Could any of you morons...

[Vault Dweller]

... explain why you think that the Joining scene is so utterly horrible and wrong? Inquiring mind wants to know.

 

[Freelance Henchman]

Also, what's the Joining scene?

 

[Vibalist]

The only problem I had with it was when Duncan slew that apprentice guy who tried to back out, since I didn't really understand why he had to do that other than for the sake of making the scene dramatic and serious. Otherwise it was mostly cool, but maybe a bit anti climatic.

 

[opium fiend]

To preserve the secretness of the ritual, obviously. The thing I hated is that my character just picked up the fucking chalice calmly and drank the black blood like he didn't notice what happened to the sod before him.

 

[Vault Dweller]

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/in ... l#msg36938

Well, I don't think that most people would be ok with the fact that the Wardens drink the tainted blood. Some might even say that by doing that they become what they fight. I thought it was kind of obvious, no?

 

[Armacalypse]

It felt kinda badly done. It just felt like a cheesy drama scene, rather than doing what it might have originally been intended to do in showing that joining the gray wardens isn't like joining the super friends, but like joining a medieval army that punishes any disloyalty by death. The "secrets of the ritual" are also preserved in order to not scare away any eager recruits.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Badly done? Ok. How would you have done it? I'm just trying to understand why so many people here seem to be stuck on that scene.

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

What I didn't get is why Duncan didn't even try to persuade the guy before killing him. For fuck's sake, a comrade died before his eyes, of course he'd be uneasy and start thinking whether he's doing the smart thing. I understand that the scene is meant to show that the Spectres are protecting the galaxy at any cost, but they could have illustrated the point a bit more subtly.

 

[Sulimo]

What I didn't get is why Duncan didn't even try to persuade the guy before killing him. For fuck's sake, a comrade died before his eyes, of course he'd be uneasy and start thinking whether he's doing the smart thing. I understand that the scene is meant to show that the Spectres are protecting the galaxy at any cost, but they could have illustrated the point a bit more subtly.

This.
It just misses the little bit of logical thinks you'd expect, i.e. Player Character panicking as well or the PC going "... Okay, that's a bit odd, now why'd you do that?" BEFORE drinking from the chalice, Duncan at least giving Jory the choice "Put the weapon away Jory, drink from the chalice or I'm afraid I'll have to kill you" or something like that.

I found the aftermath lacking a bit as well, dialogue was a bit stiff with "I still can't believe you killed Sir Jory." as only thing referencing the fact that he did, in fact, stab one of the much needed Grey Warden recruits. I'm no David Gaider, but I'd have gone with something more in the line of "Why on earth did you feel the need to kill the poor man, you could have easily disarmed him with the force, Obi Wan."

 

[MetalCraze]

Well, I don't think that most people would be ok with the fact that the Wardens drink the tainted blood. Some might even say that by doing that they become what they fight. I thought it was kind of obvious, no?

Of course - and Gaider is a talented writer who writes deep stories with hidden meanings and the scene is there for other reasons than to show how EXTREME and darkandgritty the game is.

 

[Vault Dweller]

What I didn't get is why Duncan didn't even try to persuade the guy before killing him.

If you recall, the guy says that he changed his mind, Duncan says it's too late now, bro, the guy draws out his sword. Later when I asked Duncan if killing the guy was necessary, he says that once the guy reached for his weapon, it was too late, which kinda makes sense.

For fuck's sake, a comrade died before his eyes, of course he'd be uneasy and start thinking whether he's doing the smart thing. I understand that the scene is meant to show that the Spectres are protecting the galaxy at any cost, but they could have illustrated the point a bit more subtly.

I think that it's a somewhat typical "we've reached the point of no return, now that you know what we are, you can't go back" situation. Anyway, same question is before, how would you have designed that scene?

PS. Btw, "could have illustrated the point a bit more subtly" is already an improvement over "Does it outweigh cheese like the Joining?". You're a scholar and a gentleman, Humps.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Well, I don't think that most people would be ok with the fact that the Wardens drink the tainted blood. Some might even say that by doing that they become what they fight. I thought it was kind of obvious, no?

Of course - and Gaider is a talented writer who writes deep stories with hidden meanings.

http://www.rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic ... 788#949788

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

What I didn't get is why Duncan didn't even try to persuade the guy before killing him.

If you recall, the guy says that he changed his mind, Duncan says it's too late now, bro, the guy draws out his sword. Later when I asked Duncan if killing the guy was necessary, he says that once the guy reached for his weapon, it was too late, which kinda makes sense.

Except it doesn't. While the man does draw out a sword, he obviously is in no condition to start waving it around.

I think that it's a somewhat typical "we've reached the point of no return, now that you know what we are, you can't go back" situation. Anyway, same question is before, how would you have designed that scene?

Duncan talks the guy down, he calms down, lowers the sword. When he finally comes to his senses Duncan again asks him to drink the blood. He refuses and asks to be let go to his wife and child. He talks in a composed voice, showing that he really means every single word he says. Then Duncan kills him.

This way the scene shows both Duncan's cool fatherly side and his dedication to the cause at the same time. The way it is in the game, the scene shows Duncan as a massive jerk who starts chopping people at the slightest provocation.

PS. Btw, "could have illustrated the point a bit more subtly" is already an improvement over "Does it outweigh cheese like the Joining?". You're a scholar and a gentleman, Humps.

I don't see how. They both mean essentially the same thing.

 

[Armacalypse]

Badly done? Ok. How would you have done it? I'm just trying to understand why so many people here seem to be stuck on that scene.

The acting isn't very good (it's a game though), and after the guy is killed it just continues as normal. Hell, the scene seems more relaxed after the guy is killed than before the first guy dies.

And why people are complaining about it is obvious. Someone finds some flaw to pick on; bandwagon; Codex.

 

[Korgan]

HA HA
I always skip half the lines with Escape, so I missed all the retarded cutscenes.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I think that it's a somewhat typical "we've reached the point of no return, now that you know what we are, you can't go back" situation. Anyway, same question is before, how would you have designed that scene?

Duncan talks the guy down, he calms down, lowers the sword. When he finally comes to his senses Duncan again asks him to drink the blood. He refuses and asks to be let go to his wife and child. He talks in a composed voice, showing that he really means every single word he says. Then Duncan kills him.

The guy already told everyone about his fears and his wife/family. Why restate it again? Duncan has already shown himself as a guy who is committed to the cause and who does what he thinks is right. As a guy who already passed the ritual and dedicated his life to the cause, he would have zero patience for guys who don't have the same commitment. I don't see him as a guy who would beg someone to reconsider and waste time just so he can kill him with a clean conscience.

This way the scene shows both Duncan's cool fatherly side...

Does he have a cool fatherly side? Should he have it?

The way it is in the game, the scene shows Duncan as a massive jerk who starts chopping people at the slightest provocation.

And this is wrong because? Most people I've seen are massive jerks and people with cool fatherly sides are very, very rare (and are a massive cliche in fantasy games).

PS. Btw, "could have illustrated the point a bit more subtly" is already an improvement over "Does it outweigh cheese like the Joining?". You're a scholar and a gentleman, Humps.

I don't see how. They both mean essentially the same thing.

I understand. The cool facade must be maintained at all times.

 

[Elzair]

To preserve the secretness of the ritual, obviously. The thing I hated is that my character just picked up the fucking chalice calmly and drank the black blood like he didn't notice what happened to the sod before him.

Well, it was either that or get a knife in the gut. One path was certain death; the other had a potential for life.

 

[Shannow]

VD declines to troll

... explain why you think that the Joining scene is so utterly horrible and wrong? Inquiring mind wants to know.

No.

 

[opium fiend]

Still, he took it like he couldn't wait for his turn. Enough of the fucking distractions, I want to drink some of the evil demon blood that will do who knows what to me, even if I don't die on the spot.

 

[Chateaubryan]

I'll put aside the "why didn't Duncan try to persuade/force the guy to drink" and focus on the general awkwardness of the joining.

This is supposed to be the "consecration" of the hero, a sacred ritual by wich he'll become a part of one of the most feared or respected elite of Thedas. On one side, you got all the aspects of a ritual that make it sacred (consacred chalice, the quest for the blood of your ennemies, the memento of those who died on the ritual) and on the other, all those sordid aspects that makes it look like a dirty backstreet quickie (the former colleague that gets killed without reasoning : mafia-mob-level-killing, the chalice put on the border of the table like it's a beer leftover, the scenery).

If the writer's intent is to depict the ruthlessness, the unformal ways of the Gray Warden then he missed his goal by showing them caring, saying "sorry" instead of "you had your chance, trash". You don't make the Gray Warden seems compassionate when their ritual is about letting the weak die, and killing the coward without a second thought. It just seems schizophrenic, or dumb.

By making the choice of doing this scene in a median way, you get a median emotion from the viewer/player : nothing. Worse, you're making it seems amateurish.

"Let's make 'em Jedis, but with blood !"

 

[Vault Dweller]

Still, he took it like he couldn't wait for his turn. Enough of the fucking distractions, I want to drink some of the evil demon blood that will do who knows what to me, even if I don't die on the spot.

It's either that or being gutted by Duncan. Good motivation.

I'll put aside the "why didn't Duncan try to persuade/force the guy to drink" and focus on the general awkwardness of the joining.

This is supposed to be the "consecration" of the hero, a sacred ritual by wich he'll become a part of one of the most feared or respected elite of Thedas.....

So you're disappointed because the story isn't what you wanted it to be? You aren't a beloved hero and you didn't join the respected elite?

On one side, you got all the aspects of a ritual that make it sacred (consacred chalice, the quest for the blood of your ennemies, the memento of those who died on the ritual) and on the other, all those sordid aspects that makes it look like a dirty backstreet quickie (the former colleague that gets killed without reasoning : mafia-mob-level-killing, the chalice put on the border of the table like it's a beer leftover, the scenery).

And it's wrong because?

If the writer's intent is to depict the ruthlessness, the unformal ways of the Gray Warden then he missed his goal by showing them caring, saying "sorry" instead of "you had your chance, trash". You don't make the Gray Warden seems compassionate when their ritual is about letting the weak die, and killing the coward without a second thought. It just seems schizophrenic, or dumb.

If you say so. Of course, there is a middle ground, but who needs it, right? Maybe the Wardens are neither good nor evil. Neither ruthless nor compassionate. They are a small group that no longer commands the respect it once had and they are reduced to begging for recruits and getting them where they can. They can't force someone to be them, so if one refuses to drink the blood, there really isn't any fucking choice there but to kill them quickly before they give other recruits (you) ideas.

By making the choice of doing this scene in a median way, you get a median emotion from the viewer/player : nothing. Worse, you're making it seems amateurish.

"Let's make 'em Jedis, but with blood !"

How is the scene "like Jedi but with blood"? Jedi don't kill the recruits and don't force them to join them.

 

[Joe Krow]

What's the next stop after the joining? Is there railroading through the whole game or do you get some freedom at some point? I'm talking about real freedom, beyond flavor text, to decide what you'll do, where to go, and when.

The lack of real freedom is what killed NWN2 OC in my opinion and made act 2 of BG2 so much better then the rest of that game. I don't see a better story being enough to redeem this game if the rails are still on.

 

[opium fiend]

Still, he took it like he couldn't wait for his turn. Enough of the fucking distractions, I want to drink some of the evil demon blood that will do who knows what to me, even if I don't die on the spot.

It's either that or being gutted by Duncan. Good motivation.

Not really. It seemed extremely unholy if your character actually believed in the Maker. I'm not sure what would a fanatic believer choose, a clean death or a fate worse than death. It's like catholic baptizing his kid in a goat's blood and urin or something.

edit: in any case we should get a WTF Duncan dialog option there, whether or not it changes anything.

 

[Castanova]

For all of David Gaider and BioWare's obsession with making interactive movies, you'd think they would learn a thing or two from films.

If this were a competent movie, the main character would go to the ritual or some other kind of trial and fail to meet the requirements due to his own principles being at odds with the Grey Wardens. When the Grey Warden dude moves to kill the main character, he just barely escapes with his life in an exciting action scene. Then, putting together a small band of misfits, the main character goes about saving the world unilaterally and, at key moments, in direct competition with the Grey Wardens.

If they had done this in the game, it would actually make sense why you're limited to a small party. As it stands, you have cheezy scenes and the standard RPG trope of - you're in charge of saving the world with the backing by a major institution (the king, the Grey Wardens, etc.) but not more than 2 people can be bothered to help you.

 

[Grunker]

The only problem I had with it was when Duncan slew that apprentice guy who tried to back out, since I didn't really understand why he had to do that other than for the sake of making the scene dramatic and serious.

SPOILER

This. It's completely unwarranted. He doesn't even try to talk some sense into him first. He just kills him outright. And you can't even object. Instead you just chuck the fucking cup and say nothing. Afterwards the only reply you have is "I still can't believe you killed that dude!" to which Duncan answers "Well, he had it coming!" On this, you can't disagree.