35 réponses à ce sujet

[ZeroDotZero]

I just finished my decidedly villainous playthrough of Origins & Awakening, where my character made decisions which would gain her infamy, and cause trouble to the land in years to come.

However, I didn't know what to do with the Architect decision. Both choices were both good and both evil. Saving the Architect is potentially giving the Darkspawn free will, and allowing the only friendly-seeming Darkspawn we have encountered (bar the messenger) to live and continue his good work. Killing him damns the Darkspawn to continuing their cycle, but prevents any future 'mishaps', like what happened to the Mother and even Urthemiel.

I killed him on my evil playthrough, because I decided that if he could redeem the Darkspawn, he was a good person, and my evil character didn't like that thought.

PS. The playthrough here was to create an import to DA2 where I made all the worst possible choices, not serious RP choices.

[HolyAvenger]

The concepts of good and evil get very murky around that decision (one of the favourite things about the Dragon Age universe). I think its hard to declare either choice as either frankly. Go with what the motivation of your character is...I think for infamy and trouble, it would surely be to leave the Architect alive as he'll stir up more and more darkspawn troubles? And his plan to infect all the races with the taint?

[Chrysalde]

I actually would agree with the choice you made. Killing the Architect continues the circle of Blights. (Off topic: I think I'm now going to form a band called Circle of Blights.) Eventually, it could be argued, a true Blight could doom the land, as long as there are no pesky good Grey Wardens mucking up the works.

[nenosronhir]

Given only what you get from Awakening, the Architect's character is decidedly less grey than if you've read The Calling, wherein he proposes/enacts a vastly more heinous plan (we only get the tip of it in Awakening, where you learn he was the one who tainted the Archdemon, but the ploy leading up to that was nefarious). In my opinion, killing him is the lesser of two evils, but it kind of depends on whether or not you really believe darkspawn are redeemable (I don't; even if their intentions were good, they still spread taint and disease).

Letting him live means the possibility of more unique darkspawn like The Mother popping up, and he is aware of the locations of the other "Old Gods," so that could mean another Blight sooner rather than later if he pursues them to continue his experiments.

Honestly, I think it's all a matter of opinion, heh.

Modifié par nenosronhir, 18 février 2011 - 03:24 .

[ZeroDotZero]

I suspect that there may be Disciples in DA2 if he was spared, maybe regardless, as it was stated that some escaped to the Deep Roads. I like the Architect and I hope he is back in some form, at least.

Off topic: Circle of Blights is actually a great band name

[lost lupus]

thats a matter of perspective personally i will never suffer a darkspawn to live im like loghain in that sense (single minded)

who says the darkspawn are telling the truth? what because IT can suddenly talk i should trust IT
them becoming more intelligent is a good thing?

i did what needed to be done from my POV string up the architect's minion get the info kill him
kill the architect and the mother

darkspawn threat reduced sure the remaining dark spawn will go back underground and will do what darkspawn do another blight MAY come but hey we fought those things before and won 4 times now i have faith we can do it again

you want to make friends with the rotting non eating beast's that's up to you
Maker help your women

Modifié par lost lupus, 18 février 2011 - 03:27 .

[Corker]

A Hurlock Emissary lifts a tiny genlock up to the shaft of sunlight that somehow penetrates to the Dead Trenches:

[eltonjohn]It's the Ciiiircle, the Circle of --- Blight![/eltonjohn]

[LobselVith8]

Letting the Architect live means that there will likely be more intelligent darkspawn who can pose a threat to humanity (humans, elves, dwarves, ect.) and women who would be kidnapped to create more Broodmothers. Given the many failures of the Architect, and how darksspawn thrive by eating people and violating women, I don't think it's a good idea to give them intelligence so they can be a danger to humanity, which is likely to happen by sparing the Architect.

[dgcatanisiri]

Science may be based on a series of trials and errors, but the Architect's errors are so disastrous for the world, if another of his experiments got loose, it might mean that no one would be able to stop it. The Archdemon, the Mother... The Architect's problem is that he doesn't consider potential consequences of what he does, he just sees his ultimate goals. In my opinion, leaving him alive to cause more problems, experiment some more, and possibly create something WORSE than an archdemon is the 'eviler' path.

[Axekix]

I think if you want to make an "evil" choice here, it would have to come down to your motives more so than the ultimate outcome of your decision. You can justify both options depending on your PoV.



Killing the Architect because you don't want to risk another "accident" would be understandable... killing him strictly out of revenge for capturing you earlier, or just because you hate all Darkspawn regardless could be more "evil" so to speak.



It's never going to be so black and white though... this is a Bioware game afterall

[Browneye_Vamp84]

i killed him because he was taking Grey Wardens and i dont like it when crazies do experiments on my people.

[ddv.rsa]

Corker wrote...

A Hurlock Emissary lifts a tiny genlock up to the shaft of sunlight that somehow penetrates to the Dead Trenches:
[eltonjohn]It's the Ciiiircle, the Circle of --- Blight![/eltonjohn]

Ha, priceless. Suddenly I'm back in the 90s, sitting on a classroom floor watching the Lion King. 

[Dark Specie]

Well, it all depends on how you view it.



Killing the architect means, as others have said, that the Blight risk continuing as before, Orzammar is still in danger of the darkspawn banging on it's doors, etc... In short, it may well have killed off any chance of "peace" between the Darkspawn and other races, ensuring that the matter can only be ended by one of the races destroying the other, eventually.



Letting him live means that there may still be mishaps of his own experiments, though. It may also cement the presence of intelligent Darkspawn in Thedas (althrough I would say that it may already be more or less cemented anyway - the epilouge says that some disciples remain alive after he's dead, and assuming that they know the secret of making intelligent darkspawn...).

[electricfish]

The decision that would cause the most trouble for the land is letting The Architect live, I would think. There are only so many Old Gods left and once those guys are dead you'll have no more Blights. Letting the Architect live means having Taint-ridden darkspawn who can talk run around Thedas and destroy everything regardless of their intentions. "Death" seems to be bigger trouble than "3 more Blights and we're done forever."

Your character's infamy will definitely include letting crazed darkspawn loose and potentially allowing another Mother to rise up at a later date. :l

[Thor Rand Al]

He dies all the time, only once did I let him live n that was metagamin n then I didn't like the decision.

But it all depends on the player n how their playin the game n what they see as evil n lesser evil. For me lettin him live is the more evil. I'd rather deal with another blight then have 1000's more creatures like the Mother.

[Shinobu]

Corker wrote...

A Hurlock Emissary lifts a tiny genlock up to the shaft of sunlight that somehow penetrates to the Dead Trenches:
[eltonjohn]It's the Ciiiircle, the Circle of --- Blight![/eltonjohn]

I love you.

My good warden spared the Architect, although I'm not sure that was such a great idea given the whole broodmother thing. (This was also before I read The Calling. His motto should be: "The Architect -- the Jowan of Darkspawn.") I do believe that "sentient darkspawn" are a reality now whether or not the Architect is killed and that it's better to have one set that believes that surfacers deal in good faith. Maybe I'm crazy.

Modifié par Shinobu, 20 février 2011 - 05:23 .

[Frolk]

From a moral perspective, I agree it's hard to judge. Killing the Architect would mean that two more Blights are guaranteed to occur somewhere along the line, followed by whatever happens once darkspawn run out of Old Gods to corrupt (somehow I doubt the darkspawn would just shrivel up and die at that point). Allowing the Architect to live means dealing with the darkspawn as if they were any other political entity: an all-out war is a possibility, but so is peace.

I'm all for consequentialist ethics - I believe in taking the long view, and so does my Mary Sue character. But given the fact that that we really have no good idea of what the consequences of letting the Architect live will be, I just defaulted to a more basic ethical principle: he wasn't threatening anyone at the moment, so I let him be.

Modifié par Frolk, 20 février 2011 - 07:00 .

[BroBear Berbil]

There are plenty of reasons in Awakening alone to kill him.



1. He kidnapped and experimented on Wardens.

2. He had corpses strewn around the Silverite mines.

3. He was breeding and training dragons to use.

4. He seemingly orchestrates your escape just to set his pets on you. I still don't understand what happened in the Silverite Mines.

5. He wants to awaken all Darkspawn. That produced The Mother - does the messenger (who has his own consequences) really negate that kind of danger?



And that's all before you're hit with the news that he botched his plans and unleashed Urthemiel.



The Calling really solidified my belief that killing him is the right thing to do. He doesn't have the same concept of morality as a person does.

[atheelogos]

Kill that thing when you get the chance. Letting him go is whats evil.

[Thor Rand Al]

OnionXI wrote...

There are plenty of reasons in Awakening alone to kill him.

1. He kidnapped and experimented on Wardens.
2. He had corpses strewn around the Silverite mines.
 

This isn't directed at OnionXI, this is just general lol
That brings up an interestin general question I had that popped in my head while I was just playin this exact area lol.  Are the corpses in that one room after you clear that puzzle just regular people or are those all the Grey Wardens that he's accumulated so to speak?  I didn't count how many bodies where in that room itself but I thought the seneshel said there where about a dozen Wardens before the attack.  I'd say there was close to that many in that room, the Architect was a busy DS. 

Which also brings up another something else.  Doesn't the Architect say that all of the Wardens were dead when they were brought to him, but what about that guy with the broken legs who asks you to bring his wedding ring to his wife.  He's a Warden n still alive.  Story doesn't seem to check out there for the Architect.

[jsharkey]

No truly important decisions are pure black and white thats why I love this decision. Personally my warden was a good help everybody guy but I had the child with Morrigan and spared the Architect because I can see potential with them.
P.S. Next time though Bioware needs to make a persuasion check like with Avernus where you can get the person with 'greyish' motives to realize the errors in their processes.

[Sifr]

But the Architect could be seen as a Darkspawn version of the very first Grey Wardens.

To clarify, we know that the Wardens of old experimented with Blood Magic and the Darkspawn Taint in order to create humans with the strength, stamina and willpower, rendered immune to the Taint that usually claims those who come into contact with it, able to sense them at will and capable of slaying the Archdemon. And its very vague whether or not they experimented on themselves and not test subjects.

The Architect could be seen as doing something similar. He's trying to create Darkspawn Warden with all the strength that the Taint grants intact, but with the sentience and reasoning of humans, essentially, the process the Wardens did in reverse. He knows this, this is why he's experimenting on Wardens. He knows that in them lies the key to what keeps the Wardens human and not turn into Ghouls.

Its a might iffy, and he did lead to the Blight inadvertantly, but at the same, he did go looking for the Old God, but so do all the Darkspawn. He may have thought that at least with his steadying hand its the lesser of two evils if he could stop it becoming an Archdemon. I let him live, as his goals seem noble and ultimately, sentient darkspawn being held at bay presently, gives more hope that when the 2 Old Gods remaining start a blight, they may no longer have an army. Or even if they do, sentient thinking darkspawn, like humans, can make mistakes. *Nudges in Cailan and Loghain's direction*

Modifié par Sifr1449, 17 juin 2011 - 12:16 .

[BlueMagitek]

It's probably best to kill him off; Darkspawn spread taint and disease wherever they go, regardless of their intention and there can only be two (or three, depending on Morrigan) more blights because there were only 7 Old Gods.

The only thing to worry about is what will happen when all the Old Gods are taken care of; will the Darkspawn just shut down or will they all go berserk without the constant call from the Old Gods luring them away from the surface?

[maxernst]

Sifr1449 wrote...

 I let him live, as his goals seem noble and ultimately, sentient darkspawn being held at bay presently, gives more hope that when the 2 Old Gods remaining start a blight, they may no longer have an army. Or even if they do, sentient thinking darkspawn, like humans, can make mistakes. *Nudges in Cailan and Loghain's direction*

If someone has done horrible things, I tend to assume that any claims of noble intentions are lies, unless I have really strong evidence to the contrary.  I judge people by what they do rather than by what they say.

[Marvin_Arnold]

Hmmm.

According to what he tells you, the Wardens he "drained" were brought to him already dead.

The epilogue says the Architect retreated to the Deep Roads WITH his disciples for good, only the Messenger is left, (protecting the weak and spreading the disease...) if you spare him.

What bothers me is that he says he needs Warden blood to free all Darkspawn. Yet apparently he changes his mind and retreats with his disciples into the DR.

Even if you only need a few drops of Warden blood to free a darkspawn, I doubt there would have been enough Wardens in Ferelden to free all Darkspawn. (a few dozen Wardens for a few hundred thousand(?) Darkspawn?)

If someone has done horrible things, I tend to assume that any claims of noble intentions are lies, unless I have really strong evidence to the contrary. I judge people by what they do rather than by what they say.

Ah, but this is the old problem of DA's grey morality... nobody is good or evil, only shades of grey... that's why they are called "Grey" Wardens...

Modifié par Marvin_Arnold, 22 juin 2011 - 05:39 .