222 réponses à ce sujet

[errant_knight]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

What's funny is that if you spare him, you lose approval with Wynne and she gets pissy. Even Alistair, the ex-templar, is quite apathetic at sparing him.

It comes down to what character I'm playing, but I usually spare him. I haven't yet played anyone goody goody enough to execute him, but I am planning on such a playthrough for the sake of experience. Summoning demons was pretty stupid, since so far in the game, I'm yet to see it actually work well and end well. Both blood mages who summoned demons (Uldred and Avernus) seemed incapable of commanding even peon-level fiends.

Maybe ferelden mages are simply not competant enough to control them.

Alistair approves of killing him. Why do you find it odd that Wynne would disapprove of sparing him?

[Zjarcal]

errant_knight wrote...

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

What's funny is that if you spare him, you lose approval with Wynne and she gets pissy. Even Alistair, the ex-templar, is quite apathetic at sparing him.

It comes down to what character I'm playing, but I usually spare him. I haven't yet played anyone goody goody enough to execute him, but I am planning on such a playthrough for the sake of experience. Summoning demons was pretty stupid, since so far in the game, I'm yet to see it actually work well and end well. Both blood mages who summoned demons (Uldred and Avernus) seemed incapable of commanding even peon-level fiends.

Maybe ferelden mages are simply not competant enough to control them.

Alistair approves of killing him. Why do you find it odd that Wynne would disapprove of sparing him?

I think she meant it was funny that Wynne disapproves yet Alistair remains quiet. They both should've disapproved.

[errant_knight]

Zjarcal wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

What's funny is that if you spare him, you lose approval with Wynne and she gets pissy. Even Alistair, the ex-templar, is quite apathetic at sparing him.

It comes down to what character I'm playing, but I usually spare him. I haven't yet played anyone goody goody enough to execute him, but I am planning on such a playthrough for the sake of experience. Summoning demons was pretty stupid, since so far in the game, I'm yet to see it actually work well and end well. Both blood mages who summoned demons (Uldred and Avernus) seemed incapable of commanding even peon-level fiends.

Maybe ferelden mages are simply not competant enough to control them.

Alistair approves of killing him. Why do you find it odd that Wynne would disapprove of sparing him?

I think she meant it was funny that Wynne disapproves yet Alistair remains quiet. They both should've disapproved.

Ah! I think that's one of several instances where companions don't react when they should so that the player doesn't feel overly punished for their decisions. Alistair doesn't say anything until you tell Avernus that he's gone to far and can't be allowed to live (paraphrase), then is quite vocal about agreeing with you.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

[quote]Zjarcal wrote...
Alistair approves of killing him. Why do you find it odd that Wynne would disapprove of sparing him?[/quote]
I think she meant it was funny that Wynne disapproves yet Alistair remains quiet. They both should've disapproved.
[/quote]

Yep. Technically, Alistair, being a near-templar, one would think he'd be chomping at the bit to execute Avernus. But nope. Only Wynne disapproves. Not a peep from Alistair. And even if you do kill Avernus, Alistair doesn't get approval points, just "Yeah, rock on, let's waste this evil dude". sort of response.

Wynne was the only approval change. All of the other companions did not care, even Sten, who hates mages period.

[Reika]

Hm, I never got a negative reaction from Wynne for sparing Avernus.

[Zjarcal]

Reika wrote...

Hm, I never got a negative reaction from Wynne for sparing Avernus.

I think it depends on what you say to him. If you tell him to continue his research ethically then there's no loss of approval. But if you tell him to experiment to his heart's content and share any juicy details, then she'll disapprove.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 23 octobre 2010 - 02:23 .

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Zjarcal wrote...

I think it depends on what you say to him. If you tell him to continue his research ethically then there's no loss of approval. But if you tell him to experiment to his heart's content and share any juicy details, then she'll disapprove.

Yep, that's the one. One of my characters chose that response, and Wynne disapproved. No one else seemed to care. Not Alistair or Sten.

[TJPags]

I guess I never considered this much.

I honestly got the impession he was experimenting with Wardens before the battle, perhaps some volunteers, some given to him by Sophia, and that perhaps she stopped because she needed them for the battle.

The dead bodies in his lab could have been from that.  The cutscene we see, I always thought he retreated to his lab DURING the battle, meaning that anyone fighting would not have been in there with him, but would have died outside his lab - so the bodies were from before . . . .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Zjarcal wrote...

Reika wrote...

Hm, I never got a negative reaction from Wynne for sparing Avernus.

I think it depends on what you say to him. If you tell him to continue his research ethically then there's no loss of approval. But if you tell him to experiment to his heart's content and share any juicy details, then she'll disapprove.

I don't recall having the option to tell him to do it ethically. Do I have to tell him how monstrous it was first?

"In death, sacrifice". Avernus' experiments are invaluable to the Wardens. One of the mage's power of blood has increased damage against the darkspawn. 
So I would, very relunctantly, allow Avernus to experiment as much as he wants on tainted individuals. People like Ruck who are as good as dead anyhow. Though I am not sure people like Ruck would be as useful a test subject as Wardens.

So, I would allow him to experiment on Wardens who start becoming too old that they start losing their minds, aka the ones who have to go through the Calling. They are as good as dead and instead of going to the deep roads to die for absolutely nothing, they can be useful before they die. 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 23 octobre 2010 - 02:29 .

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

No, it was definitely after. He was too busy running for his life during the battle to be doing any experiments.

[Zjarcal]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

Reika wrote...

Hm, I never got a negative reaction from Wynne for sparing Avernus.

I think it depends on what you say to him. If you tell him to continue his research ethically then there's no loss of approval. But if you tell him to experiment to his heart's content and share any juicy details, then she'll disapprove.

I don't recall having the option to tell him to do it ethically. Do I have to tell him how monstrous it was first?

"In death, sacrifice". Avernus' experiments are invaluable to the Wardens. One of the mage's power of blood has increased damage against the darkspawn. 
So I would, very relunctantly, allow Avernus to experiment as much as he wants on tainted individuals. People like Ruck who are as good as dead anyhow. Though I am not sure people like Ruck would be as useful as Wardens.

So, I would allow him to experiment on Wardens who start becomign too old that they start losing their minds, aka the ones who have to go to the calling. They are as good as dead and instead of going to the deep roads to die for absolutely nothing, they can be useful before they die. 

I think you need to successfully persuade him that his actions were wrong in the earlier conversation to have that option.

I would also allow Avernus to experiment on Wardens. What I would do is invoke the right of conscription on any criminals sentenced to death. They might as well be useful before they die.

[errant_knight]

What makes you thing the wardens didn't retreat with him? Only to have him turn on them and use them as test subjects. Regarding Alistair, I think this has to do with balance of approval/disapproval in the game as a whole. I'm not sure how the math of that stuff is calculated, but the only way to explain some peculiarities throughout the game is the need to achieve some kind of balance. They may have felt that they had some numerical leeway with Wynne that they didn't have with Alistair. This happens with all the companions at various points, where their reactions are illogical.

Sidenote: So glad you guys don't run any prison systems or armies.

Modifié par errant_knight, 23 octobre 2010 - 02:33 .

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I don't recall having the option to tell him to do it ethically. Do I have to tell him how monstrous it was first?

Yes, I believe so. When option came up to spare or kill him when I was playing Lucrezia, the ethical bit never came up, because she did **** him out or call him an evil bastard when he told her about the experiments.

My guess is that you have to tell him he's a very naughty boy before you go off to kill Sophia (if you didn't kill her first).

[KnightofPhoenix]

Zjarcal wrote...
I would also allow Avernus to experiment on Wardens. What I would do is invoke the right of conscription on any criminals sentenced to death. They might as well be useful before they die.

What I would also consider is Warden tranquils.
While they experience physical pain, the emotional trauma is something they don't have to deal with.

[Zjarcal]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...
I would also allow Avernus to experiment on Wardens. What I would do is invoke the right of conscription on any criminals sentenced to death. They might as well be useful before they die.

What I would also consider is Warden tranquils.
While they experience physical pain, the emotional trauma is something they don't have to deal with.

An excellent idea.

[Reika]

Yeah, I generally chose the persuade check about him being a monster. Though...when writing my fanfic I did a quick run through that final conversation, and I did get the ethical option even though I didn't call him a monster.



Maybe it's based off something else.

[RavenousBear]

I normally let Avernus live and force him to atone with more research to help the Wardens, "ethically". I do not make deals with demons so the demon in Sophia's rotting corpse gets destroyed (I do not play with fire). That leaves me with Avernus to seal the Veil and after doing so, it kind of feels wrong in my opinion to kill him after helping you. Though I am debating on if he should be spared on my current playthrough with the last wave of demons destroyed.

He is a bastard for what he did with the surviving Wardens in the cages after the foolish plan to release demons during the siege. Seriously, how stupid can some of these npcs be in this game? I feel little sympathy for Sophia since she thought summoning demons was a smart idea. When you play with fire, you get burned.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Caak7i wrote...
When you play with fire, you get burned.

Well if she was going to burn anyhow, what's there to lose?
It was an act of desperation, everyone in the castle would have died anyhow.
It's not smart, but they did it when they were pushed back into a corner with no possibility of surviving.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 23 octobre 2010 - 03:07 .

[RavenousBear]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Caak7i wrote...
When you play with fire, you get burned.

Well if she was going to burn anyhow, what's there to lose?
It was an act of desperation, everyone in the castle would have died anyhow.
It's not smart, but they did it when they were pushed back into a corner with no possibility of surviving.

You open up the possibilty that the demons would eventually get out of the Keep and spread to other parts of Ferelden until the Chantry calls their Templars to destroy the infection. I would not risk it knowing the Wardens in the Keep would all perish and if the truth comes out that Wardens summoned demons for a rebellion, it would do further damage to their reputation in Ferelden and Thedas.

[TJPags]

Well, I think the plan was to banish or kill them once the fight was won . . . .

[Sarah1281]

Caak7i wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Caak7i wrote...
When you play with fire, you get burned.

Well if she was going to burn anyhow, what's there to lose?
It was an act of desperation, everyone in the castle would have died anyhow.
It's not smart, but they did it when they were pushed back into a corner with no possibility of surviving.

You open up the possibilty that the demons would eventually get out of the Keep and spread to other parts of Ferelden until the Chantry calls their Templars to destroy the infection. I would not risk it knowing the Wardens in the Keep would all perish and if the truth comes out that Wardens summoned demons for a rebellion, it would do further damage to their reputation in Ferelden and Thedas.

Well, I'm pretty sure they keep the fact that the Wardens were barely beaten by the entire Ferelden army a secret so they'd probably not mention the demons either.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Yea I know, that's why I said it's not smart. But when people are going to die anyways, their reason can be very clouded and they might try anything to survive.

And I don't think Warden reputation was that relevant at that point. Sophia decided to ruin it when she got involved in politics to try and overthrow a regime.

[RavenousBear]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Caak7i wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Caak7i wrote...
When you play with fire, you get burned.

Well if she was going to burn anyhow, what's there to lose?
It was an act of desperation, everyone in the castle would have died anyhow.
It's not smart, but they did it when they were pushed back into a corner with no possibility of surviving.

You open up the possibilty that the demons would eventually get out of the Keep and spread to other parts of Ferelden until the Chantry calls their Templars to destroy the infection. I would not risk it knowing the Wardens in the Keep would all perish and if the truth comes out that Wardens summoned demons for a rebellion, it would do further damage to their reputation in Ferelden and Thedas.

Well, I'm pretty sure they keep the fact that the Wardens were barely beaten by the entire Ferelden army a secret so they'd probably not mention the demons either.

Where was it mentioned that it took the entire army to defeat the Wardens at the Keep? I just completed this DLC yesterday and no where did I hear that the entire army besieged the Keep. That or my attention-span is pathetic.

Plus, if the demons did escape and the Templars traced their origin to the Keep itself, I do not think anyone can cover it up that someone in there summoned them. It would be an opportune time to smear the Warden's reputation even further.

[RavenousBear]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Yea I know, that's why I said it's not smart. But when people are going to die anyways, their reason can be very clouded and they might try anything to survive.
And I don't think Warden reputation was that relevant at that point. Sophia decided to ruin it when she got involved in politics to try and overthrow a regime.

I understand why she did it , but it is still something I would have not done if I was in her shoes. I now realize I did not state that in my first post and it sounded like I did not understand why chose to open pandora's box. That is my fault and I am sorry if I had you confused.

[Face of Evil]

I think he's an absolute bastard for what he did to the other Wardens … but ultimately, he's the lesser of two evils. I don't even want to think about what havoc Sophia might have unleashed on Ferelden if left to her own devices. And in theory, he might turn up something useful to actually benefit the order.

Modifié par Face of Evil, 23 octobre 2010 - 07:52 .