conningemu - Tumblr blog

conningemu · 8 months

Text

Inquisition Companions, good, bad, ugly

So over the years, I've seen a lot of dislike aimed at Inquisition's companions(Two in particular more than the rest), and doing a deep delve into all of them, a lot of the bigger issues with pretty much all of them are related to the direction the game chose to take.

Namely the thing that is pretty much ubiquitous with all of them is that unlike DAO characters where characters could, and did change, DAI's characters are far more in the style of DA2's characters, in that they are very static individuals.

That's not to say that there is no change at all to each of the companions over the game, but it's the exception, rather than the default.

The big, big thing that differentiates DAI to DA2 however, is the difference between Hawke and the Herald.

DA2's characters were for the most part just as unchanging as DAI's lot... But it was nowhere near as big and issue, because Hawke was a much, much more forceful personality, whereas the Inquisitor is a far more laid back individual, who even if they have the knowledge necessary to make arguments, isn't really all that inclined to actually make the kinds of arguments that Hawke would, and could.

However, it goes deeper than that, because DA2 also has one massive edge that DAI does not in regards to the companions. An actual series of Climaxes.

DA2 has two just as divise characters as any DAI ever had, in the form of Anders and Fenris... But you don't tend to hear that much about it anymore, because they have been overshadowed by DAI's far more divise cast... But also because if you really, really hate both of their guts... You actually get to see that through to the finish line at the end of DA2 and stick a dagger in Anders back for mass murder, and/or your preferred weapon of choice in Fenris guts when he comes to help the Templars attack the gallows.

Now this is actuqlly the case with most of the companions in DA2 and DAO. If you really, really hate one, chances are you have an option to kill them at some point. I'm just highlighting these two base breakers to illustrate a point.

NONE of your companions in DAI follows this mold... Except for one, and it's not one of the game's more hated characters.

There are few thematic, or cathartic end points for most of the companions, few moments where you can hit a point where you just tell them to fuck off and destroy them the way you could in previous games.

And without that possible sense of Catharsis, you never get any sense of closure, even if you hate the characters with every fiber of your being.

Cassandra Penthagast

Cassandra is an interesting case in that she actually does develop a lot over the game.

Cassandra is not at heart a bad person, she has plenty of flaws, and convictions she can be forced to challenge, with various degrees of success, but the ultimate thesis of her character is that she is not a leader, and she has to accept that.

Through the game you have the option of determining whether or not Cassandra reforms the Seekers of Truth, despite it all, or whether you aid her in letting go, and moving on, the latter of which seems the better option, for the reasons i'll cover next.

The worst ending for Cassandra is if you make her the next divine, where she frankly has no idea how to fix things, and so where Vivienne coldly but calculatly reinstates the circles and lays the groundwork for things going right back to the ways they were, leliana forges ahead with the reformation wheter with a cyncial heart or a cheerful one, Cassandra does not see where she needs to change the Chantry and where to keep it the way it was.

In other words, it's clear that despite good intentions, Cassandra is not up for reforming the seekers of truth... But going down that road does not utterly destroy the Inquisitor's relationship with her, and that is probably one of the better character development bits of the game.

Now the truly bad parts of cassandra, and the ones you cannot change or challenge at all, is her prejudices regarding the Elvhen pantheon or culture.

Now this is obviously far more pronounced if youre an elf, and especially if you romance her.

Now as we'll see, pretty much every, single companion has one of these(or in the case of two, a bucketload) of points where you are completely incapable of challenging or changing their views on things. Sometimes handled well, other times not.

Varric Tethras

Now Varric is as usual, perfect. He is the overall best companion to have in almost every, single situation, and his wits never fail him.

No, pretty much the only part of his interactions where i would say the game fails him, is his obligatory spot where you don't get to challenge him, and the game seemingly doesn't realize that a player might object to what's on screen, and that's the relationship he has with Bianca, his sorta Ex-Girlfriend who strings him along, even now two decades later.

Now Bianca is not a well liked character for a lot of reasons(The infuriation of any Hawke x Varric shipper for being the in universe reason not letting it happen, her being extremely unlikable, talking about things she doesnt understand, etc.), but i dont wanna focus on those here.

No the problem here is that there is no choice to point out just how toxic Bianca is, and/or try to help varric move on from her, as a friend, a love interest, or a shipper of Hawke x Varric.

You are instead forced to watch your bestie Varric Tethras keep going in a very clearly unhealthy and borderline abusive relationship without being able to do anything about it.

Solas

Like Varric and Cassandra, Solas is also one of the Game's best written characters, but unlike everyone else, it's because you actually do get to challenge him on pretty much everything he believes, culminating with a decisive point in your relationship where you get to punch him in the face... Or you can be his friend, his bestie, and he will still choose the worst possible route forwards.

Solas is a character with very, very strong beliefs, and regardless of what road you take with him you cannot change those... But unlike everyone else, this is a strength of the narrative, because the Game very clearly understands this fact, and uses it to tell a story.

If you befriend Solas, and respect his opinion on you, what you get is a tragedy, of a man with flaws and good points who despite it all was not able to overcome his issues and flaws... and if you oppose his views on every point, tells him to get bent, and ends up punching him in the face, you get the same option of catharsis that you get with Anders and Fenris(Even if it doesnt have the same kind of permanent joy of those).

Moving on from well written elf, we have the opposite. DAI's least well written, and easily the least well liked companion Sera.

Sera is an incredibly immature, rebel teenager, who thinks she has all the answers when she really doesn't know jack shit.

That's not the bad part by the way, that could have made for a great character actually... no the problem is that the game does not confront any of these flaws the way you could with previous companions.

Sera is just as intolerant, bigoted, and self-righteous as Solas, Fenris and Anders ever was... But unlike with Solas, the game does not recognize this as a flaw in her as a person.

Both of these two have genuine virtues and flaws... But the problem that ultimately doomed Sera into becoming the most hated companion is that the game does not recognize, or give you the option of confronting her on her shitty, shitty behavior in any mature fashion.

Rather it's just treated as a part of her quirky personality that you have to accept to deal with her.

I would also argue that Sera has the single least impressive endings out of everyone of your companions.

If you hate her beyond words, you have the option of kicking her out of the Inquisition at any time... But it doesn't have any sort of Catharsis behind it, and rather just comes across like the Inquisitor has just had enough of her bullshit, and tells her to leave after one too many pranks.

There was a way to do this right, and this ain't it.

On the opposite ending, in trespasser, Sera does finally give up on her hatred against the Elves, but not because of any character growth. Instead, she, like many other young firebrands burned herself out on hating the targets of her ire... But she has not had any character growth as a result, not any moments where she recognizes, "maybe I've been a douce..." instead her attitude is basically "My hatred was justified, but eh, it wasn't worth it." Which in it's own way just makes her look even worse.

Dorian Pavus

Dorian is also one of the better written DAI companions, and like Cassandra and Varric, his biggest issue, is that there are parts of him that the Inquisitor is not allowed to challenge, which can really leave a bad taste in one's mouth.

Pavus, like Sera is a young, anti-establishment rebel, the main difference being that Dorian's target of ire generally tends to deserve their hatred, and unlike Sera he has put a lot of deep, deep thoughts into it... And probably most important of all, despite everything, Dorian truly, genuinely loves his homeland.

The scene after getting to skyholdz where Dorian lays out his feelings after learning that Cory is a Tevinter magister is probably the best bit of writing he has in the entire game, as he is forced to confront that the single worst crime in human history, which everyone else takes for granted was committed by one of his countrymen, happened mostly as the chantry said it did.

"Because the imperium... Is my home."

Dorian's entire arc is summed up by that line. For all his justified anger and hatred of everything the Tevinter Imperium stands for, Dorian loves his homeland. He is just as much a patriot as any of the Venatori you fight in the game. It's just that his vision of where the Imperium has to go is fundamentally different than theirs.

He is essentially what Varric would have been, if he was in Bhelen's position.

The man who sees the flaws, the cracks and most importantly, that there is a way forward that isn't just capitulation to tradition, when tradition got them into this mess to begin with.

...which is why the thing you're not allowed to truly call him out on is so baffling.

Because the thing you are not allowed to critique in any noteworthy way is his opinion on slavery.

And the funny thing is... His initial stance on slavery is written, really, really well. He thinks on slavery exactly the way a man raised in a slave society would, even if in most other regards he is a good man. There is a lot of people in modern day that wants to demonize every, single person who lived in a slave society unless they were 100% abolitionists, but the reality is generally far, far less simple. Because there were plenty of people like Dorian. Good people in most regards, who nonetheless didn't see a problem with slavery because their society ran on it.

It is a very obvious flaw of his, and the writing for it is good... You know what is not good? The way the Inquisitor tries to challenge his views.

When challenged, Dorian points out that the south has alienages instead of slavery, that is just as oppressive and full of abuse, which is actually a good point... The problem is that you are not then allowed to point out the obvious, namely that any mage society with slaves, would have every single incentive to use blood magic in the worst ways possible, and so the root of everything wrong with his homeland comes back to slavery in the end.

Neither are you allowed to point out the constant and frequent slave raids and underground enslavement across all of Non Tevinter mainland Thedas... Which is only a thing because of Tevinter's slave market.

As such, what could have been another aspect of Dorian that added to his character, instead is far and away the most infuriating of all of these character aspects you are not allowed to challenge or critique... Because the game was so, so close to making him a perfect character... And then fumbled it by not allowing you to force him to grow at all on the subject.

Thom Rainier

Blackwall is an interesting character... In how you can have a decent concept, competent execution, good pacing, and still produce a very, very boring result.

There is nothing inherintly wrong with Blackwall, but there is nothing that interesting about him either. The man has no charisma, and though he lacks any of the big points where you're not allowed to challenge him on like most of the cast has, he lacks any of rhe more interesting aspects like varric, cassandra, solas, and so on has.

Sera and Vivienne might be far less likeable, but at least they have interesting things to consider how their writing went wrong. By contrast Blackwall is competently written and executed... but that does not make him interesting.

The Iron Bull

Iron Bull is basically the opposite of Blackwall, in that he is an incredibly uninspired concept, but because of his execution, he works.

He is the upfront double/triple agent, the washed up loser who realized how shitty his side was, and so ends up defecting.

On paper that's something that's been done a thousand times and does not sound interesting at all, but as Blackwall proves, the execution is the key to success.

Bull's story of how he genuinely believes in the Qun despite having effectively left it, and how despite his integration with the Inquisitor and the rest of the cast, at the end of the day, even if you romance him, the thing that genuinely, truly matters to Bull, his soul, is his mercenary company, not you, not the Inquisition, not the Qun, is far, far more engaging than it has any right to be for being such a simple premise.

He's also an excepection to the rule about not having a satisfactionary bad ending, because if you truly, genuinely did hate him, and sacrificed his men, he WILL turn on you, just like Fenris, and will have the same ending as the Tevinter Elf.

Vivienne

Vivienne is the second most disliked Character in DAI, and just like Sera it comes down to bad writing, and how the game does not allow you to push all the way to really make a character work.

Vivenne is an interesting concept in that she, just like the original game's ice witch is a flat out evil character in a party of generally more good-hearted if flawed individuals.

The game is very, very upfront with the fact that she is a competent, charismatic, ambitious, ruthless individual, who wants to recreate a system where she and those like her would succeed... But anyone of mediocre or average talents would be crushed, and freedom will be ground beneath templar boots again.

That's an interesting concept, and frankly I would applaud them for NOT letting you soften her, the way the original game did with a Morrigan who was befriended/romanced.

The problem here, is the fact you are not allowed to take this to the finish line.

Unlike so many of Origins and DA2's companions, who would have some sort of climax where if you went against them completely, you would be forced to have to end up fighting them as the final point to their character, Vivenne has NO climax in any way.

And no character in the entire game, is hurt more by a lack of a climax than Vivienne.

To compare her to Morrigan, the original witch was not someone who could be killed, but she had a thematic climax, where if you wanted to, you could repay her for the fact she was just using you, by denying her the ultimate price, the only thing she wanted, and all her plans had been building towards by not doing the ritual.

And if that didn't suffice there was also the way you ended whatever relationship you had by stabbing her in witch hunt.

The problem with Vivienne, is that she has nothing like this. Regardless of what you do, even if you don't recruit her, she still wins in some way or another.

And if you hate her guts, that is a big, big problem.

The reason why Morrigan worked, was because you could make her go through substantial Character development to overcome her flaws. You cannot with vivienne. She starts the game off as a bitch who loves the Orlesian pastime "The Game" that is responsible for 99% of it's population being little better than livestock that can be beaten and raped at will, and she ends the game as a successful player of that game, who even if you do nothing with her at all, still emerges as a challenger to the College of enchanters, spitefully trying to tear down any alternative to the Circle.

If you disagree with Vivienne's point of view, there is absolutely nothing to be gained from recruiting her.

Her personal quest is probably the single biggest example of this. Wheter you give her the right heart or not, her lover dies, and she moves on, takes advantage of the situation, and comes out on top.

The way to fix this is pretty simple too. Have it actually matter.

There should have been an option for you to have leliana look into why the heart mattered for Vivienne(which an inquisitor really, really sjould have the power to) and make the choice to either comply, or deny her the advantage of a powerful noble ally.

Then, if you give her a false heart and the guy dies, when confronted about it, you should have been able to tell Vivienne to get bent, that you have watched her and judged her, and ultimately decided that her and her desire for a world that is run by "the game" has no place in the one you wish to build, and so you removed her biggest patreon and supporter, and you follow that up by kicking her out of the Inquisition.

That would have been a satisfactory climax for anyone who hated Vivienne's guts, and would have given even people who don't like her as a person a reason to recruit her... All while not changing her personality in the slightest.

Wheter you then have a life and death duel with her or not doesn't matter, because the Thematic climax has been reached, and you have had a satisfactary conclusion to her and the Inquisitor's relationship.

As it is, if you really don't like Vivienne, the only winning move, is not to play with her. Once you've recruited her, she will get to reap the benefits that she was part of the Inquisition for the rest of her life, and even if you don't show up to her meeting at all, she still makes the world a worse place by trying to tear down the College.

Cole

Like The Iron Bull, Cole is also a very simplistic character idea, but unlike Blackwall, he is very well executed.

The way his telepathy is used to give an insight into how the world works, and how characters are actually built up is one of the best parts of the entire game. Cole has the single most interesting party banter in the entire game, and as such is great to have around even if not that important to the plot.

The main problem with Cole is that after you make the choice of whether or not to make him human or backtrack towards being a spirit, you don't really get to see the aftermath other than trespasser, and even then, it's just in whether or not he has a relationship.

Other than that, he's pretty great though, and of the characters who might leave Skyhold, he's pretty much the only one who's exit is engaging as he calls you out on how despite your words, you don't want to help people, which is ehy he's leaving.

The fact that he's compassion in human form makes this ending way more fitting than, say, if Blackwall does the same thing.

387 notes · View notes

conningemu · 8 months

Note

I've started One Piece but frankly am very cautious with actually continuing and investing a lot of time and energy into the work because I'm aware of the transphobia and the general... everything surrounding characters like Brook. I haven't chosen to invest in a long running Shonen since about 15 years ago, before coming to terms with my sexuality, and I fear that a lot of stuff I'll find to be inexcusable. Are the allegations blown out of proportions, or should I be worried?

Well, I don't think I can help you on what you'll find inexcusable or excusable, that's a very personal line that everyone draws for themselves, ultimately. I love One Piece deeply, but I refuse to make excuses for its shortcomings. Like all great works of art, it is flawed.

For something like twenty years, One Piece's primary depiction of visible queerness and transfemininity were the Newkama.

Which... fucking sucks, frankly. Visually, these are designs based 100% on "ha ha ha ugly men in dresses who think they're feminine, ha ha ha" as a joke. They are ridiculous caricatures, and you are meant to find them funny and laugh at their delusions of femininity.

It's a depiction that derives from extant stereotypes of transfemininity and homosexuality in Japanese culture, which... aren't really my place to speak authoritatively on. I know that there are some complexities re: drag culture, reclamation and performance culture, and Japanese queer and trans people have a diversity of thoughts and opinions on both One Piece and the "okama" stereotype more broadly. I can't speak to any of that, that's not really my lane, so I'll just say that from MY perspective, the depiction of the Newkama as visual designs comes across as a dismissive, mean-spirited and frankly cruel depiction of transfemininity.

In addition to that, it should also be said that the Kamabakka are unequivocally heroic and explicitly depicted as correct and morally right in their identities and culture.

This is Bon Clay and Ivankov, two major okama characters in One Piece. If Ivankov looks familiar that's because he's based on Dr. Frank N. Furter from Rocky Horror Picture Show. Ivankov is a major heroic ally of the Straw Hats, and Bon Clay is commonly considered one of THE most beloved and heroic supporting characters in the entire story. One Piece fans will DIE for Bon Clay, you can find tiktoks of people openly weeping with love for this man. If I ever appeared on camera, I would be one of them.

Setting aside their presentation as designs, One Piece goes out of its way to show these characters fighting, sacrificing and standing up for their friends and their communities. It goes out of its way to present their humanity, their compassion and their kindness, and to humanize them to the audience.

The ultimate villains of One Piece are the World Government, a hyper-authoritarian militaristic feudal government with a policy of absolute conformity to authority, and the Newkama and their queerness are explicitly framed as standing in opposition to that evil, and as representatives and avatars of freedom.

Freedom is one of One Piece's central themes, and it very explicitly includes freedom from gender roles and gender norms in that idea. The Newkama, among other things, also stand for freedom of presentation, freedom of gender, and freedom of self-determination. Whatever gender you want, whatever you want to wear, who and whatever you want to be, the Newkama say you can and should be those things, and damn what anyone else thinks.

Newkama Land where these story scenes take place are literally a haven of freedom carved out by queer people inside the walls of a deep-ocean prison that the World Government tried to throw them into to torture and destroy them, which is, objectively speaking, metal as fuck.

I think these story ideas are extremely queer-positive and trans-inclusive, and I think it reads like the work of someone who has queer people's backs and wants them to be part of the worlds that he makes.

...

Which makes it all the more frustrating that the Newkama are the only explicit depictions of transness and queerness in One Piece for literal decades. On the one hand, the story is vocally accepting and inclusive, on the other hand, everyone everywhere is presented as cis and straight with vanishingly few exceptions. Queer people exist in One Piece, but only really in the designated Queer Person Faction, rather than as an endemic presence in the world. It's very Planet of Hats in that way.

(inb4 yes I know Luffy is shown essentially as aro-ace, yes I also agree that Nami definitely has a thing going on with Vivi and projects hella lesbian energy. Yes you can absolutely do a queer reading of the story and its characters, and I do that and I love to do that, but there's a difference between something being open to queer interpretation and a story actually telling explicitly queer stories)

It's not until we reach the Wano arc, one of the most recent story arcs, that Oda really gets around to depicting forms of gender non-conformity and transness outside of the boundaries of the Newkama and the "okama" visual stereotype. He's been rightly praised for making those new creative choices (and Yamato is MY BOY I fucking love him), but it still took a quarter of a century for One Piece to even HAVE a transmasc character.

On the one hand its explicit text is quite radically inclusive, the themes and what the story SAYS presents queerness and queer people as good things that make the world a better, richer and freer place. People who try to eradicate or oppress queerness are, without exception, the enemy.

On the other hand, it just hasn't been very good at actually depicting queerness, except as cartoonish stereotypes and very, very occasional exceptions to the cishet status quo.

The portrayal of the Newkama, visually, arrive from a tradition of transphobic, homophobic stereotypes, and I don't blame anyone from being alienated by that. Placing them on the side of the good guys doesn't cancel out the problematic aspect of using those kinds of depictions in the first place, and I am not interested in making excuses for it.

I love One Piece, deeply, I think it is a wonderful story, and I find it very affirming of queerness as a mode of being. But I'm not going to argue with anyone who feels differently.

1K notes · View notes