander's face.

So, the Kirkwallians might blame Fereldens because someone let out an exotic imported dog get feral and breed like crazy.

And just because someone insults you does not mean that is why they are killing you. During that quest, I thought that Brekker was trying to attack you because you had a good thing going for you that he wanted and because you were making trouble for him with his co-workers. Sometime people who are angry just pick something to insult and run with it.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Well, the Dog Lords ARE Ferelden refugees that have turned to crime.

[Honest Tiefling]

Oh, that's confirmed? Nifty. But well, when you have economic or political turmoil, people often turn on whoever's handy, and the Dog Lords provide an excuse for this hatred. They can't attack the Qunari/blood mages/templars/whatevers, so why not take it out on the people who smell like wet dog who can't fight back?

[Edge]

Well, I played Legacy earlier today.

Let me just say that the designers of this DLC seem to hate mages who use Primal as their main DPS spell tree.

Aside from that, a pretty challenging, fairly long bit of DLC with an interesting if fairly easy (well, in comparison to the rest of the DLC) final boss fight.

I'd peg the DLC as more challenging than the climax events (by a noticeable margin), and I personally felt it was worth the 800 Microsoft points.

[Giggling Ghast]

Good to hear.

At what point in your campaign did you play Legacy, Edge? Was it Act I, II or III? Do you have any thoughts on that point?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I can't download Legacy because for some reason the game is "Unable to connect to Dragon Age Servers. Please try again later."

I've tried logging in again, but it says that the username and password, which I've used since the beginning are invalid. I've repeatedly asked for my password to help correct the issue, but for some reason the e-mails never seem to get to me. What the heck is going on?! :smallfurious:

EDIT: Never mind, an e-mail finally came through and seems to have fixed the problem. Legacy is downloading right now!

[Edge]

Good to hear.

At what point in your campaign did you play Legacy, Edge? Was it Act I, II or III? Do you have any thoughts on that point?

My first playthrough of it was with a completed mage save, and my second will be with a completed warrior save. Third runthrough will be my in-progress rerun of my first DA2 run (again, as a mage) that I messed up (missed Fenris, and other stuff) and am currently putting right. I'll probably run it just before hitting up the climax. Seems to be where they intended for it to be: Carver/Bethany are given leave to depart the Gallows to help you sort the problem out if they're in the Order/the Circle, which implies to me that it's before everything goes to hell.

On the difficulty front, I'd seriously leave till at least late in Act 3. Hurlock Alphas hit really hard, and Genlock Alphas are almost unkillable unless you flank them.

Guess which ones often show up in narrow corridors with no room to maneuver?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

You mention Carver/Bethany are given leave to help if they're not Grey Wardens. What if they are? I'd like to play this with Bethany, who joined the Order, and it would make sense that way.

[VanBuren]

You mention Carver/Bethany are given leave to help if they're not Grey Wardens. What if they are? I'd like to play this with Bethany, who joined the Order, and it would make sense that way.

Considering how heavily Darkspawn figure into it, I can't imagine the Grey Wardens would have trouble letting one of their agents get involved.

[Edge]

No idea. Didn't know about the Grey Warden trick when I did those playthroughs. But I imagine they're given leave to go as well, given the Carta is after "the blood of the Hawke". In the playthroughs I did, the Carta is said to have made repeated attempts on all surviving Hawkes prior to the DLC proper starting.

[Calemyr]

The "legendary weapon" they're bragging about. Is it of the "level up with user" variety or a "nice for a while, then looks nice in a dusty display rack in the basement" variety?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Considering how heavily Darkspawn figure into it, I can't imagine the Grey Wardens would have trouble letting one of their agents get involved.

Just played through Legacy, and yes, Bethany/Carver can get involved if they're Wardens. They state at the beginning that they were attacked and received leave from the Wardens to investigate.

In regards to spoilery things:
I was a bit confused as to what the most morally upstanding choice would have been. On the one hand, I can sympathize with Larius' desire to keep Corypheus imprisoned and given the notes I found after making that choice, Janeka was indeed being misled by him. But after I learned he threatened Leandra to get Malcom Hawke to cooperate, I abandoned him. For those who've made other choices, what happens if you stick with Larius regardless of what he did, or side with Janeka and then switch to Larius? I'm especially intrigued because, given what I saw at the end, Corypheus hijacked Janeka's body or something. I dunno, that smile was foreboding.

And furthermore, the battle with Corypheus was HARD. Playing as a warrior on the lowest difficulty level, I actually went down once, and almost everyone in the party was conked out at least twice. If it hadn't been for careful use of the Mythal's Favor grenades, I'd have had to restart the battle. If he's THAT hard on a low difficulty, I can't even imagine how one would win at higher ones.

And as for the legendary weapon, from what I can see, it doesn't level up with you, but it's likely meant for high-level play where really there's no further up to go. I personally stopped using it after Legacy because in my opinion the greatsword version's pretty ugly. What IS it with Dragon Age swords and the weird blade shapes and holes in it and whatnot?!

[Edge]

The "legendary weapon" they're bragging about. Is it of the "level up with user" variety or a "nice for a while, then looks nice in a dusty display rack in the basement" variety?

It should be nice, but in both my mage and warrior playthroughs, it was inferior to Falon'din's Torch and the Blade of Mercy each with a Primeval Lyrium Rune and a Rune of Devastation.

Also:
I played through on Normal. I found the Corypheus fight ridiculously easy on my mage run (Primal/Force Mage/Spirit Healer build, party was Aveline Carver and Varric). I found the fights with the Genlock Alphas much more difficult. With Corypheus, it's just really a matter of keeping your party of the fire cones with judicious use of move to position and hold position.

[Calemyr]

Well, I broke down and did it. And I'm oddly conflicted. It's meshed into the story pretty well. (Cassandra: "Why didn't you tell me this part?" Varrick: "Sister, you didn't even believe Hawke had met Flemmeth. Why would I bother with this one?") And the story hits a balance between epic and personal (Varrick and Anders both get a gut-check once or twice if you bring them, and I suspect it's the same with everyone other than Mr. "An Andraste belt buckle is not an insult to the Maker" Sebastian.

The gear is decent at mid-high levels, but I would have really favored some runeslots over the customizations they allowed for the "legendary weapon" - they were not equivalent to a rune of the same effect at the same item level. Still, if that thing is as powerful early on as it is in the third act, the fact that it has no level or stat requirements would make it godly. The trinkets are only notably good if you don't have the Black Emporium, otherwise they're really just so-so. This includes the one from the Altar of Dumat sidequest, which is a pain in the butt (hint: none of the artifacts needed are in zones past the talking altar).

The bosses need a little more thought than the usual DA2 fare, but they're not all that much worse to fight. The exception is the final boss, who I've come to call the "Lord of the Hamster Dance" - I only won by letting my allies die during each dance and then rezzing them with a blessing bomb once the fight got back into gear.

Overall, I think I liked it. It had an interesting story with some nice little twists in the process. It expanded the lore in some interesting directions and had fights that were more than just a brainless brawl. It also acts as a 2-3 hour mission in which the younger Hawke gets to show off a little if you let them - which is rather nice because, otherwise, the only time you get to see them in action again is during the final push. But the gear is a bit of a let down (at least playing from a level 21 perspective) and, while respectable looking, the legendary weapon doesn't really have much going for it in terms of stats and enchantments.

In the end, Sandal would *not* approve, but Varrick would. The question is which dwarf you want to listen to.

[Calemyr]

Okay, I gotta admit the DLC is growing on me. I tried it with my diplomatic warrior and it was decent. I tried it with my joking mage and it became awesome. It's like the Dev team has finally figured out something is seriously wrong with how Hawke's life goes, because my mage is very clearly sick of it. The banter is hilarious:

Hawke: Blood. Again? Why is it always blood and never spit or a lock of hair.
Varrick: You'd want to face off against a spit mage?
Hawke: For variety's sake? Sure.

Hawke: One of these days I'm going to go some place without demons, blood mages, plagues, blights, or insanity... A beach, perhaps.
Varrick: Hawke, the day you go to the beach is the day that beach gets raided by evil demon-zombie pirates.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I'll admit, I've never taken the joking options. Every character I've played has been Diplomatic/Helpful, since that seems the most "Lawful Good" which I how I tend to play.

[Giggling Ghast]

Hawke: One of these days I'm going to go some place without demons, blood mages, plagues, blights, or insanity... A beach, perhaps.
Varrick: Hawke, the day you go to the beach is the day that beach gets raided by evil demon-zombie pirates.

Hawke is basically a Cosmic Plaything (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CosmicPlaything). No use denying it.

Although I usually go with the Good/Diplomatic options, I'll choose the Sarcastic option when it feels appropriate or when it prompts a bit of dialogue that fits the scene. Even a purely diplomatic Hawke is a little snarky.

Diplomatic Hawke: I'll speak (to the prostitutes at the Blooming Rose). You never know what you can learn from pillow talk.

[Calemyr]

I'll admit, I've never taken the joking options. Every character I've played has been Diplomatic/Helpful, since that seems the most "Lawful Good" which I how I tend to play.

Really? That's a pity. The joking lines are pure gold more often than not, especially as a mage. Hawke's obsession with changing into a dragon during the chat with Flemmeth is great (almost as much as the Warden's childlike fascination with gryphons when Wynne is telling her story in the original). Some of the automatic lines (those you don't select) are great when Hawke is in a joking mood.

Also, when it comes down to it, the joking persona of Hawke has always struck me as a weary and cynical soul who understands that fate is out to get him and take everything he ever held dear from him, piece by piece, before it comes to claim his life and he fully intends to laugh in death's face when it comes at last. The humor and sarcasm come off as a defense mechanism against frustration and opposition he faces daily. I find it makes Hawke a deeper and more interesting character, and the fact that he's genuinely funny at times just makes it better.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Yeah, but it doesn't seem very "Lawful Good." I mean, how can you top "Let's make Kirkwall a better place for everyone" in terms of Lawfully Goodness?

[Zevox]

Okay, I gotta admit the DLC is growing on me. I tried it with my diplomatic warrior and it was decent. I tried it with my joking mage and it became awesome. It's like the Dev team has finally figured out something is seriously wrong with how Hawke's life goes, because my mage is very clearly sick of it. The banter is hilarious:

Hawke: Blood. Again? Why is it always blood and never spit or a lock of hair.
Varrick: You'd want to face off against a spit mage?
Hawke: For variety's sake? Sure.

Hawke: One of these days I'm going to go some place without demons, blood mages, plagues, blights, or insanity... A beach, perhaps.
Varrick: Hawke, the day you go to the beach is the day that beach gets raided by evil demon-zombie pirates.
Hah! I like that. Reminds me of the banter with Liara while picking the lock in Lair of the Shadowbroker.

So then, I'm getting that so far the general consensus is that this DLC is probably worth the price of admission?

Zevox

[Giggling Ghast]

So then, I'm getting that so far the general consensus is that this DLC is probably worth the price of admission?

I haven't gotten it yet, but I checked on a few player reviews and the only people who disliked it really hated DA2 in the first place.

[SowZ]

So I had an Andermance, (was sleeping with Isabella but she betrayed me in the fade and I got pissed and broke up with her and Ander's tried to comfort me and swept me off my feet,) and was satisfied that I had sexed the only 'good' character available to me. I needed a good person to balance my moral... flexibility.

KIND OF A SPOILER A LITTLE BIT, I GUESS

So when everything went down I sat there and uttered what the crap for about five minutes straight with Meredith and Orsino just staring at me waiting for a reply. I mean, what the frick, dude?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Is there ANY kind of good Andermance considering...
...the Chantry incident? I find it very hard for a "Lawful Good" type player such as myself to like him after knowing what he'll do, even if he's genuinely sorry because you've maxxed out his rivalry. And I'd rather not have Sebastian bring down an army on me. It's sort of an odd dichotomy. If you're a friend of his, then he's unrepentant, and that makes him more unlikeable in my book, but if you support mages and mage freedom, then why would you be a rival with him?

I've been interested in having one of my Hawke's romance Anders (virtually all my characters have romanced Merrill, except for one who picked Fenris), but I have no idea how to reconcile the fact that if Anders is repentant, it's because you're his rival, but if you support mage freedom, he remains unrepentant, and thus is more of a jerk.

[Zevox]

I haven't gotten it yet, but I checked on a few player reviews and the only people who disliked it really hated DA2 in the first place.
One wonders why the heck they actually bought the DLC, then. :smallconfused:

Zevox

[Calemyr]

Zevox: I liked it. The plot is pretty good (2-3 hours of good stuff, but you can stretch it to five if you want to see both paths and do all the quests), all the characters seem to have something revealing to say (other than Sebastian), and it manages to make the plot personal to Hawke without making the Champion the center of the world. Again. A lot of old complaints are fixed (no maps get reused, few wave-based fights, the introduction of ambushes and "strategic" fights). The gear is okay, but not end-game quality and, despite the vaunted customizability of the legendary weapon, it ends up much less customizable (and weaker) than if it had just given us rune slots.

Real bonus of this DLC, though: the Fortress set of equipment, which uses warden-style armor. Finally the Champion can dress as well as a Grey Warden. Of course, if you cared about that, you've probably modded some other armor to use that model instead. Ah well.

One other potential bit of good news is that, if Anders is in your party, he is devastated by the final boss's revelations and is forced to admit that his beliefs may not be beyond question after all. I didn't see anything meaningful come of it, but could this be the first step in a Broken Steel-style rewriting of the ending? What would the game be like if Anders questioned whether he was right or wrong?

Zousha: Lawful good is about actions, not tactfulness. My usual Hawkes are very devoted to the city and its peoples, honorable in their dealings and true heirs to Amell line. They also tend to make light of grim situations, joke in the face of certain death, and mercilessly mock anything that threatens their city or their family. Playing the diplomatic path allows a couple dialogues to go happier directions (the elf and the werewolf one comes to mind), however.

SowZ: If you're playing a female (the combination of Isabele and Anders is not conclusive on that point) and have the DLC for Sebastian, he can be romanced - to a degree. You can't flirt with anyone but him to get it to work, and he doesn't by or move in. If Sebastian ends on the Friend side, you end up in a chaste marriage with a priest. If he ends up on the Rival side, you get to marry the prince instead. At least that's what I hear - I haven't finished the game I'm testing it on, but he certainly seems amenable to the idea.

Anyway, I just mention that so that you'd no there's at least one truly good-aligned potential love interest in the game.

[Dienekes]

Is there ANY kind of good Andermance considering...
...the Chantry incident? I find it very hard for a "Lawful Good" type player such as myself to like him after knowing what he'll do, even if he's genuinely sorry because you've maxxed out his rivalry. And I'd rather not have Sebastian bring down an army on me. It's sort of an odd dichotomy. If you're a friend of his, then he's unrepentant, and that makes him more unlikeable in my book, but if you support mages and mage freedom, then why would you be a rival with him?

I've been interested in having one of my Hawke's romance Anders (virtually all my characters have romanced Merrill, except for one who picked Fenris), but I have no idea how to reconcile the fact that if Anders is repentant, it's because you're his rival, but if you support mage freedom, he remains unrepentant, and thus is more of a jerk.


Or you know
Divide what you know and what you're character knows. Just because you know that Anders goes off the deep end doesn't mean a Hawke wouldn't bang him before they figured that out. Which I believe is what happened to SowZ.

It's fine to try and have a good romance with the guy which just doesn't work out in the end. Also adds a bit of sacrifice and following the whole lawful part of lawful good when you kill him for his crimes at the end.

Also at Calemyr. I have to agree Lawful Good does not mean always diplomatic and never joking. In fact I think one of the strengths of DA2 over ME series is that you are not punished for developing your character beyond a single path. For example the one character I played who I would definitely say was LG rarely if ever used diplomacy and preferred to tell idiots exactly why they were dumb and then fixing their problems.

Also I can see a case for Merril being a good aligned romance, just a stupid one.

[Giggling Ghast]

One wonders why the heck they actually bought the DLC, then.

How would they be able to complain otherwise? :smalltongue:

The general consensus is that this is the best DLC that's yet been produced for Dragon Age. Take what you will from that.

[Zevox]

The general consensus is that this is the best DLC that's yet been produced for Dragon Age. Take what you will from that.
Surprising. I know Dragon Age never had anything completely stupendous (i.e. Lair of the Shadowbroker), but Stone Prisoner was pretty damn good in its own right, and some people were pretty impressed with some of the other DA:O DLC, like Warden's Keep.

Zevox

[Calemyr]

Warden's Keep is a pretty good DLC to compare this to, because Legacy is more or less Warden's Keep pumped up on serious steroids. The basic plot has some similar elements - a forsaken tower in the middle of nowhere marks a dubious page in the Grey Warden history, and factions within the tower try to enlist you against the other factions. While there you get to forge a "super weapon" that becomes iconic for you.

What is different between the two is scope, and the two are worlds apart on that score. The tower in Warden's Keep amounted to a tiny snow covered yard and three or four floors that were of reasonable size for a modest keep, all populated with the standard undead and demons. This one has two large maps before entering the keep and six or seven floors afterwards, and most of these floors on their own are big enough to make thaigs jealous (not surprising, because it is suggested that most of it is repurposed Deep Road (repurposed in story, there's nothing like them in the main game)). There's a lot of dead space in there, but the increase in scale definitely makes it feel epic.

Character interaction is good. Everyone has a lot to say and it seems almost everyone (Sebastian excluded) shows something new in the process. Those looking for insight on Bianca's origins are encouraged to bring Varric along for the ride, for instance. You'll probably want to, anyways, because he has quite a bit to say in this DLC and it's almost all worth hearing. The younger Hawkes also can join you on this quest even in later acts, assuming they're still alive, and have many new banters with party members. It's really nice to see them back in the party - even if Bethany seemed to be trying to tempt Sebastian away from Hawke...

As I've said multiple times now, the gear is a disappointment in general - good, but nothing to compare with end-game epics. The Key in particular, this DLC's legendary weapon, can rival the Starfang in base damage, but falls flat by virtue of having no rune slots and meager enchantments. Black Emporium sells a good deal of gear of that grade without having to solve puzzles to do so. The fact that the weapon changes form based on your class and three of the weapon's four enchantments are selected by you (each from a pool of four options) is nice, but the lack of runes really cripples it. The Fortress gear, however, is quite solid and darn well should be - given that you have to find and solve puzzles to get half of it and it's pretty easy to miss some pieces (particularly the helm) altogether.

[SowZ]

Or you know
Divide what you know and what you're character knows. Just because you know that Anders goes off the deep end doesn't mean a Hawke wouldn't bang him before they figured that out. Which I believe is what happened to SowZ.

It's fine to try and have a good romance with the guy which just doesn't work out in the end. Also adds a bit of sacrifice and following the whole lawful part of lawful good when you kill him for his crimes at the end.

Also at Calemyr. I have to agree Lawful Good does not mean always diplomatic and never joking. In fact I think one of the strengths of DA2 over ME series is that you are not punished for developing your character beyond a single path. For example the one character I played who I would definitely say was LG rarely if ever used diplomacy and preferred to tell idiots exactly why they were dumb and then fixing their problems.

Also I can see a case for Merril being a good aligned romance, just a stupid one.

Yeah. I just couldn't bring myself to kill him. My whole character's morality was based on loyalty to family and friends before loyalty to any code or anything else. Kind of a, 'everyone should look after their own' world view. It pissed Sebastian off, but I just told him to leave. Later, when he came back, he asked what out deal was. I told him I wouldn't travel with him but wouldn't let him be executed for his crimes, either. But I suppose after I lost control of Hawke NPC Hawke changed that tune or at least Varric thought so...

I look at Merill as one side of the coin and the templars are on the opposite side. Personally, I can't call Merill or most templars 'good' even if their intentions are.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Or you know
Divide what you know and what you're character knows. Just because you know that Anders goes off the deep end doesn't mean a Hawke wouldn't bang him before they figured that out. Which I believe is what happened to SowZ.

It's fine to try and have a good romance with the guy which just doesn't work out in the end. Also adds a bit of sacrifice and following the whole lawful part of lawful good when you kill him for his crimes at the end.

Wasn't quite what I was asking there.
I want Anders to feel sorry for what he's done, as opposed to unrepentant, but I want to support the mages because I want my character to romance him, and I'm unsure how to balance an Anders rivalry with mage support. It'd be like the times I sided with the templars and had him as a friend, he'd say I was a mage supporter when nothing I'd done indicated that.

[SowZ]

Wasn't quite what I was asking there.
I want Anders to feel sorry for what he's done, as opposed to unrepentant, but I want to support the mages because I want my character to romance him, and I'm unsure how to balance an Anders rivalry with mage support. It'd be like the times I sided with the templars and had him as a friend, he'd say I was a mage supporter when nothing I'd done indicated that.

It seems like you pretty much have to get their rivalry maxed before doing any of your companions personal quests OR act like a total douchebag during said quests.

[Aux-Ash]

Wasn't quite what I was asking there.
I want Anders to feel sorry for what he's done, as opposed to unrepentant, but I want to support the mages because I want my character to romance him, and I'm unsure how to balance an Anders rivalry with mage support. It'd be like the times I sided with the templars and had him as a friend, he'd say I was a mage supporter when nothing I'd done indicated that.

Well if you just want Anders to regret his actions, a friendship romance won't be a problem. On my first char I had a friendship romance with him and he was very remorseful towards the end.

Maybe it was something I said or because politically I was walking the middle path, I don't know. But he certainly was considerably less antagonistic in how he spoke (to me) than when he was just a friend.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Well if you just want Anders to regret his actions, a friendship romance won't be a problem. On my first char I had a friendship romance with him and he was very remorseful towards the end.

Maybe it was something I said or because politically I was walking the middle path, I don't know. But he certainly was considerably less antagonistic in how he spoke (to me) than when he was just a friend.

How do you...
Politically walk the middle path? I thought the game rewarded you for taking sides with achievements.

[Aux-Ash]

How do you...
Politically walk the middle path? I thought the game rewarded you for taking sides with achievements.

By not gunning for said achievments. Yes, in every individual situation I had to choose a side. But I went with the one that felt right for that character at that time. I generally aimed at trying to protect innocents (including innocent mages), so sometimes I sided with the templars and sometimes the mages.
This meant that I often put myself between templars and mages to protect the latter, but also often recommended them to return to the circle and encouraged templars like Thrask. Often vocally supporting the templars (in spirit at least).

I did however side with the mages in the end.

[ScrambledBrains]

So, I've played the game as all three classes, having beaten it as a Rogue, gotten to Act II as a Mage, and still in the middle of Act I for my Warrior(I started it then switched to the others.), and I have to say, I HATE ANDERS, and I hate the fact the game near forces him on you as he's the only healer(unless you're playing as a mage. :smallbiggrin: I haven't even talked to him in my mage file apart from the Map mission). If you wanna know why,

He's a whiny, hypocritical pain in the ass with no ability to seperate his own feelings from the conflict at large. Yes, we get it, you want Mage freedom. But guess what Anders, there ARE good templars, and Mages who want to stay in the circle. What's that, you say they just don't understand. :smallfurious:

[sihnfahl]

But guess what Anders, there ARE good templars, and Mages who want to stay in the circle.

What I got from Anders is that he knew there were moderates on both sides - heck, he ran into a number of them. The problem is - to him, the moderates were just holding up the status quo, and nothing was really changing to knock the extremists out. Blood mages were still running around, and templars were still abusing their powers.

So he took action to try to force the moderates into action to fight the extremists. Sort of like the older cancer treatments - toxic as all get out, made you absolutely miserable, really knocked your life to its basics, but when you were done... cancer gone (hopefully).

[SowZ]

So, I've played the game as all three classes, having beaten it as a Rogue, gotten to Act II as a Mage, and still in the middle of Act I for my Warrior(I started it then switched to the others.), and I have to say, I HATE ANDERS, and I hate the fact the game near forces him on you as he's the only healer(unless you're playing as a mage. :smallbiggrin: I haven't even talked to him in my mage file apart from the Map mission). If you wanna know why,

He's a whiny, hypocritical pain in the ass with no ability to seperate his own feelings from the conflict at large. Yes, we get it, you want Mage freedom. But guess what Anders, there ARE good templars, and Mages who want to stay in the circle. What's that, you say they just don't understand. :smallfurious:

I can understand this view point. But... Anders is a good person. (Anders/Justice... Not so much.) Anders never would have been able to go through with his plan were it not for his merging with Justice. This does not give Ander's absolution, as part of him really wanted the civil war and he did nothing to stop his crazy spirit from taking over his mind. If anything, he helped it along. Right before he allows Justice to take over and 'do what must be done' in Anders addled mind, I think he is evil. But up until that point he is probably the only good person you can have a romance with without the DLC.

[ScrambledBrains]

What I got from Anders is that he knew there were moderates on both sides - heck, he ran into a number of them. The problem is - to him, the moderates were just holding up the status quo, and nothing was really changing to knock the extremists out. Blood mages were still running around, and templars were still abusing their powers.

So he took action to try to force the moderates into action to fight the extremists. Sort of like the older cancer treatments - toxic as all get out, made you absolutely miserable, really knocked your life to its basics, but when you were done... cancer gone (hopefully).


I get that. I really do. But what bugs me is that you have a man who could rightfully be called an abomination and denies it while picking on Merill(who at the very least has admitted, to some extent anyway, what she's done.) A man who would set an entire city ablaze and to the brink of war, just to foster a change, when it was really only that one city that was that oppresive. HE COULD HAVE JUST FREAKING MOVED! :smallfurious: Not only that, he pushes his dogma on all the party members, not once, but all the time, and, here's the kicker, why not blow up his opposition in Meredith instead of exploding the Grand Cleric?!?! And I'm supposed to like this guy?! :smallannoyed: I think Morrigan was a better person than him, and she was a Darwinist with extreme emotional issues. :smallbiggrin:

[Arbitrarity]

I get that. I really do. But what bugs me is that you have a man who could rightfully be called an abomination and denies it while picking on Merill(who at the very least has admitted, to some extent anyway, what she's done.) A man who would set an entire city ablaze and to the brink of war, just to foster a change, when it was really only that one city that was that oppresive. HE COULD HAVE JUST FREAKING MOVED! :smallfurious: Not only that, he pushes his dogma on all the party members, not once, but all the time, and, here's the kicker, why not blow up his opposition in Meredith instead of exploding the Grand Cleric?!?! And I'm supposed to like this guy?! :smallannoyed: I think Morrigan was a better person than him, and she was a Darwinist with extreme emotional issues. :smallbiggrin:

S'not Anders. Play Awakening. Anders is cool there. He's quiet, complains less about the "injustice" of the circle, is less of a complete emotional trainwreck, is actually funny rather than drama queen, and has Ser Pouncealot. In all companion dialogue, he's the "normal funny guy" while everyone else plays their respective neuroses fairly straight.
Justice: I understand that you struggle against your oppression, mage.
Anders: I avoid my oppression. That's not quite the same thing, is it?
Justice: Why do you not strike a blow against your oppressors? Ensure they can do this to no one else?
Anders: Because it sounds difficult?
Justice: Apathy is a weakness.
Anders: So is death. I'm just saying.

Justice: I believe you have a responsibility to your fellow mages.
Anders: That bit of self-righteousness is directed at me?
Justice: You have seen oppression and are now free. You must act to free those who remain oppressed.
Anders: Or I could mind my business, in case the Chantry comes knocking.
Justice: But this is not right. You have an obligation.
Anders: Yes, well... welcome to the world, spirit.

[sihnfahl]

S'not Anders.

Of course, conversations in 2 lead you to realize that while it's not Anders, it's also not Justice. It's still Anders, but with Justices' mentality. Although, it's also implied that Justice got twisted into Vengeance...

[ZeroNumerous]

Of course, conversations in 2 lead you to realize that while it's not Anders, it's also not Justice. It's still Anders, but with Justices' mentality. Although, it's also implied that Justice got twisted into Vengeance...



Varric: So, the knight-commander... Boiling in oil? That one never gets old.
Anders: This is past time for joking.
Varric: I'm helping you indulge in elaborate revenge fantasies. I think it's good for you.
Anders: Meredith will die. Do not doubt that.
Varric: Go away, Justice. Can Anders come out and play?
Anders: Stop.
Varric: You are no fun anymore.

Pretty much covers the Anders-v-Justice dictomy fairly well.

[VanBuren]

Pretty much covers the Anders-v-Justice dictomy fairly well.

It's that, plus Justice being corrupted into Vengeance. But also, it's the nature of Kirkwall and it's exceedingly thin veil that exacerbates it. The codex entries for The Enigma of Kirkwall heavily imply that the Magisters of the Imperium were doing things in Kirkwall that have effects to this day, causing the extremely high rate of crazy blood mages.

[Aux-Ash]

I get that. I really do. But what bugs me is that you have a man who could rightfully be called an abomination and denies it while picking on Merill(who at the very least has admitted, to some extent anyway, what she's done.) A man who would set an entire city ablaze and to the brink of war, just to foster a change, when it was really only that one city that was that oppresive. HE COULD HAVE JUST FREAKING MOVED! :smallfurious: Not only that, he pushes his dogma on all the party members, not once, but all the time, and, here's the kicker, why not blow up his opposition in Meredith instead of exploding the Grand Cleric?!?! And I'm supposed to like this guy?! :smallannoyed: I think Morrigan was a better person than him, and she was a Darwinist with extreme emotional issues. :smallbiggrin:

Like someone else mentioned... it isn't Anders. Anders is the one that runs away when he's scared or getting drawn in. And he did run... back to Amaranthine, only to discover Justice preparing to hand over his hostbody to it's former owners wife. Compassionate and friendly as he is, he offered his own body for the spirit.

But Justice is a single minded aspect of the notion of Justice. To him there's only the just and the unjust. There's no lenience for the sake of peace. No grey zones. Black and white morality.

Here comes the trouble. Anders views what the circle does as opression. Which is why he runs for it. But when he let Justice in, Justice had to do whatever it takes to end opression for -all- mages. He cannot choose not to. He cannot leave it be... he have to force a change. Whatever the cost.
Anders is scared of this and throughout the game he does what he always does... he runs. So Justice takes over more and more.

In a way, Anders emotions destroyed and corrupted Justice. And justice then took over Anders with his singlemindedness. He isn't a fanatic. He's even worse than that.

In a way... Isabella and Merill explains Anders best:

"Justice is an idea. It works in a world of ideas but not here"

"All spirits are dangerous Anders. I knew that, I'm sorry you didn't"

[Archpaladin Zousha]

It's that, plus Justice being corrupted into Vengeance. But also, it's the nature of Kirkwall and it's exceedingly thin veil that exacerbates it. The codex entries for The Enigma of Kirkwall heavily imply that the Magisters of the Imperium were doing things in Kirkwall that have effects to this day, causing the extremely high rate of crazy blood mages.
Not to mention...
In Legacy, implications are also there that the malaise that infects Kirkwall stems from an even deeper corruption: Corypheus.
Also, something I posited over in the Origins thread:
There's almost a parallel between Loghain and Anders in the two games. In Dragon Age: Origins, Loghain causes countless deaths by abandoning Cailen at Ostagar, followed by many more dying in the Ferelden Civil War that followed, to say nothing of the people killed by the darkspawn. Likewise, Anders causes the deaths of many people at the Chantry, the mages and templars who die fighting in the Gallows, and in the mage/templar war that follows. Also, both place themselves at your mercy, expecting execution for what they've done, and if you spare them, you alienate someone else in your group (Alistair in Origins, Sebastian in II).

I'm wondering if basically what the writers did with Anders in the sequel was sort of make him "the next generation's Loghain" as it were. Anders becomes a hero upon joining the Grey Wardens and helping save the Arling of Amaranthine from the darkspawn, much like how Loghain became a hero after joining Maric and fighting off the Orlesians. Both became increasingly obsessed with their suspicions and alleged enemies, and both committed a terrible act that caused many more deaths. In the novels, Maric is trouble because Flemeth supposedly told him Loghain would betray him many times, each worse than the last. This is sort of what Anders does in the sequel, a friend who betrays you (depending on one's definition of betrayal) until finally he makes his huge event.

The only major difference between the two is that the option is there to execute Anders right on the spot, preventing him from going through that long breakdown we see in Loghain as he watches everything fall apart around him. With Loghain, we watch the fallout of his actions. It'd be like actually playing during the war in the sequel.

Just a sort of interesting pattern I noticed as I was playing through Origins again.

[VanBuren]

So, I got a Gamasutra article about DA2, the writing process and the narrative decisions that were made, and a bunch of Legacy reviews.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6444/the_writing_of_biowares_dragon_.php


It was Laidlaw who first proposed the new game concept. His idea was this: instead of telling a linear, he suggested they modify the structure on a high level and jump between the major moments of a character's life. Instead of telling a story over a short span of time in a wide open world, they would set the game within a single city, and jump through an epic ten-year period. This would be accomplished with the help of a framing device, allowing for the time jumps to be implemented as flashbacks.

"[The new approach] definitely allowed us some unique opportunities," Gaider says. "Sometimes the lack of an ability to hand-wave time passing means we end up with a lot of events happening in an unrealistically short span, or repercussions for a player's actions that either need to occur instantly or be relegated to the epilogue. So this offered us the chance to give a sense of greater scope."

However, there were also unknowns. What would it feel like to play a game where you don't see time's gradual passage? Would jumping through time break narrative unity and pull the player out of the story? And how would this work from an implementation standpoint? Would creative resources get bogged down trying to account for the long-term impact of minor decisions that the player made five years ago in game time?

These questions began to work themselves out as the process unfolded. In some ways, the new concept worked just as planned. But in others, the team found that certain RPG elements emerged naturally, as a function of the genre, rather than as a matter of tradition. The game ultimately came to reflect a blend of these ideas – the concept as it was originally envisioned, and the actual limitations revealed by the writing process.

...

Writing a game like this is a top-down process. "We start with what we call a one-pager," explains Gaider, "which lays out the flow of the plot in general, and then slowly begin expanding on that in more and more detail. We end up with a very detailed overview, break it up into segments, and split the work among writers who in turn break up those segments into workable sections. Any required assets (such as a codex or a description) will be identified as the work is ongoing, and eventually all this information simply accumulates."

Every plot line – whether it's the spine, a particular chapter, or a subplot – has what Gaider calls its own "narrative overview." The overview lists all the beats for that section of story, including the choices involved, the gameplay elements, and the resources needed – along with the required budget. Once approved, the narrative overview serves as a blueprint that can be shared by writers, combat designers, level artists, and so on.

"The trick is to keep track of it all," says Gaider. "We have a wiki on our internal network that houses our accumulated lore, and our in-house editors devote a fair amount of time to trying to keep it all organized and searchable. You get a lot of outdated legacy information in there, which can make it a real challenge to keep up-to-date as things inevitably change over time."

And reviews, spoilered for length.

Cheat Code Central (http://www.cheatcc.com/ps3/rev/dragonage2legacyreview.html), 3.5/5.

Dragon Age II: Legacy isn't going to convince anybody who strongly disliked Dragon Age II to come back to the fold, but it shows improvement in terms of level and encounter design from the original game. The vignettes with various companions—especially Hawke's sibling—add nicely to the overall game's story, and it's nice to see the battle and dungeon layout improvements provided by Legacy's development team. It's a solid, albeit short, DLC addition that bodes well for any planned expansions to Dragon Age II.

Just Push Start (http://www.justpushstart.com/2011/07/30/dragon-age-2-legacy-dlc-review/), 3.5/5.

Dragon Age 2: Legacy is an awesome DLC that fans of the series will love. You get a great new stroy that fills you in on the Hawke Lineage as well as some new weapons and armor pieces to help you slay the various new foes you will encounter. While the DLC is very linear it does offer a 2-3 hour story that players will love from beginning to end.

PC PowerPlay Magazine (http://www.pcpowerplay.com.au/2011/08/dragon-age-ii-legacy/), 9/10.

In this writer’s opinion, for what it’s worth, Dragon Age II: Legacy should be immortalised as an exercise in communication, showing how passion (hopefully the more eloquent and useful) can influence a developer’s vision and guide design back to a more common ground. The careful observer will be able to discern a shift from, “We know what you’ll like,” to “What do you like?” in this twelve dollar toe-print, at the very least.

Nave360 (http://www.nave360.com/reviews/dragon-age-ii-legacy/), 8.5/10.

For the first DLC of a game which got mixed responses, Bioware has done well. With a good length, some very nice changes, some nice puzzles and hardly any reused locations (almost everything feels new), this DLC is worth its 800 MSP/$9.99 price. However, the DLC might have gotten a higher score from me if they had made the story a little more understandable.

[Giggling Ghast]

Watched the trailer. Was that Jennifer Hale's voice as the Grey Warden lady?


No, it's the same actress who voiced Mistress Woolsey from Awakening, unless I'm mistaken.

Just a heads up: I was correct.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Just a heads up: I was correct.
So it would seem. :smallannoyed:

Just kidding! I'm not mad at you. I wish there was an "eye roll" smilie.

[VanBuren]

I have some Legacy reviews here. They seem mixed, as per usual. Spoilered for length.

Joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/08/02/dragon-age-2-legacy-dlc-review/), scoreless, seems to like it.

As you make the noticeably linear descent into the mountain's belly, you'll clash with Darkspawn that have, just like you, wandered into an inescapable trap. It's a nostalgic pleasure to cut through so many emissaries and genlocks again -- a fact that won't be lost on certain party members (should you choose to bring them along). One of the best things about Legacy is how attentive it is to the state in which you left Dragon Age 2. The game unlocks unique dialogue if you bring along a romantic interest, for instance, and triggers a bonus battle should one of your spiritually unstable companions take a turn for the worse.

If you're the sort that enjoys perfecting the party's automatic tactics, slotting their abilities into a dungeon-crawling killing machine, you'll be happy to test it against the great variety of enemies in Legacy. The combat encounters feel far less random compared to the main game, with deliberately positioned archers and heavily armored monsters (including a new type of bronto) calling for specific classes and instructions. You don't have to micromanage to win, but there's always opportunity to act efficiently, and that's half the fun.

IGN (http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/118/1185707p1.html), 6.5/10.

Dragon Age II Legacy see-saws between going-through-the-motions and meaningful character development. I suppose Legacy’s character-centric exploration of the Hawke family’s dark secrets is just the kind of story downloadable content is made for, but after wading through several hours that felt as much like a checklist of Dragon Age IITM ingredients being tallied up as a meaningful addition to the game, I have to wonder: why wasn’t this in the game in the first place?

This is my joystick (http://thisismyjoystick.com/reviews/review-dragon-age-ii-legacy-dlc/), "Buy it!".

That being said, I enjoyed Legacy. Yes, it’s short, and yes the story is limiting, but ultimately, I had more fun with the few short hours I spent with Legacy, than I did for some thirty hours spent in Dragon Age 2. Bioware have listened; they’ve gone back to what was good about the Dragon Age series, and delivered. Whether it is worth 800 points or not is up to you, but it definitely made me feel more positive about the future of the Dragon Age series after playing it.

Now all Bioware have to do to make me happy is release an add-on for Dragon Age 2 that is akin to Awakening in size and depth. That may go some way in soothing the wounds of disappointment I endured back in March.

GameSpy (http://uk.pc.gamespy.com/pc/dragon-age-ii-legacy/1185391p1.html), 2.5/5.

With full Champion Armor, champion-level weapons, and a group of similarly leveled and equipped companions, you simply won't find a challenge in Legacy, no matter how tactical the Darkspawn are. Even when BioWare threw flames, specters, ice, electricity and one very pissed-off magistrate at me all at once, my battle-hardened Hawke barely broke a sweat. Worse, with the aforementioned high-level characters, none of the new loot you score in Legacy tops the weapons and equipment you're already lugging around, resulting in a disappointing treasure hunt for seasoned Dragon Age II players who were hoping for something new.

The good news is, BioWare is on the right path; Legacy is a promising development for fans hoping the franchise's third installment will feature a return to the tactical gameplay of Dragon Age: Origins. Unfortunately, it's a bit too late for Dragon Age II, and Legacy's legacy is as a $10 reminder of the full game's shortcomings.

The Escapist (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/9049-Dragon-Age-2-Legacy-Review) recommends to wait for a Game of the Year edition, scoreless:

I played through Legacy on normal after having completed the main game, and breezed through the entire thing in about five hours without ever really being challenged. I was momentarily frustrated by the final boss not because it was particularly difficult, but because my AI posse apparently thought the best approach to dealing with geysers of fire was the bunny approach: stay perfectly still and hope they don't notice you. If you actually put some effort into using cross-class combos or directing your AI companions, Legacy will be even more of a cakewalk. The class-specific weapon you get - and customize - is a nifty bit of kit, but not dramatically more than the trinkets you likely picked up during your playthrough of the main game.

[Giggling Ghast]

I have a lot of work to do and not a lot of time to do it, so naturally I was procrastinating by sifting through the Bioware forums (lol) and came across an interesting comment made by Mike Laidlaw that I thought I should share:


Since I'm in a sharing mood, I will put this out there: our intention is that for each major release of Dragon Age, you will take up the mantle of a new character. This does not mean your old character may never appear in future games, but as far as the core protagonist goes, if there is a DA III, it will very likely be neither Hawke nor The Warden.

We want to keep the series about the time and place, rather than about any singular character. While I know not everyone prefers that approach, I believe it's perfectly valid, especially if certain plans of ours to shore up world consistency (import bugs really bother me!) come to fruition, which I believe they will.

And that's all I can say about that.

I kind of suspected that there will be a new protagonist for each new entry in the franchise, but this sort of confirms it.

[Mx.Silver]

I have a lot of work to do and not a lot of time to do it, so naturally I was procrastinating by sifting through the Bioware forums (lol)
I did that the other day, curious to see whether they were truly as bad as I remebered.

Turns out they'd gotten worse.





I kind of suspected that there will be a new protagonist for each new entry in the franchise, but this sort of confirms it.

Yeah, personally I'm rather interested in the idea, although I would like it if the protagonist of DA3 wasn't a human.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

The character would likely have to be an elf then, as making him/her a dwarf would restrict you to just Warriors and Rogues. Oh, I can hear the whining even now! :smallamused:

I personally like this direction. I think I remember hearing something similar a while ago, that the reason the series is called Dragon Age is because that's when all the games take place. Rather than getting the story of a single hero (which BioWare is doing with Shepard in Mass Effect) we're getting Thedas' history as it's being made.

[Mx.Silver]

The character would likely have to be an elf then, as making him/her a dwarf would restrict you to just Warriors and Rogues.
I have never understood why this is such a common thing in fantasy. Mythological dwarfs were never portrayed as such, as far as I know, and yet it's such a pervasive cliche for no real reason (besides the fact that were no magical dwarf characters in LOTR).

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I presume it started out of the "Dwarf vs. Elf" dichotomy. As elves were depicted as magic masters, dwarves became depicted as disdainful of magic because those soft elven nancies use it. But it's part of Dragon Age's codex that dwarves have a resistance to magic and inability to use it due to hanging around lyrium for so long. Regardless of where it started, dwarves are SOL when it comes to being a mage in Thedas.

[Mx.Silver]

Regardless of where it started, dwarves are SOL when it comes to being a mage in Thedas.
Yeah, although there is some speculation about Sandal :smalltongue:

[Archpaladin Zousha]

But people will want to customize, won't they? They won't want to be forced to play Sandal, intriguing though he is (I say intriguing because I assume that he's a polarizing character that people either find awesome or annoying).

[VanBuren]

Yeah, although there is some speculation about Sandal :smalltongue:

That's different: he's the Maker.

[Giggling Ghast]

That's different: he's the Maker.

No, that's Flemeth. Or is she Andraste? I can never remember.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Lampshades! Hanging everywhere!

[VanBuren]

No, that's Flemeth. Or is she Andraste? I can never remember.

Yes.

Mathematician's answer

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Wait, so Sandal and Flemeth are MARRIED?! :smalleek:

That puts the "old lady" conversation in a horrible new light!!! :smalleek:

[Mx.Silver]

Wait, so Sandal and Flemeth are MARRIED?! :smalleek:


What? No. Don't be ridiculous.

They're clearly the same person.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

So Andraste is the Maker? :smallconfused:

[VanBuren]

So Andraste is the Maker? :smallconfused:

What? No. Weren't you paying attention?

Andraste was the first Darkspawn.

[Yora]

I have the luxury of having both a PC, PS3 and 360.

Since my PC is quite low hardware with only DirectX 9 and I think DA2 probably plays a lot better on console (and I don't like playing for long time at my desk anymore), I should probably go for either PS3 or 360.
Since I use my PS3 a lot more and I'm not entirely sure if I want to keep my 360 around once I grew tired of Mass Effect 3, I'd strongly favor the PS3, but are there any really good reasons to go for 360 anyway?

[Zevox]

I have the luxury of having both a PC, PS3 and 360.

Since my PC is quite low hardware with only DirectX 9 and I think DA2 probably plays a lot better on console (and I don't like playing for long time at my desk anymore), I should probably go for either PS3 or 360.
Since I use my PS3 a lot more and I'm not entirely sure if I want to keep my 360 around once I grew tired of Mass Effect 3, I'd strongly favor the PS3, but are there any really good reasons to go for 360 anyway?
Only if you have Dragon Age: Origins on your 360, I'd imagine. I haven't heard of any particular differences between the two console versions.

Zevox

[Dhavaer]

What's a good time to start Legacy? I'm just a little way into Act 2 at the moment.

[Edge]

What's a good time to start Legacy? I'm just a little way into Act 2 at the moment.

Some time in Act 3, probably before you start picking up most of the Champion armour set, so you might actually get some use out of the loot in Legacy.

[sihnfahl]

Some time in Act 3, probably before you start picking up most of the Champion armour set, so you might actually get some use out of the loot in Legacy.
And then, it might not last long, except for niche builds.

Finished legacy in Act I, just for the achieve, and went back to a prior save to try later.


Just looooved the Corypheus fight. I thought I was in WoW again ... "Why, oh WHY, are you just standing in the fire!? And ... it's moving. WHY ARE YOU MOVING WITH IT!?"

And if you micromanage the team, man, the fight's a joke.

Love Corypheus' monologuing and the implications.

[Guancyto]

Hmm, this may have come up before. What's the smallest party you can achieve by endgame? In the vein of "Shepard dies during suicide mission." So far I have

Act 1: Take Hawke sibling into Deep Roads; keeps your class from determining whether or not you get them back in Act 3
Act 2: Fail to achieve enough friendship or rivalry with Isabela to get her to come back
Act 3: Banish Anders, causing Sebastian to leave. Side with mages, fail to influence Fenris or Aveline enough to stick with you.

Final party of Merrill, Varric and Hawke.

Trying to get it down to just Varric and Hawke. Any ideas?

[Psyren]

What? No. Don't be ridiculous.

They're clearly the same person.

They certainly kick equal amounts of ass :smalleek:
(Can you tell I just started act 2?)

And I am loving all the mage-centric quests in Act 1 so far, especially the three where you


- Help the half-elf
- Help the runaway mages from the Starkhaven circle
- Help the Qunari mage (!!!)


The first two involve probably the coolest Templar I have met since Alistair :smallsmile:

I just wish my companions would talk more. It's starting to feel like calibrations up ins. :smallfrown:

[Mx.Silver]

So, is Sebastion worth buying? I didn't bother on my first play-through because he seemed a bit redundant (Varric seems to have the archer rogue role covered).


Hmm, this may have come up before. What's the smallest party you can achieve by endgame? In the vein of "Shepard dies during suicide mission." So far I have



Act 1: Take Hawke sibling into Deep Roads; keeps your class from determining whether or not you get them back in Act 3
Act 2: Fail to achieve enough friendship or rivalry with Isabela to get her to come back
Act 3: Banish Anders, causing Sebastian to leave. Side with mages, fail to influence Fenris or Aveline enough to stick with you.

Final party of Merrill, Varric and Hawke.

Trying to get it down to just Varric and Hawke. Any ideas?
If you're siding with the mages, Anders may turn-up again as an ally before the battle in the circle tower if you didn't kill him. He did in my game anyway, and I didn't have full friendship/rivalry with him.

[sihnfahl]

So, is Sebastion worth buying? I didn't bother on my first play-through because he seemed a bit redundant (Varric seems to have the archer rogue role covered).
I guess it comes down to whether or not you want to go Templar or Mage by endgame. Sebby's a little better for the first, Varric's a little better for the second. (Some of the tricks Sebby can do are rather fun, too... +20% to crit rate, +25% crit damage, Up to -45% damage resistance on targets, etc)


Just as long as you're willing to accept that, if you want Sebby along for the last bits of the game, you'll have to kill Anders. He won't accept anything but Ander's death. Hope you have another healy mage...

[Zevox]

So, is Sebastion worth buying? I didn't bother on my first play-through because he seemed a bit redundant (Varric seems to have the archer rogue role covered).
Eh. Combat-wise, I'd say no, Varric is definitely better, given he has multiple specialization abilities that increase his attack speed significantly. Sebastian's specialization abilities mimic the Shadow specialization and have some archery versions of two-weapon fighting talents, which aren't as useful. Otherwise, well, he does come with a decent quest during act 2 and a Leliana cameo during act 3, and at least one very nice item (my mage ended up using a staff from his act 2 quest all the way through the endgame, mostly because it has 3 rune slots) so maybe for those.

Zevox

[SowZ]

Hmm, this may have come up before. What's the smallest party you can achieve by endgame? In the vein of "Shepard dies during suicide mission." So far I have

Act 1: Take Hawke sibling into Deep Roads; keeps your class from determining whether or not you get them back in Act 3
Act 2: Fail to achieve enough friendship or rivalry with Isabela to get her to come back
Act 3: Banish Anders, causing Sebastian to leave. Side with mages, fail to influence Fenris or Aveline enough to stick with you.

Final party of Merrill, Varric and Hawke.

Trying to get it down to just Varric and Hawke. Any ideas?

Well...

Fenris is easy to get rid of by never recruiting him or giving him to the slavers. Anders/Sebastain/Isabella are easy to kick out. Three people is the smallest you can get. Merill will only leave if you side with the mages and Aveline will only leave if you have a certain rivalry. So you could be Aveline, Varric, Hawke... With such a small group Zevran joins up with you.

[Giggling Ghast]

So, I heard some rumours that there's a new item pack of some kind coming out next week. Few details, though.

I'm normally receptive to DLC, but geez, is the game long enough to justify buying all these extra armor sets and weapons?

[Zevox]

*shrugs* I don't buy item packs, so releasing those is a waste of time with me. The only DLC I have so far is Exiled Prince and Legacy (and I actually haven't played Legacy yet - been busy with other games).

Zevox

[Giggling Ghast]

*shrugs* I don't buy item packs, so releasing those is a waste of time with me. The only DLC I have so far is Exiled Prince and Legacy (and I actually haven't played Legacy yet - been busy with other games).

Same here, though I did get some of the promotional items, like Hayder's Razor, the Lion of Orlais and Fadeshear.

But I shouldn't bitch. As is the case with all DLC, if you don't like it then you don't buy it.

[Zevox]

Same here, though I did get some of the promotional items, like Hayder's Razor, the Lion of Orlais and Fadeshear.
I got some of those as well, but I don't tend to count/think about them, since they were free and all.

Zevox

[Giggling Ghast]

Here are some neat videos that I found on Youtube featuring Varric talking about each of Hawke's companions (not including the sibling). I guess they were recorded to be part of character trailers that never got released, but some enterprising soul found them. I particularly like Aveline's intro.

Aveline (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5MJvaZlrjw&feature=related)

Fenris (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQsmKecm418&feature=related)

Merrill (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43bSgA1SkRg&feature=related)

Anders (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajq39jiwXQ0&feature=related)

Isabela (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSvMXXfhL3c&feature=related)

Varric (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej6TX8QRkuc&feature=related)

Note: some of the images in the videos are slightly spoiler-ish.

@V: OK, thanks. It's fixed now.

To answer your other question: it's a mod, I would imagine. These aren't the actual companion trailers that Bioware developed; someone just found Varric's dialogue encoded in the game and put them into fan-made trailers.

[Mukora]

The Fenris one links to Isabella's video.

Also, question: Why is Isabella's outfit black in her video?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

The Fenris one links to Isabella's video.

Also, question: Why is Isabella's outfit black in her video?

Mods I think.

[Gralamin]

Mods I think.

From the Wiki:


If Isabela is romanced, she will update her outfit with a black corset, added goldwork embroidery to the bottom hem of her sash, a red scarf around her right bicep, and replaces the leather pauldron on her left shoulder with a metal one.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Yes, but that's not what Isabela looks like in the video there.

This is what Isabela looks like if you romance her.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110323223260/dragonage/images/thumb/6/60/Isabella_romance_armor.png/830px-Isabella_romance_armor.png
The outfit in the video doesn't have the altered shoulderpad of the romanced look, and it's all black with white strings, instead of a black corset around the waist. If it were the romanced look, Isabela's "top" wouldn't be black as well.

That's what leads me to believe it's modded. Looking at the other videos by this person strongly suggests this, as the color schemes of many outfits has been altered.

[Giggling Ghast]

On this point, I agree (http://thepunchlineismachismo.com/archives/897).

[JadedDM]

Okay, so I'm in Act II, playing a Warrior (Mace and Shield), and here are my opinions so far:

Has anyone tried romancing Aveline? Yes, you cannot succeed, but you can try. And got-dang, is it depressing. I actually wanted to give Hawke a hug after it was over.

But he moved on, and I started up a rival romance with Merril. Wow, that didn't turn out how I expected. I guess being denied her cultural heritage gets her all hot. :smallwink:

The re-used dungeons are really starting to annoy me, but really it's combat I hate. It's so boring. I loved the combat int he first game, but here it is such a chore. And just when you think it's over, another wave of enemies spawns out of nowhere and drags it on further. Ugh.

One last thing, though. In one of the little tidbits of info I saw during loading screens, it said that if you attack an enemy and they are resistant to that kind of attack, a shield pops up over their head. This happens to me a lot. My weapon has no elemental or special properties, which makes me wonder if all of these enemies are just resistant to...maces. Are maces totally worthless in this game or something?

[Giggling Ghast]

Okay, so I'm in Act II, playing a Warrior (Mace and Shield), and here are my opinions so far:

Has anyone tried romancing Aveline? Yes, you cannot succeed, but you can try. And got-dang, is it depressing. I actually wanted to give Hawke a hug after it was over.

A-yup. Though it's not the most depressing thing that occurs in Act 2 by far.


The re-used dungeons are really starting to annoy me, but really it's combat I hate. It's so boring. I loved the combat int he first game, but here it is such a chore. And just when you think it's over, another wave of enemies spawns out of nowhere and drags it on further. Ugh.

It does get a bit wearying, though my issue with it is that it makes the fights so much harder. I completed the quest Night Lies yesterday and OH MAKER that was a tough battle.

My only recommendation is to use lots of poison and get really good at cross-class combos.

Oh, and don't play a sword and shield warrior, as they frakkin' suck. :smalltongue:

[Dienekes]

Okay, so I'm in Act II, playing a Warrior (Mace and Shield), and here are my opinions so far:

Has anyone tried romancing Aveline? Yes, you cannot succeed, but you can try. And got-dang, is it depressing. I actually wanted to give Hawke a hug after it was over.

But he moved on, and I started up a rival romance with Merril. Wow, that didn't turn out how I expected. I guess being denied her cultural heritage gets her all hot. :smallwink:

My first character when i didn't know Ave was non-romancable. He tried to help her out anyway and was happy for her and Donnic but ended up as a bachelor.


The re-used dungeons are really starting to annoy me, but really it's combat I hate. It's so boring. I loved the combat int he first game, but here it is such a chore. And just when you think it's over, another wave of enemies spawns out of nowhere and drags it on further. Ugh.

One last thing, though. In one of the little tidbits of info I saw during loading screens, it said that if you attack an enemy and they are resistant to that kind of attack, a shield pops up over their head. This happens to me a lot. My weapon has no elemental or special properties, which makes me wonder if all of these enemies are just resistant to...maces. Are maces totally worthless in this game or something?

Reusing dungeons was horrible and I have no idea why Bioware went that route. Well ok I do. They wanted to ship the game out fast and level design takes time.

What really annoys me though is the whole "see the world around you develop" bit they were saying. I'd actually be ok if my adventures took me to the same dungeons and buildings if I saw them develop a lot so each time you could see where they were and how they've developed. And if they were different caves don't use the same one and close up a few doors. Jeez that reeked of laziness.

Now as to combat using cross-class abilities makes it alot faster and makes you more deadly. So that might help if you think of it as a chore. Still have to deal with the ridiculous amount of waves though.

As to maces. I think, unfortunately, that the game uses the idea that swords are just better. Though I don't think that there are any added resistances.

[JadedDM]

My only recommendation is to use lots of poison and get really good at cross-class combos.

Hmm, I haven't used any poisons at all so far, on account that I'm not a rogue. Guess I could brew some for my rogues to use, though.

I never did learn how to use cross-class combos, though. The game didn't do a very good job at teaching me how to do that.


Oh, and don't play a sword and shield warrior, as they frakkin' suck.

They were a perfectly serviceable class in the first game! :smallbiggrin: Would I be having more fun if I was something else?


My first character when i didn't know Ave was non-romancable. He tried to help her out anyway and was happy for her and Donnic but ended up as a bachelor.

That's the option I went with. Well, first, I facepalmed three times when Aveline was all like, "Say, do you think there ever could have been anything between us?" Then I told her to be happy. But oh, Maker, that big fake smile he put on for her sake before he walked away. I just knew he spent the next several hours in the Hanged Man, drinking after that.


Reusing dungeons was horrible and I have no idea why Bioware went that route. Well ok I do. They wanted to ship the game out fast and level design takes time.

What really annoys me though is the whole "see the world around you develop" bit they were saying. I'd actually be ok if my adventures took me to the same dungeons and buildings if I saw them develop a lot so each time you could see where they were and how they've developed. And if they were different caves don't use the same one and close up a few doors. Jeez that reeked of laziness.

I guess on the bright side, I'm starting to memorize all of the dungeon layouts...

I'm starting to think everything about this game stems from trying to release it as quickly as possible. Not just the reused dungeons, but also the whole 'human only' and 'Kirkwall only' stuff, too.

What also annoys me is I start a quest, play through it, and find myself wondering what would have happened if I had done things differently? So I look it up on the wiki and discover, oh wait, the same thing happens no matter what you do. (For instance, the Qunari mage quest. No matter what you say or do, same result.)

Also, there's a lot of clipping in this game. My mace clips through every shield I've ever owned (when they're on my back, I mean). My armor clips through most of my shields. I've seen Isabella's clothes clip through her own body. Hell, one time, I saw a corpse on the ground (not a corpse I made, mind you; one of those lootable corpses that you find everywhere, like piles of rubble or bones) that was clipping through the ground.

This to me, is like watching a movie where the monster's zipper is clearly visible. I don't play games with much of a technical eye, so if even I'm noticing these things, that's pretty bad.


As to maces. I think, unfortunately, that the game uses the idea that swords are just better. Though I don't think that there are any added resistances.

In the first game, maces did less damage than swords overall, but they had high armor penetration values, making them really useful against heavily armored opponents.

In this game, though, the just seem to suck. I kind of wonder what the point of them was.

[Giggling Ghast]

Hmm, I haven't used any poisons at all so far, on account that I'm not a rogue. Guess I could brew some for my rogues to use, though.

You don't need to be a rogue to use poison in DA2. My two-handed warrior Hawke uses them plenty. And they generally last a half-hour, so you can use them over several fights.


I never did learn how to use cross-class combos, though. The game didn't do a very good job at teaching me how to do that.

Well, that's part of the problem. Your fights will go a bit smoother if you use combos.

It's pretty easy: just read the ability descriptions of spells and talents. Pay attention to talents that render opponents STAGGERED, DISORIENTED or BRITTLE. Then have other characters pick talents that deal extra damage to enemies in those states.

For example: Varric can DISORIENT an opponent with Pinning Shot. Then Merrill can hit that opponent with an upgraded Stonefist for massive damage (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ForMassiveDamage).

You can tell whether an opponent has one of these status effects by watching for the little symbols over their heads.

You as a sword and shield warrior can STAGGER opponents with Shield Bash and deal extra damage to DISORIENTED opponents with Battery or Disperse.

Do you have the Black Emporium? If so, you might want to invest in some Maker's Sigh potions if you've been ignoring this stuff up to now.


They were a perfectly serviceable class in the first game! :smallbiggrin: Would I be having more fun if I was something else?

IMHO, two-handed warriors are way better in this game and function nearly as well as tanks.


I guess on the bright side, I'm starting to memorize all of the dungeon layouts...

That's about the only upside of it. :smallsigh:


I'm starting to think everything about this game stems from trying to release it as quickly as possible. Not just the reused dungeons, but also the whole 'human only' and 'Kirkwall only' stuff, too.

I think delaying the game a year would have helped the game overall, as they would have had more time to develop extra maps and work out some of the quest-related bugs. Maybe they would have been able to include Ketojan as a party member as originally planned.

But I highly doubt that the plot of the game would have changed much or that the protagonist of the game would be someone other than Hawke.

It seems to me that a fair bit of thought went into plotting the story and fleshing out Hawke as a protagonist. A lot of work has been put into the supporting cast (though your mileage may vary) and in the dialogue system. They make some mistakes, but there's no perfect formula for crafting art.

Also, the dev team has made it somewhat clear they wanted to go in a different direction than Origins. Some of the main complaints about the first game was that the hero was an emotionless mannequin and that Bioware recycled its "hero joins elite group/saves the world from ancient evil" plot. Say what you will about DA2's plot, but it isn't a carbon copy of its previous games.

They also wanted to make dialogue more "cinematic". Personally, I'm not be-moaning the inability to talk to companions whenever you want, as I rarely did that anyway in Origins.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I'm starting another playthrough, and I'm trying to figure out just how to run things. I know for a fact that I want to play this Hawke as a peacenik, wanting to reconcile differences between others but generally going with the side that will promote the most peace in the long run if forced to choose between two sides. I'm uncertain as to just how that kind of Hawke would lean leading up to the ending. I know a few things for certain:

He'd side with the Templars in the end, to keep the uprising in Kirkwall from causing strife for the whole world.

He'd definitely have a rivalry with Anders, disliking his extreme stance on mage liberation.

He's return Ketojan to the Arvaarad, as well as attempt to get Isabela to return the Tome, as he wants to promote peace with the Qunari, but he'll duel the Arishok because Isabela is part of his Nakama, and while he believes in peace, he won't sell out his friends.

In the "On The Loose" quest he'll convince Emil to return to the Circle, and in the following quest he'll push for Meredith to go easy on the rebels.

I'm uncertain about other quests though. The Act I quests like Wayward Son and An Act of Mercy really force you to choose sides. What would be the best way to resolve Feynriel's issues so as not to cause more strife (sending him to the Circle, I imagine, but that makes Feynriel miserable).
Any advice?

[Phosphate]

My honest opinion?

The Qun is awesome, honestly :)). Dunno what to say about the Qunari, though.

[Zevox]

Bit o' News (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/08/31/bioware-hints-at-the-future-of-dragon-age-dlc-and-3/).

On DLC: Future DLC will be of the same type as Legacy (meaning large side-quest add-ons), and we can expect them to include characters like Varric, Leliana, Flemeth, and Morrigan.

On Dragon Age 3: It will deal with the Mage-Templar war (duh) and have the player moving between nations, including Orlais and Tevinter, to quell the fighting. They bragged that one of the maps is apparently four to five times larger than Ferelden (though what that'll mean in gameplay terms, who knows).

The main character will be someone new, no surprise there. Companions will keep the Dragon Age 2 approach to armor - unique look that can change over the game, but improves via upgrades rather than full new armor sets. Combat will revolve around "preparation, teamwork, and positioning," which news articles seem to interpret as meaning it'll be more like DA:O's for some reason I can't understand.

Personally, I'm quite happy to hear of the possibility of Flemeth and Morrigan being part of future DLC, as well as Dragon Age 3 including Tevinter among its settings (I'm very curious to see what things are really like there), and that it'll keep the DA2 approach to companion armor.

Zevox

[Giggling Ghast]

Bit o' News (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/08/31/bioware-hints-at-the-future-of-dragon-age-dlc-and-3/).

On DLC: Future DLC will be of the same type as Legacy (meaning large side-quest add-ons), and we can expect them to include characters like Varric, Leliana, Flemeth, and Morrigan.

On Dragon Age 3: It will deal with the Mage-Templar war (duh) and have the player moving between nations, including Orlais and Tevinter, to quell the fighting. They bragged that one of the maps is apparently four to five times larger than Ferelden (though what that'll mean in gameplay terms, who knows).

The main character will be someone new, no surprise there. Companions will keep the Dragon Age 2 approach to armor - unique look that can change over the game, but improves via upgrades rather than full new armor sets. Combat will revolve around "preparation, teamwork, and positioning," which news articles seem to interpret as meaning it'll be more like DA:O's for some reason I can't understand.

Personally, I'm quite happy to hear of the possibility of Flemeth and Morrigan being part of future DLC, as well as Dragon Age 3 including Tevinter among its settings (I'm very curious to see what things are really like there), and that it'll keep the DA2 approach to companion armor.

Hmm. Well, I'd heard of the new protagonist, but the rest of this stuff is new.

Well, except the part about Flemeth and Morrigan. If anybody actually expected never to see Flemeth or Morrigan again, then I have a bridge over the River Dane to sell them.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Any good archer rogue builds out there? About the only thing I know to do with archers is get everything in the Archery tree. :smallconfused:

[Cristo Meyers]

Combat will revolve around "preparation, teamwork, and positioning," which news articles seem to interpret as meaning it'll be more like DA:O's for some reason I can't understand.

Kinda like how apparently Legacy was a "step back towards what made Origins great" when about the only thing they changed was having the enemy waves come from the ground...


Personally, I'm quite happy to hear of the possibility of Flemeth and Morrigan being part of future DLC, as well as Dragon Age 3 including Tevinter among its settings (I'm very curious to see what things are really like there), and that it'll keep the DA2 approach to companion armor.

Oooooh no, they already conned me out of money with Witch Hunt. I'll eat my own foot before I let them use dealing with Morrigan to draw me into another DLC.

[Arbitrarity]

Any good archer rogue builds out there? About the only thing I know to do with archers is get everything in the Archery tree. :smallconfused:

Be Varric.
Otherwise...
On nightmare, Archery is a handicap, but otherwise it's pretty good. Get an Elemental mage, or at least some Primal, for Brittle synergy. I'd recommend Stealth and Speed as good one-point wonders, Assassin for Assassinate and Mark of Death (instantly pick off toughest target in a fight? YES), and Sabotage with Shadow, for lots of obscure and defenses.
Also, this makes Disorient infinitely exploitable, so consider Walking Bomb if not on nightmare. Otherwise, an S&S warrior does a decent job exploiting Disorient.

[Zevox]

Any good archer rogue builds out there? About the only thing I know to do with archers is get everything in the Archery tree. :smallconfused:
Sure, archers are good in general. Very high-damage, just on a per-attack basis rather than a "flurry of criticals" basis the way two-weapon fighters go - plus that high damage transfers over to their AoE talents. The one thing I'd say is a must-have is the assassin ability Bloodlust, which restores some of your stamina for each kill you make, and is conveniently the first skill in the assassin tree. Archers need that since Rogues regain stamina for each attack they make, but archers don't attack particularly fast (at least without Varric's crazy attack speed boosts from his unique tree), unlike their TWF counterparts.

My own archer was stealth-based, taking most of the Shadow tree and half of the subterfuge tree to maximize her options for stealth and getting auto-crits for being stealthed. And of course she used the Speed skill from specialist, Blindside from Scoundrel, and most of the archery talents.


Oooooh no, they already conned me out of money with Witch Hunt. I'll eat my own foot before I let them use dealing with Morrigan to draw me into another DLC.
I liked Witch Hunt. Of course I had my first character romance Morrigan and wanted some closure for that, which seems to be the main thing Witch Hunt was made for.

I suspect future DLC involving Morrigan (or Flemeth) will involve more dropping hints as to what their plans are. Or at least, that's what I'd hope for.

Zevox

[Clertar]

Bit o' News (http://www.joystiq.com/2011/08/31/bioware-hints-at-the-future-of-dragon-age-dlc-and-3/).

On DLC: Future DLC will be of the same type as Legacy (meaning large side-quest add-ons), and we can expect them to include [...] Morrigan.


http://i.qkme.me/ev0.jpg

[Giggling Ghast]

Well, I did it. I managed to beat the Ancient Rock Wraith on Hard difficulty. Just barely.

Oh, I mopped the floor with the Ancient Rock Wraith on Normal difficulty, but I wasn't satisfied. I knew that I couldn't live with myself unless I beat the boss at the same level of difficulty I had played through Act 1 with my (canon) Warrior Hawke.

I still had to cheat by equipping Aveline and Varric with Lightning Resistance runes ahead of time. The fight required an insane amount of micro-management, and only my Warrior Hawke and Aveline actually survived. (That punk Anders went first, then Varric.) But I did it.

Now if I could only beat it on Nightmare difficulty, I would finally prove my manhood. :smalltongue:

But in case any of you has an issue with me bumping this thread just to brag about my mediocre achievements, here's a link to some totally sweet Morrigan cosplay:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/gallery/view/26/112821/463.1

[Mukora]

Someone should cosplay as Sten. Then I'll be impressed.

[Arbitrarity]

My nightmare Rock Wraith (first playthrough, I didn't know it was coming >.>) took like 15 tries with Varric, DW rogue Hawke, Merill, and Anders.

It was bad. I ended up doing full-party kiting by stationing everyone in different corners, and had electricity staves equipped for some of the earlier attempts.

[Giggling Ghast]

Someone should cosplay as Sten. Then I'll be impressed.

http://jamiecotc.com/images/sten_no.jpg


It was bad. I ended up doing full-party kiting by stationing everyone in different corners, and had electricity staves equipped for some of the earlier attempts.

I ended up separating the party as much as I could. Most of its attacks are manageable except for when the Ancient Rock Wraith balls up and rolls around the room. Oy, that attack.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I just realized something that, while unaddressed in DA II, is relatively important involving Mabari hounds:

How the heck do the special "warpaints" you find make your hound more powerful? From the description you get from the Ash Warriors at Ostagar, kaddis isn't a visible identifier, but rather a scent-based tool. Hounds recognize their owner by scent, but in a fight where everyone's covered in blood, everyone smells the same, so hound and owner wear the same kaddis so the hound can smell something stronger than the blood and know where his owner is. But how do you get a "magic" kaddis that can improve the dog's strength or speed? Lyrium dust seems like the obvious choice, mixing it in with the other kaddis ingredients, but that presents two problems: 1, how do they decide what effects said kaddis will have, and 2, it seems likely that the lyrium would poison the poor dog.

And for that matter, why is it that only the DOG gets kaddis? You're the owner, you should be wearing it too, since the whole point is for you and the dog to smell the same so he can recognize you.

[Drakyn]

1, how do they decide what effects said kaddis will have, and 2, it seems likely that the lyrium would poison the poor dog.

And for that matter, why is it that only the DOG gets kaddis? You're the owner, you should be wearing it too, since the whole point is for you and the dog to smell the same so he can recognize you.

1: The same way they decide that this particular magic sword will make you slightly stronger when you hold it, while THIS one will deal 10% bonus damage vs darkspawn. Whatever that is. I presume it involves wearing a dress and waving a glowy stick around.
2: They probably make it out of whatever the hell they use for lyrium potions. Omega-3 fatty lyrium or something. Thus creating the real difficulty: trying to persuade the dog not to lick off his delicious, nutritious enchantments.

And for the last, between loading screens you rub some kaddis off him and dust your armpits with it. He's a dog - you don't need to be dunked in the stuff before he smells it. Plus, it acts as an efficient deodorant.

[Giggling Ghast]

I could attempt to explain away the effectiveness of kaddis as a special herbal solution that enhances certain traits already present in mabari, which are themselves magical creatures. (Yeah, they're dogs, but let's face it, they're magic dogs.) People can put kaddis on themselves but it only marks them as "not-targets" to mabari.

But all that is handwaving. The actual reason that kaddis works is because Dog needed a second armor set to make him slightly more effective as a party member. There's a limited number of accessories that you can put on a dog, unless you're one of those people that knits special sweaters for their pets. Since dog collars were already used, "magic paint" was invented.

In other news, I guess there's going to be an announcement this Friday about that Redemption webseries.

[Joran]

Finished Legacy.

I might replay it again with Varric; I'm sure he'd have more interesting things to say than Merrill did. Although, Merrill did have a very interesting and slightly scary look when I completed the Dumat sacrifice.

Stuff about sibling:
If your sibling survived Dragon Age 2, can you bring him/her along? If so, are there interesting bits of dialogue?


Stuff about origin of Darkspawn:

So, it seems like the origin story of the Darkspawn is true. Or at least the Magisters went to the Golden/Black City and were cursed to be Darkspawn. Does this mean the Chantry is right?

[sihnfahl]

Stuff about sibling:
If your sibling survived Dragon Age 2, can you bring him/her along? If so, are there interesting bits of dialogue?




There is an achievement for taking them in; you have to start over and do it in Act 1, of course, before you head to the Deep Roads.




Stuff about origin of Darkspawn:

So, it seems like the origin story of the Darkspawn is true. Or at least the Magisters went to the Golden/Black City and were cursed to be Darkspawn. Does this mean the Chantry is right?




Right ... and wrong, I believe. The entry of the Magisters did not corrupt the City; it was already corrupted. The Chantry maintains the idea that the Magisters caused the corruption, I believe, in order to keep the mages on a tight leash (and avoid another Imperium).

However, they were affected by the corruption there to become the first Darkspawn. They maintained their intelligence and self-will, though...

[Joran]

There is an achievement for taking them in; you have to start over and do it in Act 1, of course, before you head to the Deep Roads.




Oh, so if you do it after the game, your sibling isn't available?

Bethany... died in my playthrough. /sob.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Depends. You CAN do it after the Deep Roads if your sibling either was left behind and joined the Circle/Templars or brought them to the Deep Roads along with Anders so he/she could join the Grey Wardens.

[Joran]

Depends. You CAN do it after the Deep Roads if your sibling either was left behind and joined the Circle/Templars or brought them to the Deep Roads along with Anders so he/she could join the Grey Wardens.

Oh okay, that was my question. Although, Dragon Age II has been out awhile, so I'm unsure if spoilers are still necessary.



Right ... and wrong, I believe. The entry of the Magisters did not corrupt the City; it was already corrupted. The Chantry maintains the idea that the Magisters caused the corruption, I believe, in order to keep the mages on a tight leash (and avoid another Imperium).

However, they were affected by the corruption there to become the first Darkspawn. They maintained their intelligence and self-will, though...



Hmm... Reading through the Wiki, it seems like the Golden/Black City is visible in the entirety of the Fade. So, assuming it was visible before, it should have been Golden (hence the name), then turned black right about when the Magisters gated into it. Whether their mere presence corrupted it as the Chant of Light says is a matter of dispute. The magister claimed it was black when he got there, but maybe the gate INTO the Golden City corrupted it.

My Hawke mentioned how we'd never truly know the whole story because everybody from that era is dead. Just like Andraste. Who we know is Flemeth ;)

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Oh okay, that was my question. Although, Dragon Age II has been out awhile, so I'm unsure if spoilers are still necessary.
Everybody else was doin' it, so I assumed I had to as well, just to be safe.

[sihnfahl]

My Hawke mentioned how we'd never truly know the whole story because everybody from that era is dead.
Oh, you could find someone who would know a bit more of the story - if you could believe them.

One of the Spirits or Demons - if you can take what they say as truth...

[Joran]

Oh, you could find someone who would know a bit more of the story - if you could believe them.

One of the Spirits or Demons - if you can take what they say as truth...

True, but do they know about the Golden/Black City other than "Hey, it's there in the sky"? I guess you could ask an Old God, but that's just as bad an idea.

[sihnfahl]

True, but do they know about the Golden/Black City other than "Hey, it's there in the sky"? I guess you could ask an Old God, but that's just as bad an idea.
Probably would - if it's the major feature of the Fade, I think they'd learn something about it.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

In Awakening, you can talk to Justice about the Maker and he says that the spirits and demons honestly don't know. Some of them believe in a creator, but they're not sure what it was or where it is now. Sure, there are demons that claim there IS no Maker or Golden City, but I think that was more along the lines of demonic trash talking, attempting to demoralize the Templar castigating them.

[Giggling Ghast]

New DLC coming out Oct. 11 called "Mark of the Assassin". Features the elven assassin party member named Tallis that will be available only during the course of this story. Looks to be a heist story in the vein of Kasumi's "Stolen Memory" DLC.

From what I've gathered, it's playable during the DA2 campaign like Legacy and features new banter with all your party members. There will be a couple new monsters, including some weird giant lizard thing, and some emphasis on stealth similar to what was available in Origins.

But don't take my word for it:

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/exclusive-debut-dragon-age/720938

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Waaaaaaaaaaaaants!!! :smallbiggrin:

[Zevox]

New DLC coming out Oct. 11 called "Mark of the Assassin". Features the elven assassin party member named Tallis that will be available only during the course of this story. Looks to be a heist story in the vein of Kasumi's "Stolen Memory" DLC.

From what I've gathered, it's playable during the DA2 campaign like Legacy and features new banter with all your party members. There will be a couple new monsters, including some weird giant lizard thing, and some emphasis on stealth similar to what was available in Origins.

But don't take my word for it:

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/exclusive-debut-dragon-age/720938
Ooo, that sounds interesting. I really liked Kasumi's mission, so something in that vein could be quite promising.

I actually still have yet to play Legacy even though I bought it, since I've been playing other games, but that could get me to come back to DA2 long enough to at least play through both as my first character.

Zevox

[VanBuren]

I'm probably really pushing it here, but it seemed unnecessary to start a whole new thread, and we've already had a kerfuffle about keeping Origins and II separate.

Anywho

Dragon Age II: Mark of the Assassin DLC Audio Interview

Major Nelson's 414th podcast (http://majornelson.com/cast/2011/10/09/show-414-dragon-age-2-mark-of-the-assassin-rocksmith-sesame-street-once-upon-a-monster/) includes an eight-minute interview with BioWare's Mike Laidlaw about their Mark of the Assassin add-on for Dragon Age II. Topics include Felicia Day's involvement, the questions that will be answered during the DLC, the wyverns and "trap-laden" dungeon we'll be dealing with, and more.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Anybody played Mark of the Assassin yet? I'm excited, since I'm downloading it now.

Also, Dragon Age Redemption is finally here, and it seems to be off to a good start. Also, THEY GOT DOUG JONES TO STAR IN IT! He seems to be doing a lot of web series these days. First Fallout: Nuka Break and now this!

[Zevox]

Anybody played Mark of the Assassin yet? I'm excited, since I'm downloading it now.
It's out already? Sheesh, I thought it was another few weeks yet. Welp, guess I have something other than Starcraft 2 to play. (Actually, I still need to play Legacy as well...)

Zevox

[Archpaladin Zousha]

It's out already? Sheesh, I thought it was another few weeks yet. Welp, guess I have something other than Starcraft 2 to play. (Actually, I still need to play Legacy as well...)

Zevox

It came out yesterday, at least here in the States. I know how you feel though. I've been busy with Fallout: New Vegas at the moment, though I'm gonna make an exception for this! I'm so excited!

[Giggling Ghast]

Yeah, it came out earlier today. So far the reviews have been pretty good. A few gripes here and there, but nothing too unusual.

[Avilan the Grey]

Yeah, it came out earlier today. So far the reviews have been pretty good. A few gripes here and there, but nothing too unusual.

Well is it worth the money to talk to Felicia Day for a while? That IS the main draw of the DLC after all.

The other DLC, is that worth the money?

Despite my gripes I will probably try to restart DAII after I am done with Origins.

[VanBuren]

since Legacy was said to be the best Bioware DLC since Lair of the Shadow Broker, that tells you something.

Eh? Legacy received very mixed reviews. Even worse if you look at fan reception.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii-legacy

[Giggling Ghast]

I'll say this, Avilan: though I've bought both pieces of DLC, I haven't played more than a few minutes of either of them yet.

If you really hated DA2, neither will redeem the game in your eyes. But Legacy has been called the best DLC put out by Bioware since Lair of the Shadow Broker, and now some people claim Mark of the Assassin is even better.

EDIT: Sorry I screwed up your post, VanBuren.

[VanBuren]

I don't see where you're getting that. Critical reception has not been especially kind to Legacy.

[Avilan the Grey]

I'll say this, Avilan: though I've bought both pieces of DLC, I haven't played more than a few minutes of either of them yet.

If you really hated DA2, neither will redeem the game in your eyes. But Legacy has been called the best DLC put out by Bioware since Lair of the Shadow Broker, and now some people claim Mark of the Assassin is even better.

Good to know, thank you.
Maybe I should try restarting it first, and see how I feel.

[Giggling Ghast]

I don't see where you're getting that. Critical reception has not been especially kind to Legacy.

Oh, I'm just going by the stuff on the BSN and the stuff I've heard here. While the BSN is a pit of evil, I find they're a better gauge of quality for this stuff than Metacritic. (I generally don't care for their grading system, and the fan reviews are a joke.) And you guys generally have intelligent things to say.

Yes, some game reviewers didn't give Legacy a high grade. But I wonder if that wasn't compensating for "over-praising" the virtues of DA2. (There's no such word, but I can't think of a better one.)

[Archpaladin Zousha]

HAving just played through Mark of the Assassin, I have this to say:

Overall, an enjoyable experience. Judging by what I saw, it seems like there are sidequests tailored to whatever companions you bring along. I'll have to see if there are other companions who trigger unique things like the stone pirates who needed Isabela to free them.

The stealth portion was frustrating, as I knew it would be. Mandatory steath interludes never go well for me. I had to keep reloading to get through it without getting caught once. It frustrated me in Arrival for ME2 as well.

If you're not a fan of puzzles, this isn't for you. It'll test your math skills, pattern skills, etc.

There seems to be another "unique set" of armor for Hawke, but I could only find the boots. Anyone else find the rest of the pieces?

Storywise, the DLC was a great blend of comedy and drama. The party was especially fun because of all the familiar faces you saw: Teagan and Isolde, Leliana, Lady Elegant, the Comtesse de Launcet and Seneschal Bran with his "friend" from the Blooming Rose. Plus, certain enemies, like the Ghasts, came completely out of nowhere. They live underground? How are they not tainted? The ending felt a bit rushed. You fought Prosper and Leopold and that was it.

Also, has anyone tried leaving Tallis instead of following her? It just seems meanspirited, but maybe I'm still thinking in terms of Veronica from Fallout: New Vegas.