Given that I haven't yet started DA2, is it possible for you to say something about how the game deconstructs the fantasy and heroic tropes without slapping me with huge spoilers?
Regarding DA:O's treatment of the hero and playing it straight vs deconstructing it: given the world's grey-on-black morality and the need to "do whatever it takes to stop the blight," the player's Warden could be a horrific bastard yet still go down in history as The Hero of Ferelden. So, it's probably fair to say that DA:O's sliding scale of morality edges into deconstruction of The Hero, depending on how the player plays it and how the player interprets dis/approval from each of the party characters.
As for the Grey Wardens, yes, their entire history and lore is really interesting. After one complete DA:O play through plus a few hours of Awakening, I still feel as that there is so much about the Wardens that I either haven't uncovered or I haven't applied enough fridge brilliance to have the correct "ah-ha" moment to piece bits together.
So, here's the thing that is bugging me: can a person truly stop being a Grey Warden? After all (strange research aside, such as what Avernus is looking into), once a person lives through the joining ritual, they have been permanently changed through the taint and, in a sense, is a ticking time bomb on the way to ghouldom. It isn't like you can say, "oh, sorry, I don't feel like being a warden any longer." This is the primary reason why I didn't support Alistair during the landsmeet (my warden, on the other hand, had a mix of reasons). The taint issue coupled with the political lack of neutrality in putting a warden on the throne makes me feel all sorts of grumbling weirdness about DA:O's end-game storyline. Admittedly, if you put Alistair on the throne and refuse Morrigan, Alistair's reasons for taking the final blow are, IMHO, absolutely correct, but I just do not feel that that from Arl Eamon's early support for Alistair onward that the game's characters delved into a proper exploration of the consequences of Ferelden having a GW king. Even Alistair himself doesn't say enough about it! I wanted to kick him because of it. Thus, I found this whole issue the one annoyingly weak part in the whole story because it felt, at least to me, like the writers themselves were very all enamored with the idea of King Alistair playing the "bastard-prince becomes good king" trope very straight without dealing with the problem of who Alistair had become. The only way I can explain any of Alistair's support (and his grudging semi-willingness) for taking the crown is that those who want to see Alistair on the throne are ignorant about what a GW really is (and I, the player with the codex, have a much better idea). So, what am I missing here???
no subject
Given that I haven't yet started DA2, is it possible for you to say something about how the game deconstructs the fantasy and heroic tropes without slapping me with huge spoilers?
Regarding DA:O's treatment of the hero and playing it straight vs deconstructing it: given the world's grey-on-black morality and the need to "do whatever it takes to stop the blight," the player's Warden could be a horrific bastard yet still go down in history as The Hero of Ferelden. So, it's probably fair to say that DA:O's sliding scale of morality edges into deconstruction of The Hero, depending on how the player plays it and how the player interprets dis/approval from each of the party characters.
As for the Grey Wardens, yes, their entire history and lore is really interesting. After one complete DA:O play through plus a few hours of Awakening, I still feel as that there is so much about the Wardens that I either haven't uncovered or I haven't applied enough fridge brilliance to have the correct "ah-ha" moment to piece bits together.
So, here's the thing that is bugging me: can a person truly stop being a Grey Warden? After all (strange research aside, such as what Avernus is looking into), once a person lives through the joining ritual, they have been permanently changed through the taint and, in a sense, is a ticking time bomb on the way to ghouldom. It isn't like you can say, "oh, sorry, I don't feel like being a warden any longer." This is the primary reason why I didn't support Alistair during the landsmeet (my warden, on the other hand, had a mix of reasons). The taint issue coupled with the political lack of neutrality in putting a warden on the throne makes me feel all sorts of grumbling weirdness about DA:O's end-game storyline. Admittedly, if you put Alistair on the throne and refuse Morrigan, Alistair's reasons for taking the final blow are, IMHO, absolutely correct, but I just do not feel that that from Arl Eamon's early support for Alistair onward that the game's characters delved into a proper exploration of the consequences of Ferelden having a GW king. Even Alistair himself doesn't say enough about it! I wanted to kick him because of it. Thus, I found this whole issue the one annoyingly weak part in the whole story because it felt, at least to me, like the writers themselves were very all enamored with the idea of King Alistair playing the "bastard-prince becomes good king" trope very straight without dealing with the problem of who Alistair had become. The only way I can explain any of Alistair's support (and his grudging semi-willingness) for taking the crown is that those who want to see Alistair on the throne are ignorant about what a GW really is (and I, the player with the codex, have a much better idea). So, what am I missing here???