Loghain was the good guy, actually.

[TKVNC]

No Gaider. the game is correct and you are a ****** who is writing retcon ******** that is wrong.

To be honest, as Duncan is IP of Gaider's he really can do with him as he pleases. Gaider wrote both The Stolen Throne and The Calling, and was one the lead writers for the game/s. It is a bit silly to say he is "wrong" about his own fictional characters.
Of course, we can do what / choose which version of the lore we want to use in our (DA TTRPG) games, even so.

Sure, but retroactively changing things that completely contradict the "released" version of something is ********, and fallacious.

Just because someone makes something does not allow them to change it retroactively; the creation exists as it is, any new additions do not exist at that time. The intent of the creator doesn't matter - if they wanted to express something, then it should have been expressed.

[fkirenicus]

Sure, but retroactively changing things that completely contradict the "released" version of something is ********, and fallacious.

Just because someone makes something does not allow them to change it retroactively; the creation exists as it is, any new additions do not exist at that time. The intent of the creator doesn't matter - if they wanted to express something, then it should have been expressed.

So, if Duncan first was black (in the game), then become mulatto/white (in the next book), that would be a retcon that should be discarded?
Of the course the creator can do what they want with their own creations - that doesn't mean we have to like it or agree with it.

NOTE: I am NOT saying Duncan is or should be black - what I am saying is that since I accept The Calling as part of the canon lore, I accept that he is half Fereldan/half Rivaini - not half Ander/half Tevinter. That's all. He looks like he does in Origins whatever his heritage is.

[TKVNC]

Sure, but retroactively changing things that completely contradict the "released" version of something is ********, and fallacious.

Just because someone makes something does not allow them to change it retroactively; the creation exists as it is, any new additions do not exist at that time. The intent of the creator doesn't matter - if they wanted to express something, then it should have been expressed.

So, if Duncan first was black (in the game), then become mulatto/white (in the next book), that would be a retcon that should be discarded?

Yes.

[PixiGreen]

No Gaider. the game is correct and you are a ****** who is writing retcon ******** that is wrong.

To be honest, as Duncan is IP of Gaider's he really can do with him as he pleases. Gaider wrote both The Stolen Throne and The Calling, and was one the lead writers for the game/s. It is a bit silly to say he is "wrong" about his own fictional characters.
Of course, we can do what / choose which version of the lore we want to use in our (DA TTRPG) games, even so.

Is Duncan Gaider's IP, though? I thought it belonged to BW, the company, and the one responsible for the look not the writer of dialogues, but the Art Director, Lead Character Artist or Character Art Director.

Sorry, I love Duncan too much as a character to accept the word of a "truth fluent" writer stating in the middle of a culture war "Actually, back then I thought about my character as black and gay".

[fkirenicus]

So, if Duncan first was black (in the game), then become mulatto/white (in the next book), that would be a retcon that should be discarded?


Yes.

Well, you are consistent at least. Thanks. Not all are.

[fkirenicus]

Is Duncan Gaider's IP, though? I thought it belonged to BW, the company, and the one responsible for the look not the writer of dialogues, but the Art Director, Lead Character Artist or Character Art Director.

Sorry, I love Duncan too much as a character to accept the word of a "truth fluent" writer stating in the middle of a culture war "Actually, back then I thought about my character as black and gay".

As far as I know Duncan, Loghain, and Maric are Gaider's IP like Jamie Lannister, Eddard Stark and Petyr Baelish are GRRM's IP.
Unlike GRRM Gaider has since about 2015 destroyed all credibility and consistency of his.
I see what you mean, and partly agree - but I consider Bioware to be sane until about 2013, and so accept the books The Stolen Throne and The Calling. But it stops there for me.

[logincrash]

Duncan can't have been black. He looks like an Arab. The hooked nose and non-nappy hair make it clear. Same with Isabela in DA2; she looks like a swarthy gypsy (because she is).

[Roguey]

Sure, but retroactively changing things that completely contradict the "released" version of something is ********, and fallacious.

Just because someone makes something does not allow them to change it retroactively; the creation exists as it is, any new additions do not exist at that time. The intent of the creator doesn't matter - if they wanted to express something, then it should have been expressed.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, Tolkien retconned The Hobbit and released a new edition rewritten to be more in line with The Lord of the Rings, including an apologetic foreword saying that the first version was the story as told by Bilbo to make himself look better.

As far as I know Duncan, Loghain, and Maric are Gaider's IP like Jamie Lannister, Eddard Stark and Petyr Baelish are GRRM's IP.

Gamedevs who work for a company are work-for-hire. He wrote the characters, but they belong to Bioware.

[TKVNC]

Sure, but retroactively changing things that completely contradict the "released" version of something is ********, and fallacious.

Just because someone makes something does not allow them to change it retroactively; the creation exists as it is, any new additions do not exist at that time. The intent of the creator doesn't matter - if they wanted to express something, then it should have been expressed.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, Tolkien retconned The Hobbit and released a new edition rewritten to be more in line with The Lord of the Rings, including an apologetic foreword saying that the first version was the story as told by Bilbo to make himself look better.

Adding works, and relying on the unreliable narrator is different to a retroactive change that wholly changes the exisiting narrative / established conventions.

Changing the way a story is told is logical using the unreliable narrator - changing someone who we already know exists into a deformed ****** is not.

[PixiGreen]

Is Duncan Gaider's IP, though? I thought it belonged to BW, the company, and the one responsible for the look not the writer of dialogues, but the Art Director, Lead Character Artist or Character Art Director.

Sorry, I love Duncan too much as a character to accept the word of a "truth fluent" writer stating in the middle of a culture war "Actually, back then I thought about my character as black and gay".

As far as I know Duncan, Loghain, and Maric are Gaider's IP like Jamie Lannister, Eddard Stark and Petyr Baelish are GRRM's IP.
Unlike GRRM Gaider has since about 2015 destroyed all credibility and consistency of his.
I see what you mean, and partly agree - but I consider Bioware to be sane until about 2013, and so accept the books The Stolen Throne and The Calling. But it stops there for me.

Hm, but Martin is the sole inventor of ASoIaF, he is the only writer of his books and obviously the characters in the books belong to him. Gaider was, as Roguey said, a hired hand, nothing more. Even when he wrote books and comics, the IP itself should have long to BW (or EA). He was hired to write all these for the company. And he was not alone who worked on the characters.

Found a link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_for_hire :

Under work for hire, the commissioning party owns all rights from the very start even if the contract is breached.

[Rand]

No Gaider. the game is correct and you are a ****** who is writing retcon ******** that is wrong.

To be honest, as Duncan is IP of Gaider's he really can do with him as he pleases. Gaider wrote both The Stolen Throne and The Calling, and was one the lead writers for the game/s. It is a bit silly to say he is "wrong" about his own fictional characters.
Of course, we can do what / choose which version of the lore we want to use in our (DA TTRPG) games, even so.

I disagree. The game is the authoritative source when Duncan was created. And how Duncan was portrayed.
Everything Gaider writes after the fact cannot ever actually change that base. And that should not be attempted, anyway.
But Gaider is a clown without integrity, so he thinks whatever ********* crosses HIS mind later should be the new correct thing, and **** continuity.

That's not how it works. And every time a writer tries it, it's cringe and gay. In Gaider's case, both literally and figuratively both of those things.
Unless written to be secretly incorrect for some later to be revealed reason (plot twist or whatever) in the first place, which in the case of Duncan it was not, attempting things like blatant retcons is an insult to your audience.
But Gaider is so far up his ***, he thinks he can do no wrong, and "**** the audience anyway" (as we've seen his foul, conceited attitude is.)

Since he's up his own ***, he can eat ****. Duncan is as portrayed in Origins, and his books are ideologically polluted ******** in a discontinuity.

[Rand]

dgaider-deactivated20150130 answered:
We wrote them as bisexual, yes, and that was our intention from the outset of DA2. Some of the characters (such as Merrill) don’t discuss their sexuality, and thus it’s left ambiguous and open to interpretation by the player… but keep in mind that interpretation doesn’t change their sexuality. Just because you’re romancing Merrill with a male PC, for instance, doesn’t mean she’s straight, it just means you’re not exposed to another side of her character in that playthrough.

******** take completely (possibly deliberately) failing to understand the concept.
None of the characters have any sexuality until the player interacts with them.
If, on the player's interaction, the character does not explicitly mention homosexuality or heterosexuality, then the sexual orientation the player elicits from them IS their sexuality.
The sexual orientation expressed in the game is literally the only one that exists. It is a revealed state. The unexpressed states do not exist. They are narrative potential, not actual potential, ffs.
Just because you made potential interactions does not mean those exist. Because they don't.

The next cringe step from an author like Gaider would be to claim that all characters they ever wrote "really" are bisexual ********, because "Even though I didn't write them that way at the time, I could have. And as I'm now a deranged gay race leftist degenerate, it amuses me to consider them as faggy ******** now. especially as I hate my audience that won't accept my ideology. And I get to change things retroactively to "own the chuds" if I want to because they're MY characters and stories."
That disingenuous corruption is the ultimate expression of this behavior.

Put another way, it's as stupid as the writer saying that Karlach or Astarion or whoever are somehow "ackhually" both dead and alive.
Because upon meeting them the player can choose whether to kill them or not.
Obvious idiocy.

As to how this is asinine in yet another way, look at the "dragon break" nonsense from The Elder Scrolls: Daggerfall.
No, assholes. Pick a canon ending. There can only be one or else it's literal madness (the writer of that weak, mealy-mouthed ******** was a druggie, high most of the time).

[Rand]

Sure, but retroactively changing things that completely contradict the "released" version of something is ********, and fallacious.

Just because someone makes something does not allow them to change it retroactively; the creation exists as it is, any new additions do not exist at that time. The intent of the creator doesn't matter - if they wanted to express something, then it should have been expressed.

So, if Duncan first was black (in the game), then become mulatto/white (in the next book), that would be a retcon that should be discarded?
Of the course the creator can do what they want with their own creations - that doesn't mean we have to like it or agree with it.

You don't see that those are mutually exclusive?

To answer:
"So, if Duncan first was black (in the game), then become mulatto/white (in the next book), that would be a retcon that should be discarded?"
Yes.

"Of the course the creator can do what they want with their own creations - that doesn't mean we have to like it or agree with it."
No. He's free to write it, but he is wrong in intent and in fact. He does not "own" the creation once it is in the public sphere and has been interacted with.
That history has been written. It is fact and the writer is revealed as an disingenuous ******* by trying to alter it post hoc.

[Rand]

Sorry, I love Duncan too much as a character to accept the word of a "truth fluent" writer stating in the middle of a culture war "Actually, back then I thought about my character as black and gay".

"Truth fluid"
As in changeable, without solid form.

[logincrash]

None of the characters have any sexuality until the player interacts with them.
If, on the player's interaction, the character does not explicitly mention homosexuality or heterosexuality, then the sexual orientation the player elicits from them IS their sexuality.
the sexual orientation expressed in the game is literally the only one.

Isabela is for sure bisexual with a slight preference for women. She was married to a man and tries to initiate sex with Zevran no matter Hawke's gender.
Fenris is normally straight as he and Isabela have a friends-with-benefits kind of deal going on if you don't romance either of them. He might've been raped as a slave, though, as his master acts like a creepy homo when he shows up in Kirkwall.
Anders is implied to have had a one night stand with Isabela prior to event of DA2. Isabela asks Anders if he was that one mage that did the lighting thing during sex that one time and he confirms it. I assume that would mean he's normally straight, as he never mentions sucking off his buddy Karl unless you're coming onto him as male Hawke.
Merrill is indeed playersexual.
Sebastian is absolutely straight.

[Rand]

None of the characters have any sexuality until the player interacts with them.
If, on the player's interaction, the character does not explicitly mention homosexuality or heterosexuality, then the sexual orientation the player elicits from them IS their sexuality.
the sexual orientation expressed in the game is literally the only one.

Isabela is for sure bisexual with a slight preference for women. She was married to a man and tries to initiate sex with Zevran no matter Hawke's gender.
Fenris is normally straight as he and Isabela have a friends-with-benefits kind of deal going on if you don't romance either of them. He might've been raped as a slave, though, as his master acts like a creepy homo when he shows up in Kirkwall.
Anders is implied to have had a one night stand with Isabela prior to event of DA2. Isabela asks Anders if he was that one mage that did the lighting thing during sex that one time and he confirms it. I assume that would mean he's normally straight, as he never mentions sucking off his buddy Karl unless you're coming onto him as male Hawke.
Merrill is indeed playersexual.
Sebastian is absolutely straight.

And, as those are written into the game as fixed data from backgrounds, and the same for all players, those are all fine.
Except Merril.
Merril is 100% straight for a male PC and 100% gay for a female one. She is never "bisexual". As you point out, she is literally defined by the player's choice. If the player is a male PC, she is not a lesbian, and vice-versa.

[boot]

Logain was a white ******

Alistair , I'll let you do it since for once you want to

[Roguey]

Adding works, and relying on the unreliable narrator is different to a retroactive change that wholly changes the exisiting narrative / established conventions.

Changing the way a story is told is logical using the unreliable narrator - changing someone who we already know exists into a deformed ****** is not.

The Hobbit is written from a neutral third person perspective, it's not a first-person account. "Uh yeah, that was Bilbo's take" is a meta-explanation.

If an owner of an IP decides to change something, some fans can pout about how it breaks their willing suspension of disbelief, but ultimately it's their world. You can have your head canon of the original intent, but it's not what Bioware thinks.

[rusty_shackleford]

Adding works, and relying on the unreliable narrator is different to a retroactive change that wholly changes the exisiting narrative / established conventions.

Changing the way a story is told is logical using the unreliable narrator - changing someone who we already know exists into a deformed ****** is not.

The Hobbit is written from a neutral third person perspective, it's not a first-person account. "Uh yeah, that was Bilbo's take" is a meta-explanation.

If an owner of an IP decides to change something, some fans can pout about how it breaks their willing suspension of disbelief, but ultimately it's their world. You can have your head canon of the original intent, but it's not what Bioware thinks.

You can't own an idea, and you can't change my opinion on this.

[Rand]

You also can't rewrite what has been definitively written without being dishonest.

Exception given for the "unreliable narrator" but tread carefully.
This should only be used honestly and additively (like Tolkien), or else you're a ******** (like Gaider).

[Roguey]

In the Devil May Cry anime, the character of Morrison looked like this:


In the Devil May Cry 5 video game he looked like this


And that's just the way it is now. In-universe, he was always a black guy despite once being white.

[rusty_shackleford]

In the Devil May Cry anime, the character of Morrison looked like this:


In the Devil May Cry 5 video game he looked like this


And that's just the way it is now. In-universe, he was always a black guy despite once being white.

capcom loves *******, we already know this

[Acrux]

that was Bilbo's take" is a meta-explanation.

That's sort of true, but Tolkien's conceit of The Hobbit being a translation from an older original source was built into the writing very early on. And he made changes when saw the logical inconsistency in Gollum's attitde toward the ring as he was writing LOTR. That's much different from having inconsistencies pointed out years later - not making any changes to the original work, mind you - and saying "oh yeah I intended that all along".

[Rand]

Does anyone else suspect people like Gaider were just told at the time that the engine couldn't make black characters because some of the engine devs were disgusted with his ****** ******** and knew it was a bad idea?
"Gaider's on about that Duncan **** again."
"The **** is he on? Black people don't live anywhere in the known lands of Thedas."
"He said he wants to make some elves black as well."
"For ****'s sake, what's broken in his brain? Just tell him we can't render them properly in the engine and we'll look at it when we have time from the massive buglist."
"Are we going to ever do that?"
"No. Making Duncan a **** is stupid. He's a decent likeable character fighting for Thedas. And there aren't any blacks there anyway. Don't get me started on ***** elves."

[TKVNC]

Does anyone else suspect people like Gaider were just told at the time that the engine couldn't make black characters because some of the engine devs were disgusted with his ****** ******** and knew it was a bad idea?
"Gaider's on about that Duncan **** again."
"The **** is he on? Black people don't live anywhere in the known lands of Thedas."
"He said he wants to make some elves black as well."
"For ****'s sake, what's broken in his brain? Just tell him we can't render them properly in the engine and we'll look at it when we have time from the massive buglist."
"Are we going to ever do that?"
"No. Making Duncan a **** is stupid. He's a decent likeable character fighting for Thedas. And there aren't any blacks there anyway. Don't get me started on ***** elves."

Nah, it's just a ******** excuse that's based on absolutely nothing - same as Qunari not having Horns.

It just exposes Gayder as not knowing anything about how actual game engines, or textures or meshes, or rigging, or anything practical works.

Same as when some random **** kid pretended to be me, and explained how to make textures using "various photographic filters", like no you dumb ******* ******, that's not how it works at all.

[fkirenicus]

Duncan can't have been black. He looks like an Arab. The hooked nose and non-nappy hair make it clear. Same with Isabela in DA2; she looks like a swarthy gypsy (because she is).

Exactly. Neither Duncan nor Isabela are pure Rivaini (like e.g., Vivienne), and to be honest, I strongly suspect that African-looking Rivaini was something Bioware cooked up when they collectively lost their sanity around 2015. There is nothing that indicates this is the case even in WoT 1 from 2013, if I remember correctly (it might have been changed in the reprint from 2022, it wouldn't surprise me at all).

[Rand]

I strongly suspect that African-looking Rivaini was something Bioware cooked up when they collectively lost their sanity around 2015

This is a known fact.
There are ZERO blacks in the Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2 concept art.
And they include Rivaini characters.

[Oyster Sauce]

Does anyone else suspect people like Gaider were just told at the time that the engine couldn't make black characters because some of the engine devs were disgusted with his ****** ******** and knew it was a bad idea?
"Gaider's on about that Duncan **** again."
"The **** is he on? Black people don't live anywhere in the known lands of Thedas."
"He said he wants to make some elves black as well."
"For ****'s sake, what's broken in his brain? Just tell him we can't render them properly in the engine and we'll look at it when we have time from the massive buglist."
"Are we going to ever do that?"
"No. Making Duncan a **** is stupid. He's a decent likeable character fighting for Thedas. And there aren't any blacks there anyway. Don't get me started on ***** elves."

I've seen multiple black characters in DAO. They worked with what they had.

[Rand]

Does anyone else suspect people like Gaider were just told at the time that the engine couldn't make black characters because some of the engine devs were disgusted with his ****** ******** and knew it was a bad idea?
"Gaider's on about that Duncan **** again."
"The **** is he on? Black people don't live anywhere in the known lands of Thedas."
"He said he wants to make some elves black as well."
"For ****'s sake, what's broken in his brain? Just tell him we can't render them properly in the engine and we'll look at it when we have time from the massive buglist."
"Are we going to ever do that?"
"No. Making Duncan a **** is stupid. He's a decent likeable character fighting for Thedas. And there aren't any blacks there anyway. Don't get me started on ***** elves."

I've seen multiple black characters in DAO. They worked with what they had.

Despite what the modern ******* tell you, neither braids nor melanted skin are exclusive to the Sub-Saharan evolutionary mistakes.
(In fact, it's probably harder to braid their terrible hair than our beautiful sleek and straight tresses.)

[Oyster Sauce]

Does anyone else suspect people like Gaider were just told at the time that the engine couldn't make black characters because some of the engine devs were disgusted with his ****** ******** and knew it was a bad idea?
"Gaider's on about that Duncan **** again."
"The **** is he on? Black people don't live anywhere in the known lands of Thedas."
"He said he wants to make some elves black as well."
"For ****'s sake, what's broken in his brain? Just tell him we can't render them properly in the engine and we'll look at it when we have time from the massive buglist."
"Are we going to ever do that?"
"No. Making Duncan a **** is stupid. He's a decent likeable character fighting for Thedas. And there aren't any blacks there anyway. Don't get me started on ***** elves."

I've seen multiple black characters in DAO. They worked with what they had.

Despite what the modern ******* tell you, neither braids nor melanted skin are exclusive to the Sub-Saharan evolutionary mistakes.
(In fact, it's probably harder to braid their terrible hair than our beautiful sleek and straight tresses.)

Lol