>Templars are not holy warriors empowered by faith, but drug addicts who lose their minds over a slow period of time
>Magic is not learned but born with, and non-mages are deficient
>extremely low presence of Divinity
>all women priesthood
>zero prophets, oracles, or diviners; priests are ideologues with no actual spiritual traditions
>Humanity's greatest empire is bad and stinky and full of cartoon villains using repurposed magic from the elves
>muh slavery
Man.. Dragon Age's setting is awful..
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
>Man.. Dragon Age's setting is awful..
Yes, not sure why you made a thread about it
>it's awful because it is not trad propaganda
Look, they were a product of their time since every other faction was violent back then, but to pretend that knights were all divine holy jedis is pretty stupid. Especially when they slaughtered Christians from other kingdoms in Europe.
Their realistic portrayal is necessary given how trad zoomers are claiming that they are based for slaughtering muh heckin' muslim invaders.
>>it's awful because it is not trad propaganda
It's awful because it fricking sucks. Why would you want to play a game where the setting is written by soiilent drinking millennials? Imagine playing a fantasy game that's just real world political agendas. You might as well just go to college at that point.
It's necessary because people lack media literacy and are unable to divorce it from reality. They think that religious zeal is good when it is harmful to everybody, especially themselves.
Your comment isn't relevant to this thread in any shape or form. And in any case how on earth is "religious zeal" bad? Being zealous is a virtue and you should expect people to be passionate about values that are truly important. You sound like a homosexual.
>And in any case how on earth is "religious zeal" bad?
How on earth isn't it bad? The terrorist attacks motivated by it didn't wake you up? How about megachurch pastors buying private jet and luxuries by gaslighting with money that they've earned from gaslighting poor people?
>misinterpretation
Sorry that no one is buying your history revisionism about knights being based trad jedis fighting for honor. In reality, they were political pawns for powerful people fueled by human ambitions than anything remotely divine.
>continues to derail thread unto reddit sentiments
Okay. When you you're ready to discuss dragon age get back to me.
>people to be passionate about values that are truly important
If you don't see how that can be applied to anything then you should be put in the same room with a group of angry trannies so you can yell at each other until the end of time
Have you seen the Middle East recently?
Dumb argument because the middle east is in the state that it's in because of lack of religious zeal. In fact that's how the Ottoman empire ended up collapsing; their rulers became too hedonistic, valued the Quran less and less and eventually ended up getting ruled entirely by foreign women.
Zealotry isn't good, but Righteousness and Faith are, fedoratards just confuse the two.
Unless it's righteosness for the "wrong" cause and faith in the "wrong" god.
just don't be objectively wrong. What's so difficult about that?
But I like drinking rice vodka and eating pork on saturday middays, hadith!
I said don't be objectively wrong, what part of that did you not understand?
The part that determines objectivity.
Evangelists are devil worshippers
No, I'm not preaching universalism. Just be strong enough to defend your own people, and you know what gives a person the strength to defend their loved ones? Righteousness and Faith.
>Just be strong enough to defend your own people
Insane alcoholics that demand death of children are not my people.
> you know what gives a person the strength to defend their loved ones?
Awareness. Faith and Righteosness don't work agains gopniks, not being where gopniks are does.
Your people could be any number, even just your friends and family. Faith and Righteousness are what keep you from rolling over and letting the world corrupt and abuse you to where you have no will or ability to mount a defense. Yeah, choosing where you live carefully is absolutely important, proximity determines a lot in life. Get away from concentrations of Sin.
>universalism. Just be strong enough to defend your own people
Who are they?
>real world political agendas
Big America moment.
>thread is about how Dragon Age's setting sucks
>reddit Black person having a meltdown complaining about real world religion
Holy frick you antitheist Black folk are insufferable.
I'm not anti-theist, I'm anti-"edgy Christian". I'm so tired of contrarian simpletons lying that groups didn't do anything wrong by willingly ignoring the facts presented in front of them. They don't even argue that they were a product of their time, they pretend that a bunch of deluded hypocritical war criminals were marvel superhoeroes.
Heh funny irony because I'm an atheist that's beyond sick of lefty edgelords always whining about people that tend to pay taxes and raise their kids instead of screaming about priests diddling kids while the left created epstein, weinstein and nixvim getting them diddled as an industry while catholics were busy weeding them out.
They're not going to burst out of church on sunday and rush into your living room to slap the dicks out of your mouth and his tongue out of your ass ya know.
However leftists sure as hell burst into my living room to tell me how to live every time I boot up a game now.
Remind that Trump and Musk are the best clients of Epstein Island, as a lot of Evangelist and conservative celebrities
Completely and utterly mindbroken
Don't forget the elven ghetto that is suffering from a plague and is quarantined because of it. Well, the plague is man-made by powerful foreign wizards that the city's ruler invited for a cut of the action, with said action being slave trade and ritualistic sacrifice.
I only played the first one but i liked the templar/magicians thing. I think the copied from somr jrpg but i cant name which one, maybe it's just me or maybe it just sounds like the kind of stuff you see in a jrpg. Anyway i have a feel op is just mad cuz he wanted to play the paladin and this game have no proper paladins. Try to not be slave of your favourite class for once.
The Templar/Mages conflict is terrible since mages are a group of people that are born and it's not simply a profession, it becomes "le oppressed mages" being subjugated by corrupt templars. The conflict isn't about how you want magic to be used in society (since Templars are dependent on lyrium to use their anti-mage powers) but about how you treat the protected group. It gets even worse in 2 but it's still pretty bad in 1.
The dichotomy works because IRL templars constantly accused their adversaries of being heretic/pagans, even against other Christians.
I'm talking about Dragon Age, not your misinterpretations of history, try to stay on topic.
Templars were not an inquisitorial order, they rank banks and escorted pilgrims. They were the ones accused of heresy, although there is good basis to believe that was done to acquire their material assets.
This is basic shit.
If viewed as intended by the creators, you are correct. But irl it is hardly inconveivable that people could be born into a strata that seem to be unable to prevent themselves from destroying everything they touch. Not all of them - but so many it is impossible to ignore the causal relationship. And then the rest of civilization is in this weird place where morality (and perhaps even the neccessity of fighting fire with fire if your enemies so insist) makes it impossible to just solve for this. But ay the same time giving them free reign means the end of civilization. So you are left with a highly undesirable population and the need for a police force designed to never actually solve the problem. It doesnt matter where your politics reside - you can think of something
In general the glorification of heroism is something that has died, not sure why. homosexuals like the one in this thread will pretend it’s “realistic” but ultimately it just represents decay in society, if the tales we tell are this disgusting and pathetic
because being a hero is antisemitic, anon.
Probably also why homosexual doesn’t like knights/crusaders. IRL there is a genetic bottleneck in the ashkenazi population from the massive amounts of them killed by crusading warriors on the way to the holy land in the 11th and 12th century.
>In general the glorification of heroism is something that has died
What's heroic or Christian about raping, slaughtering, and pillaging other Christians in the name of God?
What's funny is that you trad losers bemoan brown people looting a Walgreens, but you love knights who loot churches and kill civilians. Delusional bitter people who think that it is "decadence" for humanity to realize that wars are bad, but "prosperous" for primitive illiterates to slaughter each other pointlessly for property under a religious pretext.
If you're demoralized by evil people being portrayed the way they are, then you deserve to feel that way.
>t. digital Crusader fighting in the Culture Wars
ennui is a son of a b***h
I don't need to fight in a war that you've lost decades ago.
how can i lose a war that doesn't exist, pseud-kun? you yourself give the lie to your own perception of reality, you think you're an evolved human, a "good man", but you show that fools will fight for causes no matter the when or where.
More evolved than the knights that you romanticize, that's for sure.
They were all delusional warmongerers who didn't follow their princples and failed in all of their goals, which is why the HRE doesn't exist today. You don't believe in history, only in "trad" substack blogs and youtube vids made by stupid people like yourself.
>failed in all their goals
>crusades are the reason that Spain is Catholic, the Balkans and Baltics are both Orthodox, and that all pagan religions in Europe are dead practices
You don't care for the truth nor do you possess understanding, for you lack humility.
>More evolved than the knights that you romanticize, that's for sure.
anon, they were foolish human beings, you are a foolish human being. your perceived sense of superiority over the past is just as ridiculous as any romanticising.
Was everyone all across history human? Yes. Do they have the same opportunities and knowledge as modern people do now? Nope. Did they have utilities like clean running water and electricity? Nope. Were all of them literate? Hell no.
Things were 10000x a lot worse in the past back then, and if you think otherwise you should live in a place like Somalia.
none of that makes you superior, anon. it doesn't make you, personally, a better or wiser person. what it does is make you a better and more comfortable digital serf, working fields with no off-season. no, humanity isn't evolving, slavery is being refined.
a lot worse in the past back then
why didn't people kill themselves constantly then? you have just as cartoonish of a view of the past as the trad larpers you whinge about.
>They were all delusional warmongerers
Confirmed:
Knowing nothing about the period
And b, applying modern standards to people who lived and died centuries ago.
You could have stayed moronic in private, but you've now chosen to let a thread full of strangers know. Thanks for sharing.
>What's heroic or Christian about raping, slaughtering, and pillaging
So.. this dumb redditor is conflating the practice of knighthood and wars in general with the Crusades without distinguishing between the two. You're conflating crusaders and templars with knights, which are different things. Knights were literally just warriors who were members of the nobility. The Crusades and Templar orders were specific organizations created at different periods in time for the sake of protecting Christian countries from pagan neighbors, and in the case of the Crusades specifically those were multiple different events spanning the course of 400 years in an effort to retake formally Christian lands from Muslim conquerors. Actually learn history before wagging your finger at people claiming they don't have an accurate vision of it.
>The Crusades and Templar orders were specific organizations created at different periods in time for the sake of protecting Christian countries from pagan neighbors
Very romantic and sentimental idea of what were actually a bunch of church sponsored warlords paid to aggressively conquer lands to fatten the church's purse, it was no war of defense, it was just poorly planned "religious" savagery that ended up doing more damage to everyone, including the church, than good.
>What's funny is that you trad losers bemoan brown people looting a Walgreens
So you support Black folk committing theft for no reason other than to commit petty theft? Also you've never citied any specific examples of "le Christian murdering people" and you expect your claims to be taken on nothing more than your word. If you're going to complain about wars, cite specific events that are egregious from unfalsifiable sources, otherwise no one is going to listen to you or take your perceptions seriously.
>So you support Black folk committing theft for no reason other than to commit petty theft?
You're dumb.
>Also you've never citied any specific examples of "le Christian murdering people" and you expect your claims to be taken on nothing more than your word.
>You didn't cite a specific event even though there's several and that , that means that they didn't exist at all! Checkmate.
You're very stupid, but that's expected of every conservative. They will cry about the war crimes committed against germans in Dresden, but at the same time claim that every conflict prior was 100% ethical and war crime free. How do you live with less than a few functioning brain cells in your head?
I wonder why you neglected to mention predominantly atheist/leftist countries over former HRE territories Germany, Italy, France, Greece, etc? Either way, I'm right and you're completely wrong.
There is not a single argument nor support of previous argument in this entire post of inane and self-righteous drivel
Go easy on him, anon, he's not capable of independent thought.
>Germany, Italy, France, Greece,
Because.. those countries were already Christian. You can't Christianize a country that's already majorly Christian, anon.. I know you don't have a brain to use but maybe you could ask God to give you one? Oh wait, that's right you don't trust God enough to ever develop relationship with the Lord, lmao.
>y-you're dumb
You didn't answer my question but dodged it so I'll take that as a yes.
>still doesn't cite any source to back up any of his sentiments
Wow, atheists lying? Imagine my shock..
Crusaders sacked the greatest city in all of Christiandom you heretic homosexual.
An act that was openly condemned by pretty much every single religious authority during the time period, and the army was already anathematized by the point in time. Direct from the Pope's hand.
Sure, later on the conquest would be justified on the grounds of the schism present between Rome and the eastern orthodox christians, but the reaction to the sack and the previous massacre was nevertheless extremely negative. To pretend that this was an act normal or expected from the part of the crusaders is stupid, because that kind of brutality was only accepted against open religious enemies (muslims).
>haha imagine not wanting to have your IRL neighborhood turned into a murderous drug crazed feral baby momma drama ghetto while imagining a better fantasy place where criminals are actually stopped how crazy is that hahah?
What if I'm not Christian, not Anglo, and not even Western European, and still think brown people looting a Walgreens is even more distasteful because the Christian at least believed he had a moral imperative behind his actions while the brown person just thought "YEAH FREE SHIT"?
Western political talking points fall right the frick apart when faced with the fact that out of eight billion people the west makes up about seven hundred million and, therefore, are what can be considered insignificant outliers to the human mindset.
Pro-tip. Thieves in Africa are set on fire. Their judgement of brown people looting things is even harsher than mine.
Perhaps you should listen to Black Voices in regards to criminal punishment.
And the Black Voice says Execution.
Unironically fricking this.
Slap whatever brand of internalized inferiority or white guilt you want on, but understand this.
The historic nature of the world is overwhelmingly violent xenophobia, execution first reason later, and genocide.
The west is an outlier, not because it has previously enslaved populations, but because that population is still fricking alive. That's the anomalous thing. Anywhere else, that enslaved population isn't a problem anymore because they're fricking dead. Anywhere else, there's no struggle at all with finding their place in society, because their place is in the ground.
When the west crusaded, there were people left afterwards. When anyone else did, there was nothing left besides expansion room.
The very idea that some people died, so you should maybe feel bad, is the anomalous culture of the west that is a weird diversion on the human trend to fricking kill anybody for whatever reason you can think of.
Do you know how many cultures take the land of a group of people, leave those people alive, then stop and say "hey, this is a shitty deal, but here, you can still have some of it, you do you?"
Not fricking many.
Do you know how many cultures deal with a thief or a murderer by taking a step back, seeing what their circumstances and motivations are, and if possible seeing if this person can be made to change by being better educated? Not. Fricking. Many.
>actually europe was good because other countries were more mean
That doesn’t make someone or a culture good, just because other people or cultures were worse. This is literally just relativistic morality that liberals use. Europe was evil. Other cultures may have been worse but it doesn’t change the fact that Europe’s was objectively an evil culture. And thus it makes sense for them to feel bad about their history. That is unless they want to simply disregard their identity to Europe. Then they would not need to feel guilty.
>That doesn’t make someone or a culture good
It does. If one guy murders a rapist and the other guy murders a child, you'll have more sympathy towards the first guy and will consider him a better person. If a group of people raids an apartment building to rob its residents and another group of people raids the director of their company who was docking their pay for months, you'll consider the latter to be better people. Violence is the part of human condition and its application is what determines whether the nature of an act is "good" or "bad".
>This is literally just relativistic morality that liberals use.
... did you just proclaim all of the world history to be the work of liberals? Kek.
> And thus it makes sense for them to feel bad about their history.
That's the kicker - they don't. They do so to gain attention and to virtue signal evidenced by their tribalistic discrimination.
>That is unless they want to simply disregard their identity to Europe. Then they would not need to feel guilty.
Did this EVER work that way?
You can be better than someone and still be a bad person. For example on a thing being better but still bad. Imagine two people living in hell. One person is on the bottom level and has the worst punishments imaginable everyday. Another is on a higher level and only has horrible punishments 5 days a week and the other two days he is left alone in darkness. Just because the man in the higher level has a better situation, it is still a horrible experience. The man in the higher level does not have a good situation merely because someone has it worse.
Another way to imagine this. Imagine if there were a man who was a murderer. He is the only murderer in the world. But then later another man becomes a murder and a rapist. The man who is only a murderer does not become good just because there is now someone worse than him. He is till just as bad as when he was the only murderer in the worls.
>That's the kicker - they don't. They do so to gain attention and to virtue signal evidenced by their tribalistic discrimination.
They seem like they do. White liberals all believe the white Christian hetero normative cos gendered patriarchy, caused great evil in the past. And minority groups like racial minorities, women, and lgbt members do not have this group based guilt. So the white liberals see those minority groups as more pure than the white Christian male yadayadayada group.
>europe bad
israelite detected.
It’s literally true though. Europe is far more like what George re Martin write about. Lord of the rings type depictions are pure fantasy.
But if you disagree what makes you think europe was a bastion of goodness?
>Europe’s was objectively an evil culture
At this point you might as well say all culture is evil.
It's talks like this that makes going back to Grug that more appealing. Grug is the only thing left that everyone can get behind.
I wouldn't get behind him, dude doesn't even have a bidet.
GRUG LIKE NO CLEAN. CLEAN GATHER BEAST. GRUG NO LIKE BEAST.
No. Culture is not necessarily evil. But when you look at Europe and plenty other cultures that were non European, they were objectively evil. For whatever reason, evil won out as the dominant moral force in many cultures.
What's a non-evil culture?
It would be easy to imagine. One that wasn’t bent on ivading other countries for glory, like what Alexander the Great did. One that had healthy romantic partnering values. One that did not practice infanticide. And one that cared about the lowest in their society rather than seeing them as expendable or something to be exterminated.
You could go on Lin more detail but it’s kind of obvious.
Utter castrato nonsense.
So, the only non-evil culture is the one in your head?
Goodness and evil are objective qualities. It’s not some relativistic nonsense. So even if the standard has not been met, that does not mean the standard is lowered.
But, from a purely intellectual critique, what do you have issue with when it comes to my argument? In my mind, you simply desire to claim that European culture is good. So you are arguing from that already biased standpoint.
>real good has never been tried
Right...
>what do you have issue with when it comes to my argument?
Basically, it's moronic and cartoonish.
You don’t sound very intellectually interesting. I never said goodness has never been tried. On a small scale it certainly exists. Families are a planet with goodness. But when it comes to nation states. Most fall short of being good. You can’t say a society like Ancient Greece at the time of Alexander the Great was good when they were conquering other societies for the purpose of Alexander’s ego. Neither could you say early america was good when they had slaves.
>One that wasn’t bent on ivading other countries for glory
So that rules out every culture on the entire face of this earth outside from a select very few island nations that didn't invade others simply because they had no neighbors to invade. Even the Native Americans constantly raided each other and raped the wives of other tribes. This is just what humanity does.
>One that had healthy romantic partnering values
The only "healthy" partnering values is sex for the purpose of procreation and having marriage be between a man and a woman that is founded on love, so in other words you have to be a Christian in order to have a healthy relationship.
>One that did not practice infanticide
So every human culture before Christianity became a thing that existed and every culture that did not have Christianity as an influence, got it.
>And one that cared about the lowest in their society rather than seeing them as expendable or something to be exterminated.
And the only reason someone would "care for the poor" is for the sake of pleasing God because that's not a concept that existed until Christianity became widespread.
Frick off israelite.
and this is the wests biggest weakness and why it will collapse and got cucked so hard. empathy is the worst trait anyone can have
>muh collapse
>muh hell
>muh mass suicides
Those three are only happening to right-wing ideology, and rightfully so. All of you hateful people are in complete despair because your evil ideology of making good people suffer for inane stupid reasons is dying off. You're catching diseases, getting arrested, being ostracized, and erased from social media. And the world will only improve from it.
You are so awful, mean-spirited, and unsuccessful that no kid wants to be like you. Their world of prosperity isn't collapsing, yours is.
>evil people
>evolved
>all that inane, naive pretention of progress and "civilization", alongside uncalled for moralizing, all coated in pounds of sheer bad history
You are a self-righteous moron that not only falls in a vice that even atheist secular scholars avoid, that is: making subjective moral judgements on a massive population of invidiuals across an insane spawn of time based on a series of localized incidents, making no distinction between the type of warfare being employed, the aims of the campaign or even the actual forces present during the act.
For every act of cruel barbarity one can find about "knights" (who, as a social group, varied in composition, ideals and even function during from the 1000 to the 1500 quite substantially) we can cite of examples of, if not outright chivalric conduct, at least much more merciful and "civilized" acts. Acts like violently looting churches, murdering swathes upon swathes of civilians or mass rape weren't, in fact, common part of military campaigns inside Europe as such level of destruction would end up being detrimental to any possible victory: depopulated, burned land is not profitable.
But the worst part about your post is the pretense that modern methods of warfare and the morals of the current man are in any way or form less cruel and evil than those in the past. Are you stupid, anon? Are you unironically a moron? Modernity is ruled by weaponized culture and literal memes. Wars don't target lives anymore not out of mercy but simply because subversion, cultural revolutions and outright cognitive weapons are much more effective. Our elites literally destroy the souls of entire cultures much more effectively than any barbarian warlord in the past, and you pretend this is more "civilized"?
You are speaking like the biggest moron I have seen today, and that's saying something.
>trads: No! You can't judge the morality of evil people in the past! That is reddit! To say that killing, raping, pillaging other Christian areas are immoral actions by the standards of the ten commandments is CULTURAL MARXIST SUBVERSION
What's funny is that none of you trads extend that generosity to other ethnic or religious groups.
I don't need to answer your question because you refuse to acknowledge the facts presented in front of you. If you think that knights were Jedis then you are delusional. Even IF I post facts from historians, you're still going to deny it anyway
That's a complete non-sequitur. The bible also condemns murder, slavery, adultery, etc. Didn't prevent knights or other Christians from doing those immoral actions and justifying it.
They were bad people back then by the standard of Christian and they are still bad people by the standard of modernity. If you're Christian then you should be greatly ashamed of yourself.
Go back.
>le realistic knights are evil DUR DUR
Knights were people you dummy. And worse: knights during the 11th century weren't even the same as the knights during the 14th or the 15th. They were as evil and as virtuous as any other person, and we can easily find incidents of chivalry and genuine heroism in the history of medieval Europe. Your long-reaching moral judgement about a flexible social class during such a large time period would make even the most californian of the reddit historians to complain.
where did gaider steal the mage/templar thing from? i swear i've read a similar thing in some book but i can't place it.
I wanna say Wheel of Time.
The seanchen or whatever the frick they were called kept their mages tethered with magical collars that kept them from being able to use their powers without permission so that's basically the Qunari.
The corruption that had been put into the male side of magic meant that men who were magically inclined, as it was an inherent ability not learnable, would be driven insane, so they were heavily policed and put down, while women who weren't trained properly with it were still at massive risk of it so any woman with the ability was sent to the aes sedai.
They just basically combined the two so everyone was at risk of insanity (demonic corruption) regardless of gender but it wasn't a given. The Red Ajah became the templars, magic in Dragon Age is channeling the fade in Wheel of Time it's channeling the source, the White Tower is just The Circle Tower, it's just the Wheel of Time.
>we will never get a game set in the wheel of time universe thanks to amazon completely nuking the property
The blood magic system (which leads to demonic posession) was inspired by GRRMs description of magic in asoiaf, as some dev has stated. But I don't doubt that the devs also read WoT, the resemblance of the qunari and the seanchan is quite obvious.
These books good? I watched the series and enjoyed S2 but I hear the TV show is wildly different and has little in common with the books. Everything I heard about the books prior to watching the show was that they were the most derivative, shitty LotR copycat ever made, so I never considered checking them out.
They aren't like LotR at all. They are overly long though and the female characters are extremely annoying.
Speaking of which, the most blatant Lord of the Rings ripoff I've ever read was The Iron Tower trilogy by Dennis McKiernan. It was shocking to me when I read it how blatant it was.
Story i shit but i enjoy killing things
>Man.. Dragon Age's setting is awesome..
ftfy
>Man... Pressing the Button is awesome..
ftfy
Is the button OP's sensitive christcuck vulva?
>He doesn't know about the awesome button.
Tourist detected.
And everything is fittingly diarrhoea coloured to underline the shittiness of the setting.
>Magic is not learned but born with, and non-mages are deficient
P*asant can't handle the existence of natural Aristocracy. How suprising.
>Magic is not learned but born with, and non-mages are deficient
maybe the setting as a whole is a little overly edgy, but this alone makes it way more believable than 90% of other fantasy settings where any random fricking nerd can become a god if he studies really hard but the world is still some pseudo-medieval shit for some reason
Typical racist talmudic drivel about "chosen people".
>Da Joos invented divine bias
>He thinks Zeus, Osiris or Marduk gave a shit about the chinese, indians or abbos
Black person, in evey single religion around the world the Gods were invented to give a sense of self importance to the people who came up with that shit, which is why Enki tells Hatra-Hasis to build an ark for his own people before the gods go Mr. Clean on the planet with the flood, which is why there's no egyptian myth of Ra taking a trip to Mootxico to see how quaint the pyramids were in there, because they didn't give a shit about anyone but their chosen ones.
This is especially common in something like the greek mythology were gods were so incredibly petty they'll pit their chosen people against each other to see which god had the coolest chosen people, the entire fricking Iliad is about gods playing favorites and fricking everyone else over
>where any random fricking nerd can become a god if he studies really hard but the world is still some pseudo-medieval shit for some reason
Simple, nobody wants to be a fricking nerd.
Nice party you have there. It would be a shame if someone were to throw a fireball right in the middle...
I'm sorry OP if you wanted to play Childish Fairytale #459745 you should check out Dora the Explorer or some shit
I liked it :). It does cop way too much from ASOIAF though.
>Templars are not holy warriors empowered by faith
If faith gives you actual tangible +15 bonuses to stabbing then it is literally not faith. Faith is the quality of spirit, not flesh. Many DA Templars do display strength of their spirit.
>Magic is not learned but born with, and non-mages are deficient
Yes except it's the mages who are deficient.
>extremely low presence of Divinity
As it should be. The path to Divinity is in infinit and perious, it doesn't fricking work like
>"Go to church for three consequetive sundays"
>"Jesus comes does to wipe your bum"
>all women priesthood
Makes perfect sense in a world with female Jesus, which in turn makes more sense with said female Jesus being beutiful enough that God wanted her. Unironically more based theology than IRL Christianity.
>zero prophets, oracles, or diviners;
We've already covered the issue of you needing God as your nanny, as opposed to Faith as the guiding light of your soul.
>Humanity's greatest empire is bad and stinky and full of cartoon villains
So just like in the Bible? Book of Revelation?
>muh slavery
Man enslaving man cannot be not evil in the sight of God who makes a flock of all the men. To enslave another and make him kneel before you is the most blasphemous form of playing God.
>Makes perfect sense in a world with female Jesus, which in turn makes more sense with said female Jesus being beutiful enough that God wanted her
It makes no sense at all. Female saints have been revered for a long time, but revered because they embody feminine virtues, not for taking on masculine roles.
>So just like in the Bible
No. Even Christ acknowledged Pilate had the authority to execute Him.
>Man enslaving man cannot be not evil in the sight of God who makes a flock of all the men. To enslave another and make him kneel before you is the most blasphemous form of playing God.
Very modern perspective, always looks off in a setting that purports to portray a pre-modern society. Some things are just normal whether you like them are not.
> but revered because they embody feminine virtues
Beauty is the ultimate expression of divinity, and it is a feminine virtue. Your b***h ass disrespects Maria.
>Even Christ acknowledged Pilate had the authority to execute Him.
Naturally, but having earthly authority has fundamentally nothing to do with being good.
>Very modern perspective
Pure Puritan cope. This "perspective" exists purely for sinful men who say
>"Yeah, um, Kingdom of Heaven, sure"
>"But I need someone to do my earthly labors for me"
>"And cook my earthly food"
>"And fill my earthly taxes"
>"And frick my earthly wife"
Who, naturally, existed in every age, but their perspective was never the only one out ther. Read Isaiah 53 and stop your cringe tradcath LARP.
>but their perspective was never the only one out there
Things that you take to be absolutely evil today like war or slavery were simply not seen as such by the overwhelming majority of premodern people. Rather they were seen as so natural that any criticism of them was as pointless as reproving the wind. This was the normative perspective in all civilized societies without any exceptions.
>Things that you take to be absolutely evil today like war or slavery were simply not seen as such by the overwhelming majority of premodern people.
Begone, M*dernist.
What is the point of this? Is this post supposed to highlight how game developers are propagandizing games to make medieval europe look bad?
Medieval Europe was not a nice place. Even though modern far right trad cons love the idea of pan European identity, Europeans loved killing each other for their rulers. The church was not able to establish peace. Everyone was part of the church and they still justified their invasions of other christian nations. Medieval Europe was a horribly evil place based on what happened. Normal people would find watching people get tortured to death as normal entertainment. It was just terribly evil.
Even things like prostitution was justified by Catholic philosophers. People like to point out how crazy some Christian churches are for justifying homosexuality and transsexualism but they were already in the past justifying prostitution.
Medieval Europe was a bleak place and far more like a song of ice and fire, than the lord of the rings.
>What is the point of this? Is this post supposed to highlight how game developers are propagandizing games to make medieval europe look bad?
The point of this is to state how Dragon Age's setting is awful. I'd rather play any RPG other than DA simply because of how terrible the setting is.
Dragon Age tries to do a subversion of otherwise classic medieval fantasy concepts and attempt to be edgy with it, but it doesn't work because you can still strive towards something and ultimately make Thedas better as a result, so the setting just ends up being lame instead of being nihilistic or hardcore. You can purposefully orchestrate events to where Faeran becomes better off had you not existed at all, so it doesn't give off a sense of despair because there is actual hope.
>zero prophets
Who do you think the entire Chantry is built around?