madzilla84

[madzilla84]

Davrin and Assan! Had a lot of fun putting this together!

You can commission me via ko-fi here!

[madzilla84]

Bellara

[madzilla84]

Just saw the thousandth "Rook isn’t a better person than Solas, they have no right to judge him" argument (without even acknowledging the whole Titans fiasco at all, of course, business as usual), and while I can usually look the other way when I see opinions that oppose mine (or try start a polite debate if I’m feeling particularly brave, which I usually don't), this one was so vitriolic that it actually hit me.

I don’t want to go too deep into the Rook vs. Solas moral debate, because if you don’t see how genocide automatically puts your favorite character a few steps down on the morality ladder compared to the poor bastard who maybe used to be a thief or a murderer, then it’s already a moot point. But seriously – why do people hate their own Rooks so much?

I understand not fully clicking with them; I had that issue with my Inquisitor at first, when the game gave me dialogue option after dialogue option that just wasn’t what I wanted to say. But if anything, the Inquisitor’s case taught me that I shouldn’t go into an RPG expecting it to bend to my every whim and desire. I should design my character around the game, not the other way around. And, wonder of wonders, with that mindset, I came to like – and even love – my Inquisitor. (Sure, the ten years I spent filling in the gaps probably helped too, but still.)

So why doesn’t Rook get the same grace from people? Even if you blame them for making things worse by disturbing the ritual with that pillar (again, without acknowledging that Solas is the one who started the ritual in the first place, with zero regard for construction site safety, lol), how come you can’t find it in yourself to look for something redeemable in a character who’s obviously new at this and straining to satisfys the expectations put on them? Someone you’ve spent forty, fifty, sixty, seventy, or more hours with? Whose biggest widespread criticism is literally that they’re too kind?

What is so hateable about this character? And why is it always the same group of people yelling the loudest?

I’m genuinely curious, if anyone has any insight or ideas – what’s behind all of this?

[madzilla84]

thinkin about neve. as you do

I did Neve’s quest last night (because once again I had started to do The Soul of a City and I forgor that if you haven’t done her quest, she won’t give an opinion about the Archon, since it’s tied to the quest outcome). So since I’m replaying my first Rook, I once again went for the same option I chose the first time, which was for her to be an inspiration to Dock Town. And like, it’s fine... it’s really nice actually, she opens a detective agency with Rana and all that. Aww.

But in my second playthrough I was doing all the alternate decisions so I saved Treviso, which of course meant I had no choice in Neve’s personal quest and she became leader of the Threads. Which at first I was like - what?? I didn’t think that’d happen, I thought she’d set up her own shadowy organisation without, you know, all the crime. Or something.

Now I’ve done (nearly) all the choices in the game, I can make decisions with a bit more clarity because I’ve seen the alternative, as it were. I almost always go with my gut the first time, and then RP it a bit more in later playthroughs if I feel it’s needed. I was sure for this choice I wouldn’t like the alternative much, but there was no choice associated with it, so I got it anyway. BUT, I actually am feeling a bit more conflicted now…? I’m not saying I’m going to change my decision for this Rook (my main Rook), but I am now thinking about it…?

As with pretty much all of the companion decisions in DAV, there’s no objectively right or wrong answer, though depending on the choice in question you (the player) might reject one outright if it feels wrong to you for whatever reason. But for me, some of them are pretty difficult choices, because they both feel – not just like they *could* be correct for the character (they’re all written like that), but because I, the player, like them both equally, or could see either being part of my worldstate. So, for example, I will never have a worldstate in which Emmrich is a lich, but I could see having a worldstate where the griffons go to the Wardens *or* Arlathan. (I think my ‘canon’ – for now at least – will be Arlathan, but having seen both I like both, you know? Antoine the Griffon Trainer was so cuuutteee)

So now I’m wondering which one I like more…? Neve the Threads Leader was a surprise, but I can kind of see it? Like, take over a corrupt organisation by filling a power vacuum and change it for the better? Lovely parallel to Dorian’s approach to being Archon, which makes sense since she only supports him if that choice is made. (Plus, for this worldstate, it’d be a kind of Organised Crime Power Couple thing going on and that’s kind of … I kind of love it?)

Buuuut I do like the detective agency/inspiration outcome for her as well, and the hopefulness of it, for Dock Town and for her. I just don’t know which one I prefer for her for this particular world and Rook… much to think about...

[madzilla84]

I appreciate it when people draw Emmrich mole. Odd, I know, but it just feels incomplete without it.

[madzilla84]

Dragon Age II - Dragon Age: The Veilguard

[madzilla84]

dragon age fandom remembering that not everyone who romanced dorian is a pavellan challenge: IMPOSSIBLE

[madzilla84]

Split Fiction by Hazelight Studios (2025)

[madzilla84]

split fiction

[madzilla84]

[madzilla84]

[madzilla84]

Everyone keeps talking about "the writer's barely disguised fetish". But I still haven't heard about "the writer's barely disguised huge ass pet peeve"

[madzilla84]

aces don't need to compensate for our lack of sexual attraction by being super kinky, making dirty jokes, writing the best smut, handing out water bottles at the orgy etc. i'm tired of seeing these jokes about "the ace friend" who does all of these things because it feels like just another way to say "oh look! aces aren't that broken actually! aces can participate in all these sexy things and be normal!"

we don't need to compensate. we just exist, whatever that looks like, in whichever way we relate to sex and sexual things.

[madzilla84]

People complain about not being able to 'be mean' in datv, but like. You can be. Not in a 'sell people into slavery' way like you could in the other games, because narratively it just would not Work, but you can very well be mean. It just won't end well for you.

Like, okay. By virtue of being recruited by Varric and working with him for a year prior to the events of Veilguard, Rook cannot be, like....morally bankrupt? Because Varric wouldn't recruit them if they were, or would kick them to the curb if he realized they were soooo so chill with wanton murder and other such things (him and Harding kept getting distracted on their search for Solas because they kept stopping to Help People, after all) So. there are certain limitations to the choices you can make, but they Make Sense. And you can still be an asshole, in a way. Like...I think people maybe....forget? that you can get your Entire Team killed by just...not caring? A thing that you couldn't really do on a similar scale in the previous games? 'Oh you have to play the team therapist-' You don't, actually! You can ignore everyone's problems! The game doesn't stop you from just pushing on with the main plot! You can leave your companions to their own devices. It will not end well, but you can do it. Pretty much everyone will die and Rook may just end up being locked in the Fade with Solas forever, but it's an option that was Very Much Put Into The Game. But I don't think ive ever seen that ending mentioned in posts that complain about Veilguard being 'too nice'. And i'm not gonna make assumptions as to why that might be, but. Bear with me here.

It kind of, in a way, reminds me of when people were like 'ummm why does it suck so much to play a fascist in Disco Elysium??' Because it sucks to be a fascist, Period. you know? Like. You cannot want to get a good ending in the game and then also choose to be an asshole of unimaginable magnitude.

(obligatory 'piss on the poor' disclaimer: I am not saying that people who have those complaints abt veilguard are fascists or anything of the sort, it was just an example that came to mind that i thought would convey my point more efficiently)

I love origins, but it kind of...I don't know, it trivializes the acts of violence you can commit by still, inevitably, leaving your character in the position of the Hero That Saves The World. There are no real consequences in the overall story arc. It's kind of just flavor, but it never feels like an actual consequence. The story will still end approximately the same way. And I mean...it makes sense, too. There's basically only one other guy who can get the job done, so the HoF is kind of Needed for the job, no matter how much of a monster u can choose to be. You can leave the world worse than you found it, but at least there is still a world left in the end.

With Veilguard, that is not the case. The thing that makes Rook special is not their background, or their skills, or the dagger. Anyone could take their place. They're just Some Guy! And anyone WOULD take their place if they suddenly decided to start selling people into slavery. Because no one on the team is going to just sit back and let them do it. Half of the factions wouldn't even cooperate with them. They'd probably get stabbed by a shadow dragon somewhere in a dark alleyway n dropped into the sea, you know?

What makes Rook special, what secures the good ending, is their inherent kindness and care for the world and other people. The connection they build with others, who, in turn, lend their support to them. (like. something, something, almost every companion having some sort of healing/revive ability? u know?) Its the commitment to doing the Right Thing. And that is, by definition, incompatible with the option of making evil choices.

You have to want to leave the world better than you found it if you want to actually do so. The game gives you the option to do that. It also gives you the option of saving the world without caring for it or the people around you. And it gets the job done! It doesn't leave the world worse off, but it doesn't leave it better, either.

At the end of the day, all art is political in some way. And I think it's good that Veilguard is a story about hope and the value of kindness, among other things. Considering the current....Everything, I think it's kind of tone-deaf to demand that the story let you be evil for evil's sake. Look around for a moment. We really need more hope and kindness in the world right now.

The previous games were not necessarily wrong or bad for providing those options. But they were also each a product of it's time. They also each told a different story.

Veilguard is not 'sanitized', or 'dumbed down', or whatever people like to say. The mundane horrors and violence of the world don't need to be spelled out or thrown in your face via slurs against your PC. Frankly, if certain bits of the game did not horrify you on some level just from the environmental storytelling alone, then maybe you need to think about why that might be. Maybe you just need to stop and actually process what the game is showing you.

Like, i might be getting a bit off topic here, but i will be the first guy (gender-neutral) to tell you about how much of a lasting impression the broodmother bit from dao left on me. But it wasn't just the sheer violence of the experience described by Hespith. It was, well...

It's not that it occurred, it's that it was allowed.

When you go through D'meta's Crossing, through blighted Minrathous with bodies piled in the streets and hanging from the improvised gallows? Hell, the very beginning of the game, with demons snatching people left and right? The horror here is not just that it occurred, it's that it was allowed. Do you get what i mean? The fact that these things aren't spelled out to you in the form of a poem or a dialogue tree doesn't mean that they're somehow 'sanitized'.

People complain the dialogue is over-explanatory sometimes (and okay, it is, but i can think of several good reasons as to why it would be, like keeping in mind players completely new to the franchise), and then completely miss out on things that are not spelled out to them directly, and then present the 'lack' of those things as a failure of the game. I'm just saying.

So, in conclusion. I don't think Veilguard is too nice. I don't think the game has to let you commit atrocities to be complex or to show the darker bits of the world. I think datv uses it's gameplay mechanics in a way that helps it drive the point of the story home. I think the choices the developers made were made with intent, especially given the limitations they were under. And i also think that many of the 'faults' that people like to complain about are not actually faults at all.

Veilguard is not a perfect game. It IS a solid one, though. It has bits that I wish the developers were allowed to work on more and under less stress. There IS room for constructive criticism (while keeping in mind, you know, the dev hell etc). Being 'too nice'? That is not one of the game's faults. I think people who complain about that just maybe missed the entire point.

[madzilla84]

It’s asexuality day!