35 réponses à ce sujet

[Zaxares]

I wouldn't say the Architect is evil. Rather, he's completely amoral; he seems to lack any sense of morality and what is 'good' and 'evil'. His ultimate goal of wanting to free the darkspawn from their endless cycle of violence and destruction is a 'good' one, but lacking any sense of morality, he sees no problem with performing hideous and abhorrent deeds to achieve his goal. I think that in between the events of "The Calling" and "Awakening", the Architect discovered the process to awaken darkspawn, and so he abandoned his initial plan of transforming the entire world into darkspawn, because this new method was much better. Not to mention easier due to less resistance.

I usually let the Architect live, despite what he's done, for the same reason that I let Avernus live. Their actions were deplorable, but they may ultimately lead to a better future for all. For the Architect, if he succeeds, he can stop the Blights altogether. For Avernus, his research may lead to a more refined version of the Joining, where no prospective Wardens need die and the Calling can be held off indefinitely. Perhaps even cured.

[Siven80]

In all my plathroughs i have always killed him.

But im running through DAO and awakenings again for a new import and this one im letting him live. The only reason why is potential future meetings. Fiona may come looking for him as she may be still alive and researching about him, he may cause more problems for me to clean up = more content. Same sort of reasoning i usually let Loghain live, possible future meetings, different views and content.

Metagaming at its finest

[yaw]

On my good play through character, I spared him because... he was... attractive?

Is that, weird to say? 

I thought he was kinda hot.

Modifié par yaw, 26 juin 2011 - 09:55 .

[Vahir]

If the Grey Wardens are ready and forwarned, a blight could be a good thing. Better to start one when the Wardens are strong than in the uncertain future. Have the fight be on your terms, with heavy recruiting and garnering of foreign support. Remember, there is only two more Old Gods.

[Rvlion]

I was actually very much in doubt for this.
In the end I chose to let him live until the Mother told me it was the Architect that caused the last blight in the first place... Hoping he could create a "good" Archdemon, that was actually something I did not want to know and re-loaded my savegame and killed him again.

What is to say that if I let him go another blight will not happen very shortly after the last one, with the Darkspawn being smart they can search more structured and as such can find the old gods a whole of a lot faster.

[Jedimaster88]

Its very hard to tell. I always end up sparing him although I do keep thinking if it is the right thing to do. Its like some reviewers have said about the choises in DA. There is a bad choice and a worse choice so take your pick. Kill him and a new blight is guaranteed. Spare him and there may be no more blights or they can be worse with the intelligent darkspawn. Still the ability to speak and so on can give a chance to reason with them and make peace. I dont know...this can be just wishful thinking from me, but you never know. I quess we just have to wait and see what comes.

[Clertar]

yaw wrote...

On my good play through character, I spared him because... he was... attractive?

Is that, weird to say? 

I thought he was kinda hot.

Hmmm... 

[Kaldelar]

I kill him every single time. Before I read the Calling, I killed him for his desire to create more like him and obviously for awakening Urthemiel (who, by the way, has an awesome name for a dragon). After reading the book, I couldn't spam Flurry fast enough.
The reasons are, to me, fairly obvious: this creature, while certainly intelligent, is a fool. A fool with magic at his disposal and the ability (like all his kin) to awaken the Old Gods and the brainpower to start experimenting on Wardens for his own purposes. What he did in the novel, while remaining this aloof, amoral character, just cements how dangerous he really is. He's clever, he's powerful, he's got the ability to do what he wants - but he's also ever so empty-headed and has zero empathy. He doesn't care about the road, only the goal, and that is dangerous.

Plus, you know, he annoys me. Annoying darkspawn die.

[Sir Pounce-a-lot]

That depends on your motives and rationale. I'll break it down as I see it:

Deciding to side with the Architect:
Good: He represents hope that the Darkspawn will one day be intelligent and capable of civilized behavior. 
Neutral: It's practical and tactically smart to have a Darkspawn ally.
Evil: I admire his deadlieness and power. (weak)

Deciding to attack the Architect:
Good:  He has killed people and must face justice.
Neutral: Grey Wardens kill Darkspawn. That mission is non-negotiable.  I must follow proper protocol.
Evil:  I don't care about long-term solutions.  I want revenge.  Darkspawn are inferiors and must die. 

An evil pc would probably want to kill him purely for revenge or disgust at the idea that Darkspawn could one day be people. Only a good or neutral pc would consider sparing him. Considering the fact that Darkspawn under the Architect are in the process of becoming sentient, they may not have understood the wrongness of some of the things that they did earlier. The Architect comes across as someone that is trying to be good but still has much to learn. 

[TEWR]

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

Though this is an ancient quote of yours Lob, I disagree with you on this. First, the Darkspawn don't need to eat people. Gaider has gone on record to say that the Taint sustains them, and that they eat for purely non-dietary reasons. Supporting this is that the Darkspawn seem to be immortal -- though not unkillable obviously -- given that we fight an Ancient Darkspawn and the Architect says he was born the way he is. Not only that, but Legacy also gave us more insight into how long the Darkspawn can live.

Second, I would rather give the Darkspawn a chance to prove they can live alongside humanity -- not actually alongside them, but at least peacefully coexist even if they became isolationists -- instead of have them mindlessly seek out the Old Gods where Blights can still occur. We don't even know if the Blights would end should the remaining two Old Gods be defeated. For all we know they might mindlessly seek out the High Dragons.

The Architect's research gives the Darkspawn a liberated soul. I'd say it's up to them to determine how they use it, not the player. The Darkspawn in their animalistic nature will kill anything without remorse. But the Awakened Darkspawn, they're different. They have the capacity to choose whether or not they commit a crime.

I mean the Messenger is a good Darkspawn. He aids those in need of it, though he unfortunately does give off isolated cases of the Taint. But who knows? Maybe the Architect can figure out a way for the Darkspawn to not radiate the Taint anymore. Not necessarily a way for the Darkspawn to not carry the Taint, but just a way for them to not radiate it.

Not only that, but the Architect's journal says that the Disciples enjoy spending time with Seranni. They feel a sort of kinship to her, no doubt due to them finding similarities in her tale to their own.

Also, come on. They're making some badass armor now. We need to see more of this:

 

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 15 avril 2012 - 07:12 .

[RonixisJK]

I thought that sparing the Architect was the right thing to do as well (although I didn't find the fact that Oghren agrees with me and Justice doesn't to be a boost of confidence). I asked myself, "What would Captain Picard do?" After all, that's where most of my experience in thinking about newly-emerging forms of life or sentience comes from. It seems to me that wiping out new life simply because of how it was made, which the new sentient beings had no control over, is the wrong thing to do. Admittedly, this universe is much grayer than Picard's, and I've got a decently strong suspicion that it could come back to haunt someone (probably a player character) later, but I still think they should have a chance.