84 réponses à ce sujet

[fongiel24]

I can't stand Eamon. He's as much a snake as Howe but at least Howe doesn't try to hide it. He has no problem with having Alistair sleep in the stable when he's inconvenient but as soon as he sees the throne vacant it's "Alistair you're the last hope for Ferelden and we need you to be king. I wish I'd groomed you better for it but don't worry, you'll always have me to tell you what to do!"



Concerning the whole Connor situation... if I RP it and avoid metagaming, I always kill Connor. It's not that I have anything against him, it's just the safest and most logical solution. Sending one person alone onto the demon's home turf is ludicrous when you can just draw it out into the real world where it's presumably less comfortable and beat on it with an entire party.

[Raiil]

Eamon's a manipulative bastard. I really think that the only reason why he wants Alistair on the throne is because he can't take it himself. I don't give a **** about him 'taking' Alistair in- he treated a good kid like crap and set up the situation where the PC has to take control because Alistair now has a deeply ingrained lack of self-worth. All the while that horse-faced woman of a wife screeches.





I always save them both because my PC has a strong sense of 'all life is sacred' and so she has to try for the tower, but it always crosses her mind to let Isolde die. Hell, if they didn't need Redcliffe soldiers so bad, she'd probably let Eamon die too.

[CalJones]

It's funny how Eamon is portrayed as a good and noble man, yet so many people really dislike him. Must admit I'm one of them - I agree with both the posts above. I'd let him die in a heartbeat, but sadly you don't get that option. Sten has a very good point when he says you're wasting time with the whole Ashes thing.

As for the quest, I've done it all three ways. The mage tower option is a real cop-out, happy as it is. I killed Connor once and felt pretty lousy about that, so won't do it again. I feel pretty happy about sacrificing Isolde, though. Orlesian harpy.

[Sarah1281]

It's funny how Eamon is portrayed as a good and noble man, yet so many people really dislike him.

Most people don't even seem to dislike him for him but on Alistair's behalf for what we know of his probably crappy childhood and for putting someone he's spent years convincing would fail at ruling up as King. Not to mention the no on-screen Isolde punishment for her part in the Connor-demon fiasco.

[kormesios]

The amount & passion of Isolde hatred amazes me.



Jowan lies to his best friend and to his lover with indifference to their harm. The he agrees to poison someone due to his combination of selfishness and cowardice. And he has fans who wish he was a companion NPC.



Loghain orders the poisoning, and turns over an innocent Templar to be imprisoned and tortured by Howe--heck, he needs to cover up his crime. And you get long threads defending the guy, perfectly happy to invent facts if that's what it takes ("Maybe the Orlesians were going to attack after all!")



Isolde acts out of love her child, unaware of the consequences, willing to sacrifice her life when that's the option to save him. Of the three responsible, she's the only one without malice.



As far as I can guess the biggest problem is she doesn't fall into a sycophantic swoon when the hero saves the day. Loghain tells the hero how impressive they are, so all is forgiven. Jowan understands he's second fiddle. Isolde has the nerve to ask that her son be spared.

[ObserverStatus]

:?Interesting, but it never discusses the ethics of trading the boy's soul to learn a few magic tricks that's what I did.

Modifié par bobobo878, 27 avril 2010 - 06:05 .

[Sarah1281]

And you get long threads defending the guy, perfectly happy to invent facts if that's what it takes ("Maybe the Orlesians were going to attack after all!")

We really don't know enough aout that situation so it's not inventing facts to say it's within the realm of possibilities that once the Blight was defeated the Orlesians wouldn't leave and it's happened in Blight's past. Not to mention that even w/out the fear of another occupation, the Orlesian GW brought with them FOUR LEGIONS of chevaliers. I don't know why anyone (let alone Loghain) would be cool with that.

[OldMan91]

kormesios wrote...

The amount & passion of Isolde hatred amazes me.

Jowan lies to his best friend and to his lover with indifference to their harm. The he agrees to poison someone due to his combination of selfishness and cowardice. And he has fans who wish he was a companion NPC.

Loghain orders the poisoning, and turns over an innocent Templar to be imprisoned and tortured by Howe--heck, he needs to cover up his crime. And you get long threads defending the guy, perfectly happy to invent facts if that's what it takes ("Maybe the Orlesians were going to attack after all!")

Isolde acts out of love her child, unaware of the consequences, willing to sacrifice her life when that's the option to save him. Of the three responsible, she's the only one without malice.

Why are you generalizing? Not all of us are defending Jowan or Loghain. I equally hate Loghain, though with Jowan i'm more forgiving in general (I do send him to the circle of magi to face justice... which basically means becoming a tranquil or simply death, so yeah).

Isolde may not have acted out of malice, but her actions and secrecy led to the deaths of too many people. You can't justify that with "but she loved her son!". Loghain also justifies his crap through his "love for his homeland". See the similarity? And if you do save both Connor and Isolde, she never faces justice nor does she even say sorry for what she did. Nothing, zilch, nada. It's as if nothing had happened at all.

As far as I can guess the biggest problem is she doesn't fall into a sycophantic swoon when the hero saves the day. Loghain tells the hero how impressive they are, so all is forgiven. Jowan understands he's second fiddle. Isolde has the nerve to ask that her son be spared.

Yes, she actually does have the nerve to say that. Why don't you ask to the villagers if their family members were spared the undead attacks? But I do save the kid, he's innocent in my eyes. It's the mother I would like to deal with.

[AuraofMana]

You know what I did (Male Human Mage)?



Let the demon have Connor: This is because I get an extra talent point. I don't even care if it's right or wrong, because more power to me = better.

Went in the Fade myself: Can't trust anyone to get anything done. I am the best character anyway. AKA, I am the most powerful so I am going to get the job done.

Saved the arlessa: Despite how ****y she was and how much I hated her, I figured I get a better reward if she still lives.

Told Connor about it: That little brat needs to know how much trouble he got me into, and how he should feel guilty for the rest of his life because it makes me feel better.



Am I evil? I guess many would say that. Honestly, I just do whatever that pleases myself and don't really care about other people. I would help people if either I get rewarded for it as well or it won't harm me in any way. Some would classify that as evil.

[Xandurpein]

OldMan91 wrote...

Isolde may not have acted out of malice, but her actions and secrecy led to the deaths of too many people. You can't justify that with "but she loved her son!". Loghain also justifies his crap through his "love for his homeland". See the similarity? And if you do save both Connor and Isolde, she never faces justice nor does she even say sorry for what she did. Nothing, zilch, nada. It's as if nothing had happened at all.

I do see a similarity between Isolde and Loghain too, which is why I also many times let Loghain live. I agree that it's wrong that she never faces justice, but that's not really her fault. That is Eamon's fault, because he is the law in Redcliff.

[Aisynia]

kormesios wrote...

Jowan lies to his best friend and to his lover with indifference to their harm. The he agrees to poison someone due to his combination of selfishness and cowardice. And he has fans who wish he was a companion NPC.

Because some of us have real friends. Even if your friend screws up, you stick by them, especially one you've known all your life (like Jowan).

I don't think he was ever indifferent to their harm, that's a silly thing to say. He was a worry wart throughout the entire origin, and loved Lily enough to want to give up magic after they escaped. He wasn't blind to the dangers of what they were doing, nor was Lily. He hid the fact he was a blood mage, but I mean, do you blame him? It's an automatic death sentence, and I tend to believe him when he says he didn't practice it out of some malign intent.

When he DOES use blood magic and reveal himself, my characters always choose the option "I can't believe he just did that!" lol as in "What an idiot, we might have been able to talk our way out of this". Never a condemnation of the blood magic itself.

He panicked.

As for the incident at the castle, firstly, Jowan is not a coward, as he is willing to go through quite a bit of combat (and enthusiastically) in the origin. His refusal to fight with you in the castle is very out of character, and probably put in there after they scrapped him as a companion. I just play it off that, like Riordan, he's in no condition to fight. He was tortured repeatedly and then locked in a cage with no food or water for several days at minimum. Unlike Sten, humans aren't fit to fight after that in general

Regarding the poisoning of Eamon itself.. Stupid decision, but hardly one he can be blamed for. Much like Berwick down in the tavern in Redcliffe, he didn't (at least at first) realize he was doing anything wrong. Teyrn Loghain, the great Hero of River Dane, Hero of Ferelden, best friend to King Maric and all around respected, revered, and honorable man comes to you and tells you to do something for the good of the country.. you believe him.

MOST people bought into the propoganda about Ostagar. They had no reason to believe otherwise. What, Teyrn Loghain betray Maric's son?! Bull****! It's inconceivable for the majority of people in the country. That's like trying to tell someone General Patton was secretly a **** collaborator in World War II. It sounds absolutely ludicrous.

So yes, stupid decision, yes, and in hindsight, Jowan admits that after he was already poisoning Eamon, he was wondering how he could be the threat that Loghain said he was, but why disbelieve him? He thought he could serve his country, make Ferelden a better place, and get reinstated in the tower, get a chance to put his life back together..

Well, that didn't turn out well, but just understand that he wasn't privvy to everything the Grey Wardens knew.

Once he realizes what he has done, he owns up to his mistakes. He never denies them, he never tries to shift the blame. He just wants to help, in earnest, to make things right.

On top of all that, he's been my mage's best friend for 10-15 years, maybe more. Friends stick together, especially in the worst of times, so yes, I absolutely love Jowan and support the idea of making him a companion

[IoCaster]

I usually just make Isolde kill Connor herself. I prefer that solution. That's my version of justice.

As far as Jowan is concerned, he's a worthless turd with an annoying voice. The whiniest idiot in the game. I tend to cut his throat at the earliest opportunity and let him bleed out. Actually, I do the same to Zevran as well.

[Tirigon]

Valentia X wrote...

They put the demon inside of you? My understanding is that you had to face it in the Harrowing, or you'd be possessed and the Templars would chop you down. :/ Could just be me, though.

Yea you have to face the demon in the Fade. But I guess the mages employ this demon.

[Tirigon]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...


I have always suspected that the Chantry/Circle Puppets does deliberately do some sort of "quota control" within the Circle, either through the Harrowing, or bullying/frightening mages into Tranquility. My guess is, is that there are probably safer, more effiecient and better ways to deal with the threats of possession, but research or exploration is strictly controled and limited, through Chantry prohibitions. They want mages and their power, true, but they also want to keep the number of mages to managable, controllable numbers. I think it's why they take away mage's children, and discourage or prohibit the majority of mage marriages.

Yea. It´s sort of Off-Topic, but I always wished you could side with Uldred in the Mage Quest. I think Uldred´s rebellion was the best the Circle mages ever produced. Too bad the game forces you to side with the Chantry and to help stopping the chance for improvement.

[Tirigon]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Inzhuna wrote...

What really makes me ultimately despise Isolde is that she tortures Jowan. It's quite understandable that she ordered to throw him in prison, or she could even be overcome by rage and order his execution when she found out he poisoned Eamon. But she continued going down to the dungeon, ordering her guards to torture Jowan, watched his pain and suffering... In fact when she must have realised it was her fault (because she admits she is to blame if you choose blood ritual). And she still did it. It is just horrendous.

I think that was understandable. If she did it before Connor got possessed then she'd need to know who sent him and what they hoped to accomplish. If she did it afterwards then since she clearly had very little knowledge about mages (or else she wouldn't have tried what she did) she honestly believed him to be responsible and was trying to get him to stop.

I think Isolde´s actions are understandable, yes, but torture is still wrong.
But remember, Isolde is from Orlais.
What do you expect from a country where knights (Chevaliers) are allowed to rape every woman they want, as long as this woman isn´t noble?
I guess from Orlaisian standards Isolde is probably a rather nice noblewoman.

[Xandurpein]

Tirigon wrote...

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...


I have always suspected that the Chantry/Circle Puppets does deliberately do some sort of "quota control" within the Circle, either through the Harrowing, or bullying/frightening mages into Tranquility. My guess is, is that there are probably safer, more effiecient and better ways to deal with the threats of possession, but research or exploration is strictly controled and limited, through Chantry prohibitions. They want mages and their power, true, but they also want to keep the number of mages to managable, controllable numbers. I think it's why they take away mage's children, and discourage or prohibit the majority of mage marriages.

Yea. It´s sort of Off-Topic, but I always wished you could side with Uldred in the Mage Quest. I think Uldred´s rebellion was the best the Circle mages ever produced. Too bad the game forces you to side with the Chantry and to help stopping the chance for improvement.

The problem with siding with "Udlred" is that it's really not Uldred anymore. By the time you enter the tower "Uldred" is a pride demon who has possessed the real Uldred. As much as I like to free the mages, having them enslaved by Fade demons doesn't really strike me as a way of freeing them.

[Tirigon]

kormesios wrote...

The amount & passion of Isolde hatred amazes me.

Jowan lies to his best friend and to his lover with indifference to their harm. The he agrees to poison someone due to his combination of selfishness and cowardice. And he has fans who wish he was a companion NPC.

He is a Blood mage. If he´d tell that he´d be killed without even be tried. And the one he posinons is an ass. I´d gladly finish the job if I could.

Loghain orders the poisoning, and turns over an innocent Templar to be imprisoned and tortured by Howe--heck, he needs to cover up his crime. And you get long threads defending the guy, perfectly happy to invent facts if that's what it takes ("Maybe the Orlesians were going to attack after all!")

Loghain is an ass, yes, but how does that excuse Isolde?

Isolde acts out of love her child, unaware of the consequences, willing to sacrifice her life when that's the option to save him. Of the three responsible, she's the only one without malice.

As far as I can guess the biggest problem is she doesn't fall into a sycophantic swoon when the hero saves the day. Loghain tells the hero how impressive they are, so all is forgiven. Jowan understands he's second fiddle. Isolde has the nerve to ask that her son be spared.

But she´s an Orlaisian noblewoman. That´s enough reason to hate her, not even to mention everything already said here.

[Xandurpein]

Tirigon wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

Inzhuna wrote...

What really makes me ultimately despise Isolde is that she tortures Jowan. It's quite understandable that she ordered to throw him in prison, or she could even be overcome by rage and order his execution when she found out he poisoned Eamon. But she continued going down to the dungeon, ordering her guards to torture Jowan, watched his pain and suffering... In fact when she must have realised it was her fault (because she admits she is to blame if you choose blood ritual). And she still did it. It is just horrendous.

I think that was understandable. If she did it before Connor got possessed then she'd need to know who sent him and what they hoped to accomplish. If she did it afterwards then since she clearly had very little knowledge about mages (or else she wouldn't have tried what she did) she honestly believed him to be responsible and was trying to get him to stop.

I think Isolde´s actions are understandable, yes, but torture is still wrong.
But remember, Isolde is from Orlais.
What do you expect from a country where knights (Chevaliers) are allowed to rape every woman they want, as long as this woman isn´t noble?
I guess from Orlaisian standards Isolde is probably a rather nice noblewoman.

Again, the big question is perhaps not why Isolde does it, but why she does not need to face any consequences for it. And that brings it back to Eamon, because he is the law in Redcliff. Apparently marital happiness is more important than justice for him...

[Tirigon]

Xandurpein wrote...

The problem with siding with "Udlred" is that it's really not Uldred anymore. By the time you enter the tower "Uldred" is a pride demon who has possessed the real Uldred. As much as I like to free the mages, having them enslaved by Fade demons doesn't really strike me as a way of freeing them.

Well, I like demons more than Chantry people. At least demons are more useful, and they don´t lead exalted marches against others, and they didn´t enslave my PC´s people (the elves). So yea, never saw the point in hating demons, while the Chantry gives many reasons.

[Tirigon]

Xandurpein wrote...

Again, the big question is perhaps not why Isolde does it, but why she does not need to face any consequences for it. And that brings it back to Eamon, because he is the law in Redcliff. Apparently marital happiness is more important than justice for him...

Or Eamon is just an ass.
I think that´s the most likely explanation.

[Xandurpein]

Tirigon wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

The problem with siding with "Udlred" is that it's really not Uldred anymore. By the time you enter the tower "Uldred" is a pride demon who has possessed the real Uldred. As much as I like to free the mages, having them enslaved by Fade demons doesn't really strike me as a way of freeing them.

Well, I like demons more than Chantry people. At least demons are more useful, and they don´t lead exalted marches against others, and they didn´t enslave my PC´s people (the elves). So yea, never saw the point in hating demons, while the Chantry gives many reasons.

I'm sure it was fun to write that, but I hope you don't expect anyone to take it seriously.

[Tirigon]

Xandurpein wrote...

I'm sure it was fun to write that, but I hope you don't expect anyone to take it seriously.

You don´t need to agree with it, but yes, it´s serious.

Demons did less bad things to the elves than the Chantry, and they helped my PC more than the Chantry ever did.
Besides, I think a Pride demon or Revenant party member would be cool. And a romanceable succubus:wub:

[Oloria]

I sympathise with Isolde, and I don't think she is evil at all. Yes, she makes a poor decision, with awful results, but she was terrified of never seeing her son again. If anything would make me act irrationally, selfishly and with poor consideration for the consequences, it would be the threat of losing a child, or seeing harm come to my child. Little else will strike such fear into the heart of a parent.



On my first playthrough I made my decision by empathising with Isolde - she wished to give her life to save her son and so she should. She accepted the blame, and realised that her foolishness had caused terrible suffering. I found it sad that Connor (in my opinion entirely blameless) should also have to pay by losing his mother, but he would (hopefully) get his father back in time.

[Xandurpein]

Tirigon wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

I'm sure it was fun to write that, but I hope you don't expect anyone to take it seriously.

You don´t need to agree with it, but yes, it´s serious.

Demons did less bad things to the elves than the Chantry, and they helped my PC more than the Chantry ever did.
Besides, I think a Pride demon or Revenant party member would be cool. And a romanceable succubus:wub:

To begin with. If you bothered to listen to Uldred, siding with him involved letting him make you an abomination. That is, let a Fade spirit enslave you forever, trapping you inside your body at the mercy of the demons actions. And all those abominations you kill in the tower are also mages enslaved and mind controlled by Fade demons. So... um... if you think that is a bright idea to let your soul be imprisoned forever, then go ahead, join Uldred and let his friends possess you.

Demons are way more dangerous to elves than the chantry. The only reason the chantry have killed more elves than emons is becuse it's relativly hard to get to the real world from Fade. Once the demons get here it's far more probable that they will attempt to harm you or any other elf, than the average chantry member, at least last time I played.

Saying that demons are better than the chantry is a bit like saying nuclear holocaust is preferrable to a flue epidemic, because historically the flue has killed more people than atom bombs.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 27 avril 2010 - 01:24 .

[Tirigon]

Xandurpein wrote...


To begin with. If you bothered to listen to Uldred, siding with him involved letting him make you an abomination. That is, let a Fade spirit enslave you forever, trapping you inside your body at the mercy of the demons actions. And all those abominations you kill in the tower are also mages enslaved and mind controlled by Fade demons. So... um... if you think that is a bright idea to let your soul be imprisoned forever, then go ahead, join Uldred and let his friends possess you.

Not at all; Every alliance with demons involves pointing a gun at their head ready to pull the trigger at the first wrong move.
Uldred made the mistake to let control slip and surrendered himself to the demon. That was wrong.
But it is clear that demons can be a useful tool if you can control them, the reson being, that demons are quite powerful, but also very limited because humans, elves and dwarfy are more creative and free, while demons need help to even come to this world. It is possible to strike a deal from which both parties profit.

One example could be: The demons fight for the warden, and in return they can possess the fallen, or something like that.
Another example is the demon that teaches you blood magic: You get powerful magic, the demon gets a chance to survive.

Demons can be useful allies; the difference to alliances with humans however is that you must first prove your strength. The demon must know that it is more useful for him to help you than to betray you. Uldred failed at making this clear.