Bioware decided to make the Qunari inhuman devil things after this, probably because of fear of misinterpretation.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Grothesk (Long Spike)
I've been into Dungeons and Dragons lately and their Reddit page (r/DnD) is fairly progressive, but many of the players a're also realists. In a video game or DnD you can have your non-player characters (NPCs) act however you want, but it comes down to ensuring that people are having fun; depictions of overly sexist or extremely racist NPCs is just kind of bad writing, to be honest. However, in this video game it seems as though they are presenting a race or faction that has oppressive views upon women, which isn't innately bad if that serves a plot point or goes somewhere...but if you simply have a race/faction that is oppressive to women for no reason then it's just lazy content.
On that note, one of the mainstays of DnD is the concept that the humanoid races are "racist" against each other in a way because it's extremely obvious to tell the races apart (one guy looks like a lizard-person and another person looks like an elf) and on the whole the races have their own history and segregation. The 5th Edition Player's Handbook specifically mentions how certain races behold other particular races and that some of the races are straight up shunned by everyone (such as the Drow).
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Ozmen (Long Spike)
The Qunari or whatever in Dragonage were not 'oppressive of women' or had 'oppressive views of women''. Their system is a fictional version of what happens when you pressupose the labels necessary for a society to function and teach everyone to fit those labels. Everyone in their system from leader to serf had to change to fit it. They were a culture set in stone basically. Warriors were only warriors, clerks only clerks and so on. Whatever 'oppression' happened did so because the individual in question did not understand the meaning of 'social happiness' basically. Too much individuality.
But given that the information available is a 75 second clip about a 'whole culture' that formed the thinking patterns of the character it's understandable to think they 'held oppressive views about women' instead of the 'truer' interpretation of 'they held repressed views about individuality'.
As a real life example, women haven't been allowed in to the army for that long in the western world. Mostly because nobody, most women included, viewed them as 'warriors'.
Comments
(Short Spike)
Bioware decided to make the Qunari inhuman devil things after this, probably because of fear of misinterpretation.
(Long Spike)
I've been into Dungeons and Dragons lately and their Reddit page (r/DnD) is fairly progressive, but many of the players a're also realists. In a video game or DnD you can have your non-player characters (NPCs) act however you want, but it comes down to ensuring that people are having fun; depictions of overly sexist or extremely racist NPCs is just kind of bad writing, to be honest. However, in this video game it seems as though they are presenting a race or faction that has oppressive views upon women, which isn't innately bad if that serves a plot point or goes somewhere...but if you simply have a race/faction that is oppressive to women for no reason then it's just lazy content.
On that note, one of the mainstays of DnD is the concept that the humanoid races are "racist" against each other in a way because it's extremely obvious to tell the races apart (one guy looks like a lizard-person and another person looks like an elf) and on the whole the races have their own history and segregation. The 5th Edition Player's Handbook specifically mentions how certain races behold other particular races and that some of the races are straight up shunned by everyone (such as the Drow).
(Long Spike)
The Qunari or whatever in Dragonage were not 'oppressive of women' or had 'oppressive views of women''. Their system is a fictional version of what happens when you pressupose the labels necessary for a society to function and teach everyone to fit those labels. Everyone in their system from leader to serf had to change to fit it. They were a culture set in stone basically. Warriors were only warriors, clerks only clerks and so on. Whatever 'oppression' happened did so because the individual in question did not understand the meaning of 'social happiness' basically. Too much individuality.
But given that the information available is a 75 second clip about a 'whole culture' that formed the thinking patterns of the character it's understandable to think they 'held oppressive views about women' instead of the 'truer' interpretation of 'they held repressed views about individuality'.
As a real life example, women haven't been allowed in to the army for that long in the western world. Mostly because nobody, most women included, viewed them as 'warriors'.
(Long Spike)
Ah, I wasn't aware of the lore. Thanks!