This Swedish DA:I interview with Mike and Mark says that Varric will NOT be a romance option.
Translation of relevant passage:
"Q. It seems to have been a little uncertain whether fanfavoriten Varric going to have a romance with, it is possible to say more today?
Mark: It will not be…
Interesting to note that they seem to care about the minority here instead of the majority. That seems odd, to say the least, for Bioware (and completely unprecedented). I mean… *looks at Cullen, Anders, Garrus, Tali* *then looks at ME:3 Extended Cut “DLC”* …Well, maybe not entirely.
A lot of people want to cry “WELL BIANCA”. Here’s the funny thing, and to express my point, I’m going to have to tell a very personal story.
I thought I was deeply in love with a best friend at some point. i mean, he was always there for me and for the most part, did right by me. We said some things. Made a few “promises”.
Then, something happened, and there was someone else in the picture, and I quickly realized that the reason I had latched on to my friend was because I was terrified of being alone after a few really bad relationships. I talked to my friend. We agreed that maybe we hadn’t thought things through. He urged me to see this other guy, to let my options remain open. He was more than relieved.
I am now married, more happy than I can imagine, to the “someone else in the picture”, the love of my life, and the idea that I might have made a mistake because of a few brash promises terrifies the piss out of me. So, if you want me to care about a promise and a girl I know nothing about, you’re shit out of luck, Bioware. Been there, and happier for taking a leap than staying safe on a cliff edge with no ways to go but backwards.
And because you latched onto someone because you were lonely, Varric is that pathetic as well, right?
I’m sorry, but I seriously have no tolerance for these kinds of posts. You know dick all about Varric’s relationship with Bianca, and you’re proving that you, a) know nothing about Varric’s character, and b) care more about banging the cool dwarf dude than seeing his story play out.
Seriously you could take this logic and apply it to anything. “WAH SERA IS LESBIAN WHY?! I HAD A FRIEND WHO WAS LESBIAN UNTIL SHE MET A GUY ONE TIME AND NOW THEY’RE TOGETHER BECAUSE HE WAS JUST PERFECT SERA BE LIKE HER!”
You know nothing about that character’s personal relationships in their past. You know nothing of their current relationships. We barely know who Bianca is. In fact, I don’t even know if it was explicitly stated to be a romantic relationship - it very well could be that she’s a sister, or a child of war, that for some reason or another he’s foresaking love entirely in order to care exclusively for them. (Again, maybe it has been explicitly stated, but I’ve not come across it yet. Even if this paragraph is wrong, don’t ignore the rest of the post like the majority of people on this site would).
Varric isn’t going to just drop a promise with someone because someone else expressed interest in him. And even if he was going to, Hawke would’ve had a much greater chance given that she was his friend for several years (and again, to my knowledge, Inquisition takes place over a shorter and much more urgent period of Thedan history).
Okay, so, I wrote that post at like, 3 in the morning when I was tired and had a headache. I may have come across as a little vitrolic. Happens. Not an excuse, but seeing as I’m human, well.
But to call me pathetic because of loneliness is, well. I’m not really sure what point you’re trying to get across here. It certainly can’t be a good one if you’re taking to pot shots at the character of someone you don’t even know. Sorry that I made some stupid decisions because of a basic human need? Yes, that makes me pathetic, thank you. Ignoring that now though!
However, let me make an amendment: because of my personal experience with a story that is in a lot of ways similar to what most people speculate Varric goes through, I think it would have been a hell of a lot more interesting to show a character not FORSAKING a promise, but simply realizing that maybe it’s not the most healthy option. Yes, you’re right, we don’t actually know what’s going on with Bianca. But a promise, no matter the intentions, is NOT always good for people. However, most fiction writers seem to think all promises are sacred. Characters don’t usually think these things through. I feel Varric would have been an interesting medium to use in the idea of a promise not always being what’s best or even right, and him “coming around” as it were (perhaps not the best term to use, but it’ll get the point across).
Again: I was being a pouty fangirl at 3 in the morning —>
but I am not fucking pathetic for making human mistakes in my own life (nobody’s perfect) —>
however these mistakes, I feel, give me an interesting insight that I don’t think most fiction writers think of or take into account, and I am disappointed that this is so, simply because I think it’s a damn interesting turn of events.
We all make mistakes - if you check my post now, I reworded what I said to be a bit less hostile. It’s not pathetic to be lonely, but I’ve seen enough relationships where people latch onto others out of loneliness end in the suffering of both involved (and mostly the person being latched on to). It’s a childish notion and not one that you see very often (if ever) in mature relationships.
People who jump into relationships like that are pathetic. By the very definition of the word: “arousing pity, especially through vulnerability or sadness”. I’ve seen those situations far too often, and it really does break my heart because I know how much the person latching on to the one they’ve hurt suffers because of it. It breaks my heart to see that in people.
I’m sorry if you took it to mean something more mean spirited than I intended. It was the opposite intention, but I re-worded the post after my girlfriend pointed out that most people don’t view the word “pathetic” by its original definition anymore.
Varric seems like the kind of character who already knows what’s best for him. He has always been an incredibly wise, incredibly intelligent character. He breaks a lot of the dwarven tropes that’re popular and that is one of his defining features. And I think it’d be a lot more interesting to see what the deal with Bianca is than to see him foresake that relationship (again, one that’s been in the works for years) for a romance with some random soldier he meets in wartime.
I’m still personally hoping that Bianca is a daughter figure or someone like that, rather than the romance. A dependent that he’s sworn to look after or avenge, or something else entirely. But not a romance. I think that’d be a really good direction for them to go in, but we’ll have to see.
People who make mistakes are pathetic, again, by its very definition. I’m sorry again that you saw my post as an attack on you, it was actually the stark opposite as I’ve explained.
You may think it’d be interesting, but I disagree. And I’m certain a lot of other people agree with me on that one. Regardless of that fact, it would be too out of character for Varric, and let’s be honest - if you’d wanted the promise with Bianca to be let go, it doesn’t have to be through romance to the Inquisitor (or a romance at all for that matter, but that’s besides the point). It’d make far more sense for it to be Hawke, or hell, any of the characters from DA2 that he’s known over the years. Even Cassandra. However, the one character it definitely doesn’t make sense for him to romance… is the Inquisitor.
I like that Varric is sticking with this promise, and I adore the air of mystery surrounding it. There’re plenty of examples in fiction where promises were broken or let go because they weren’t good for the character in question. We don’t need it here, and it wouldn’t suit the character or the story - and little lessons like this shouldn’t be shoehorned into stories for the sake of it.
Well, I suppose that that’s just something that we agree to disagree on. I could sit here and argue your points all day, and you could argue back - not that I mean argue in the inflammatory sense, mind you - but there’s no point to it as we’re both set in our opinions. Which is fine, god knows I’m set on a lot of unpopular opinions. But, unpopular or popular, people are allowed to have them and the popularity (or unpopularity, as it were) of such opinions (when in expression of things such as books, films, etc - subjective things like that, I don’t want this post to be accused of supporting people who have the opinion that people should be segregated based on skin color or something like that) shouldn’t really be a motivating factor in, well, anything, except friendly discussion.
As for the pathetic part, whether people use the term correctly or not, you’re not going to find a lot of people who accept being called that, even if it’s true (I think you could argue that, since the term is no longer being used correctly, that pathetic and what is or isn’t is subjective - or even using the correct term, you could argue for it being subjective, what I find pitiable might not be what you find pitiable). In my personal view, people who make mistakes are human. I suppose if you’re going with the original meaning, and since everyone makes mistakes, then the entire human race is pathetic, but again, not something people like hearing. I know I certainly balk at it.
For the pathetic part, that’s exactly why I changed the wording. And yes, everyone is pathetic at plenty of different points in their lives - I wasn’t saying “I pity you in general”, but “I pity you in that situation”.
And I disagree about the usage. Should we start using ironic and coincidence interchangeably because people use the word incorrectly? No. These words have a meaning and we should work more on educating people in their correct usage rather than allowing people to skew their meaning entirely. I thought you may understand my feelings here as a reading and writing buff, but I guess not.
As for the opinions thing, I suppose that’s one way to look at it. I still think the argument to make him a romance option is weak (even if we ignore how out of place I think him breaking his promise this long after making it would be). Even if that was something he would do, for argument’s sake, there are still many candidates that would make more sense to be the one to open that road to him. A random soldier fighting over a short period of time, regardless of her rank, would be a really anti-climactic and out of place way to end that promise. It very literally would just be pandering to the fan girls who want to jump his bones. However, I don’t think you’re going to agree with me (I know how defensive people can be when it comes to romances in games), so there probably isn’t much use in continuing this discussion.
Again, sorry for offending you. You just happened to see my post before I made my corrections to it (to make it more suitable for a contemporary audience). I stand by the idea of using words correctly rather than avoiding them and allowing the incorrect definition to take over, though, and I’ll pretty much always defend the correct use of the English language.
Wow, okay, I don’t usually jump into these things, but, uhm…
There is no “correct way” to use the English language?
English is DESCRIBED, not PRESCRIBED. That means there is no authority and there are no hard and fast rules. The dictionary people listen to popular words and meaning and then shrug their shoulders and go “Okay” and put them in the dictionary. And that’s about it.
If you want to use “correct English”, then you won’t be using a lot of words we use today, or a lot of phrases. Hell, you wouldn’t even be saying my last name properly - because when my immigrant great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents got off the boat, their last name was mispronounced and misspelled so much, that it got morphed into the last name I hold. But it’s my last name. Not what their last name was, that’s not my last name - it’s what’s been mispronounced or misspelled. And frankly, I’d be sort of pissed if you used their last name instead of my own.
http://www.pbs.org/speak/speech/correct/prescriptivism/ I think this is a really great article, as are most of the articles/books he cites as additional reading.
English evolves - that’s why we have words such as internet today. As reading and writing buffs, I think ohno-melon and I both understand this.
Whether you like the fact that English is evolving and is described isn’t the point. It is, and it doesn’t need anyone “defending” it.
"There is no ‘correct’ way to use the English language."
Uhm, I think I could find a few million English teachers/lecturers who would disagree.
You seem to be going into semantic territory, in the sense that words change over time and are added to or subtracted from the language, etc. That’s not what I was talking about.
I’m talking about a word being warped by incorrect usage (like how “irony” and “coincidence” are often muddled up in America, as well as the rest of the world thanks to the globalisation of American media) to mean something entirely different to what it actually means. People use “pathetic” when they mean “disgraceful” or “contemptible” (or any other number of words describing a negative view of a person without any real sympathy, compassion or sadness). This was mostly due to ironic or sarcastic use of the phrase originally, which over time was perceived to be the correct usage and (incorrectly) used in such a way.
Perhaps you’re satisfied with people confusing the meaning of words, like “pathetic” or the aforementioned “irony” and “coincidence”. However, if these words continue to be used incorrectly, we’ll eventually end up losing flexibility in the language - we’ll no longer have a word that means “evoking sympathy through sadness or vulnerability”, nor will we have a word that means “something that appears contrary to what’s expected”. And, as a by-product, we’ll have an overabundance of words meaning the opposite.
Sorry, but I celebrate the complexity and nuances of the English language. As a “reading and writing buff”, perhaps I’m unique in this or just plain crazy, but I can’t just “follow popular usage”. If we left the language in the hands of the average person - people with low literary acumen - the language really would lose all that makes it beautiful.
I already find it difficult to enjoy books that use “layman’s English” (ie. simplified for the express usage of those with low or average vocabularies). And before you start, I’m not being snobby, nor am I looking down on anyone. However, that does not mean I need to be satisfied with the devolution of the English language, nor need I settle for a writing or speaking style that cuts all of the allure out of it.