108 réponses à ce sujet

[TheAwesomologist]

Rockpopple wrote...

Hm... maybe...

Except why would Templars be outside the Gallows, attacking the people? The whole argument is over the Right of Annulment. Meredith wants to Annul the Circle, Orsino wants himself and his people to all not die.

Yes, staying in Hightown protecting the people from rogue Mages as they try to escape Annulment makes sense, but it wouldn't stop the overall battle/slaughter going on in the Gallows. So... what, would Hawke be twiddling his thumbs watching the Gallows burn going, "Well at least the normal people of Kirkwall are safe"

I'm not sure it would work, but I'm genuinely curious as to ideas.

I mentioned this in another thread, but its actually very easy to do. In the scene where Anders blows up the Chantry and Meredith asks you to choose sides you choose the middle option: "Both of you go stuff yourselves". Then you can either Murder Knife Anders or not (with the same effect on Sebastian).
Your companions then react. Perhaps Fenris will still leave you to fight the mages while Merrill and Anders may still go fight with the mages. Aveline then makes her suggestion of keeping the fighting from the Gallows from spilling into the city. Hawke and Co hen go through the same exact fights you have to go through anyways in Lowtown and the Docks, maybe add a section in High Town to rally the guard and those nobles who support you (who are mysteriously absent end game) or see the destruction of the Chantry first hand but it's not necessary.

Then you make you way with Guards and companions in tow to the Gallows (perhaps to rescue Bethany/Carver, or because you did not side with either of them witness their death scene). There you see a cornered Orsino turn into a Harvester. Kill him. Meredith then wants to arrest you, Cullen says No, then you fight super-sayan Meredith and her Harryhausen statues. You win and become Viscount before something makes you disappear in a few years anyways.

Seriously it's maybe a few extra lines of dialog and the same exact fights we have to go through anyways. The only reason I imagine they didn't put in a 3rd option is because it would be the sane choice that everyone would take.

[theauthority]

Rockpopple wrote...

But I'm not sure what her reasoning is to arrest Hawke during the Templar ending was...

Plot tyranny, I'm afraid. You had to fight granny-ninja and her robots (up until that point, Meredith was a good character, despite my being pro- or anti-templars).
Yes, the idol turned her paranoid and insane, but ultimately it's a McGuffin to justify the second boss-fight.

[AlexXIV]

Rockpopple wrote...

Well again, in that scenario Hawke did choose a de-facto side.

I could see that mostly working, tho... except if the Harvester went on a rampage in the Gallows, there'd be no reason for Hawke to go into the Gallows and fight it. Because he's not choosing a side, and the Harvester is just a part of their war. So in order for Hawke to get involved, the Harvester would have to appear in the city.

And if Hawke kills a monster in the city, I don't really see a reason for Meredith, even as crazy paranoid as she was, to attempt to arrest Hawke. After-all, it wasn't in the Gallows. But I'm not sure what her reasoning is to arrest Hawke during the Templar ending was...

Yes, the point is that Hawke chooses to kill the Harvester and not to side with the templars or mages. A harvester is a demon and there is really only one thing the 'Champion of Kirkwall' can do if a giant blob demon attacks his/her city and home. The reason to arrest Hawke is probably his/her friendship with Anders, who blew up the Chantry. Meredith just doesn't do it earlier because she hopes to win Hawke for her Annullment against the mages.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 15 avril 2011 - 04:25 .

[Kimberly Shaw]

@ Rockpopple
"Hey Hawke, there are a bunch of citizens trying to get away from the Gallows and in grave danger, come help them escape!"
Better than most of the prompts/motives in DA2 I daresay.


@Shama, We will have to agree to disagree. Many people believe that Orsino's transformation to the Harvester came out of no where and was poorly written and explained and a serious "WTF" moment. I've seen this on facebook with people discussing it as friends, I've seen this in these threads in these forums, and I've seen it in reviews. It could have been as you describe, but that was not clearly explained to us the player and I can give as many reasons as you gave why Orsino should have believed that Hawke could have prevented Meredith from killing him and let him escape as many other mages DO.

The game (poorly)  makes this very murky in terms of numbers of Templars you would need to fight by throwing ridiculous numbers (an army's worth) of cannon fodder at us every time we walk the docks at night, so we don't really know if we could take on all the Templars or not. We do know we have the city guard to back us up if you have Aveline and that the Champion is incredibly powerful to counter Meredith. If the game showed us that Meredith had the MacGuffen (I am being incredibly unflattering to the game's design in referencing that "plot device" in case it wasn't obviou) then there would have been more reason for Orsino to believe it. Meredith WITH MacGuffen could be seen as a reason to Harvester himself because she becomes the flying ninja lightsaber Japanime able to animate statues. But we don't know that. We only know Meredith is a Templar. And Hawke has killed dozens and dozens of Templars without facing real danger.

Modifié par Kimberly Shaw, 15 avril 2011 - 04:28 .

[Shamajotsi]

Rockpopple wrote...

Well again, in that scenario Hawke did choose a de-facto side.

I could see that mostly working, tho... except if the Harvester went on a rampage in the Gallows, there'd be no reason for Hawke to go into the Gallows and fight it. Because he's not choosing a side, and the Harvester is just a part of their war. So in order for Hawke to get involved, the Harvester would have to appear in the city.

And if Hawke kills a monster in the city, I don't really see a reason for Meredith, even as crazy paranoid as she was, to attempt to arrest Hawke. After-all, it wasn't in the Gallows. But I'm not sure what her reasoning is to arrest Hawke during the Templar ending was...

I think that the "Neutral" fight with Orsino could still happen in the Gallows:

-Templars besiege the Circle.
-Many mages die.
-Orsino goes crazy and turns into a Harvester.
-Many templars die.
-Everybody is afraid that he is going to unleash hell... erm, Void, that is, in Kirkwall.
-Hawke goes in the Gallows to save the day.
-He kills Orsino.
-The story goes almost like the "side with the templars" ending.

[Rockpopple]

nm

Modifié par Rockpopple, 15 avril 2011 - 04:32 .

[Rockpopple]

Shamajotsi wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

Well again, in that scenario Hawke did choose a de-facto side.

I could see that mostly working, tho... except if the Harvester went on a rampage in the Gallows, there'd be no reason for Hawke to go into the Gallows and fight it. Because he's not choosing a side, and the Harvester is just a part of their war. So in order for Hawke to get involved, the Harvester would have to appear in the city.

And if Hawke kills a monster in the city, I don't really see a reason for Meredith, even as crazy paranoid as she was, to attempt to arrest Hawke. After-all, it wasn't in the Gallows. But I'm not sure what her reasoning is to arrest Hawke during the Templar ending was...

I think that the "Neutral" fight with Orsino could still happen in the Gallows:

-Templars besiege the Circle.
-Many mages die.
-Orsino goes crazy and turns into a Harvester.
-Many templars die.
-Everybody is afraid that he is going to unleash hell... erm, Void, that is, in Kirkwall.
-Hawke goes in the Gallows to save the day.
-He kills Orsino.
-The story goes almost like the "side with the templars" ending.

Yeah this. I can see this working.... kind of. He'd still have to know the Harvester was wreaking havoc in the Gallows. The Gallows is clear across a lake. I guess if it was really loud...

If people basically begged for The Champion to go to the Gallows and kill the big bad monster, then I can see the rest of it playing out logically. This would have been a good alternative. Thanks for that.

Shamajotsi wins.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 15 avril 2011 - 04:37 .

[AlexXIV]

Shamajotsi wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

Well again, in that scenario Hawke did choose a de-facto side.

I could see that mostly working, tho... except if the Harvester went on a rampage in the Gallows, there'd be no reason for Hawke to go into the Gallows and fight it. Because he's not choosing a side, and the Harvester is just a part of their war. So in order for Hawke to get involved, the Harvester would have to appear in the city.

And if Hawke kills a monster in the city, I don't really see a reason for Meredith, even as crazy paranoid as she was, to attempt to arrest Hawke. After-all, it wasn't in the Gallows. But I'm not sure what her reasoning is to arrest Hawke during the Templar ending was...

I think that the "Neutral" fight with Orsino could still happen in the Gallows:

-Templars besiege the Circle.
-Many mages die.
-Orsino goes crazy and turns into a Harvester.
-Many templars die.
-Everybody is afraid that he is going to unleash hell... erm, Void, that is, in Kirkwall.
-Hawke goes in the Gallows to save the day.
-He kills Orsino.
-The story goes almost like the "side with the templars" ending.

They could actually use it for the next game. Obviously the flag for the next installment is either 'Hawke sided with the templars' or 'Hawke sided with the mages'. Since Hawke kills the Harvester it probably grants him/her sympathy from the templars, and after killing Meredith they could still make him/her Viscount like in the templar ending. While Hawke didn't really chose the templar side it would still have somewhat of the same effect on the templars. They would admire him/her for restoring order. And Meredith is most likely posthumly disgraced anyway after what she did so I doubt the templars will blame Hawke for not helping them with the Annullment in the first place.

[Kilshrek]

AlexXIV wrote...

Kilshrek wrote...

I don't know what the true ending is, I'm still trying to find it myself. I just thought I'd get a funnier reaction than "what is the true ending?"

Of course it could all begin with Varric saying "No ****, there I was....."

Obviously even Cassandra didn't get Varric to tell the true ending. Shame.

I dunno, was there an ending? All I know is what Cassandra knows, the "Champion" is missing, nobody knows where he/she is. That's an ending for some, but not for me. Heck, it doesn't even seem like a riding into the sunset thing for me. I just blew my time on 7 years of someone elses life to find out what? They finally decided to let the rest of the idiot world sort themselves out? (In DA 2 context)

[Shamajotsi]

TheAwesomologist wrote...

Seriously it's maybe a few extra lines of dialog and the same exact fights we have to go through anyways. The only reason I imagine they didn't put in a 3rd option is because it would be the sane choice that everyone would take.

That's actually a sound reason not to have a third option - the same way Bioware chose not to leave the option for the player to save Leandra. Again, though, I suspect that this could have been amended by making the "Neutral" end not the "best of both world" one. It could have been that Hawke's rule as a champion was a bit like Lord Harrowmont rule in Orzammar - the fact that you didn't show support to neither templars nor mages made Val Royeaux contemplate an Exalted March and was the cause for the attempts for many Anders-like acts of terrorrism by the apostates. Thus, while you wanted not to take any sides and help Kirkwall, instead you caused much more damage to the city by making it an enemy to each side in the conflict.

Edit: In this case though, Hawke couldn't get the support from the templars for becoming a Viscount, so if acquiring the title was part of the "neutral" ending, it should be done through the support of the nobles and the people of Kirkwall. Who knows, this could have been the ending where the Senesschal actually begins to approve of Hawke .

Modifié par Shamajotsi, 15 avril 2011 - 04:42 .

[Kimberly Shaw]

There wasn't an ending in Origins where the Warden could just say, "Screw you guys, I'm going home" and not have a battle with the Archdemon somehow.

So tired of anyone defending DA2 by bringing up something about DAO they didn't like and saying "well if DAO could do it, why can't DA2" as if somehow this excuses anything. No, DAO wasn't perfect. We loved it. We did not think it was the 2nd coming however.

To your point, your motives for fighting the Arch Demon are much much much more real to the player character (you've taken an Oath to become a Grey Warden, the Blight has destroyed your homeland, you are one of the few individuals in Ferelden that has the ability to stop the Arch Demon, your best friend or love interest have strong ties to the kingdom and want it saved, etc.) than your motives for staying in Kirkwall, never mind your motives for being forced to side with Mages or Templars (in a lot of cases of playthroughs). If you disagree with this, then you lack the intelligence for me to debate with you further on this point, sadly.

You're coming up with in my opinion implausible reasons why something couldn't be explained. As I said it doesnt' take anything more than someone saying "Come quick Hawke, we need your help rescueing some citizens who are at trying to flee the Gallows, it's gotten ugly!"

This is much less implausible than Hawke being forced to side with Mages or Templars when he could give a crap (say Carver and Bethany are dead, you never spoke to Anders beyond the initial quest and he is dead....what motive do you have to pick a side or even stay in Kirkwall?)

[Rockpopple]

Shamajotsi wrote...

TheAwesomologist wrote...

Seriously it's maybe a few extra lines of dialog and the same exact fights we have to go through anyways. The only reason I imagine they didn't put in a 3rd option is because it would be the sane choice that everyone would take.

That's actually a sound reason not to have a third option - the same way Bioware chose not to leave the option for the player to save Leandra. Again, though, I suspect that this could have been amended by making the "Neutral" end not the "best of both world" one. It could have been that Hawke's rule as a champion was a bit like Lord Harrowmont rule in Orzammar - the fact that you didn't show support to neither templars nor mages made Val Royeaux contemplate an Exalted March and was the cause for the attempts for many Anders-like acts of terrorrism by the apostates. Thus, while you wanted not to take any sides and help Kirkwall, instead you caused much more damage to the city by making it an enemy to each side in the conflict.

Now these are excellent points.

I'm sure if there was a 3rd option, the vast majority of us would have chosen it repeatedly. I can sorta see BioWare leaving it out on purpose.

[AlexXIV]

Rockpopple wrote...

Shamajotsi wrote...

TheAwesomologist wrote...

Seriously it's maybe a few extra lines of dialog and the same exact fights we have to go through anyways. The only reason I imagine they didn't put in a 3rd option is because it would be the sane choice that everyone would take.

That's actually a sound reason not to have a third option - the same way Bioware chose not to leave the option for the player to save Leandra. Again, though, I suspect that this could have been amended by making the "Neutral" end not the "best of both world" one. It could have been that Hawke's rule as a champion was a bit like Lord Harrowmont rule in Orzammar - the fact that you didn't show support to neither templars nor mages made Val Royeaux contemplate an Exalted March and was the cause for the attempts for many Anders-like acts of terrorrism by the apostates. Thus, while you wanted not to take any sides and help Kirkwall, instead you caused much more damage to the city by making it an enemy to each side in the conflict.

Now these are excellent points.

I'm sure if there was a 3rd option, the vast majority of us would have chosen it repeatedly. I can sorta see BioWare leaving it out on purpose.

I don't know. Many people are strict mage or templar supporter. And this third option would be an 'involuntary templar ending', so mage supporter still would go with mages. It would just make it for people like me easier to not support the mages. I mean there is this whole 'genocide' topic that an annullment is, which forced me on the mages side. Even if I am not a full blooded mage supporter or chantry/templar hater.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 15 avril 2011 - 04:47 .

[Joy Divison]

Urazz wrote...

Actually scenario 2 is that the Champion helps routes some templar attacks but things still look bleak and that the templars could still wipe out the mages of Kirkwall.  Orsino's reasoning for transforming into a Harvester regardless of the scenarios is to buy time for other mages to escape the Gallows and spread word to the other Circles of what happened in Kirkwall.

Personally, they could've easily set it up to fight both bosses when you choose the mage side of the conflict.

That would make sense to me if I saw more than the 5 Templar critters that prompted him to do this.

[Kimberly Shaw]

I don't think that's the case. People would side with the mages in a lot of cases from what I read even when they don't play mages; and if they softened Meredith a bit and made her more likeable, you'd have people who want the Templar side nearly as often. Plus, people love to replay games with more than one branch ending. Give us 3 instead of 2, even if they go to the same place.

Oh well. What's done is done. Just pray someone is listening who makes decisions or has input at Bioware when it comes to expansions, DLC and sequels.

[Avissel]

The whole problem with a "neutral" choice is that they were setting it up for Hawke to matter on a global scale.

"The guy who walked away and did nothing." Isn't a very important figure.

[theauthority]

Rockpopple wrote...

I think people here are close to a resolution, but there are just some parts that don't mesh. Writing is tougher than a lot of people think. My sister's a writer, so I know. I'm not - mostly because of figuring out stuff like this. I don't envy Gaider's job.

I don't envy Gaider as well, when you write comics or videogames it seems like you're more exposed to gunfire than any other writer, fan-proof vests ain't been patented as far as I know.

Yet, to leave so many doubt unanswered or lingering, with little or no explanation, is bad.
It's like, watching a horror movie, you see an idiot rushing into a room, ending up cornered and easy prey to Jason Voorhees or else. I facepalm all the times because it makes no sense.
In my opinion, DA2 played a little too much on murky, ambiguous situations/characters; I ain't amazed at the many threads about the story.
Characters should be put into events that really can't admit any other solutions than those you're proposing (Templars or Mages). What happens in Act III doesn't feel like it's the only way to go.
It's still a game I enjoy but sometimes its voids are tricky to fill without cringing myself.

[AlexXIV]

Avissel wrote...

The whole problem with a "neutral" choice is that they were setting it up for Hawke to matter on a global scale.

"The guy who walked away and did nothing." Isn't a very important figure.

Well that's not what the neutral side is about. As explained the 'neutral side' still puts Hawke in a situation where he/she has to kill the Harvester. And then later Meredith. Just without the killing of innocents.

[AlexXIV]

theauthority wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

I think people here are close to a resolution, but there are just some parts that don't mesh. Writing is tougher than a lot of people think. My sister's a writer, so I know. I'm not - mostly because of figuring out stuff like this. I don't envy Gaider's job.

I don't envy Gaider as well, when you write comics or videogames it seems like you're more exposed to gunfire than any other writer, fan-proof vests ain't been patented as far as I know.

Yet, to leave so many doubt unanswered or lingering, with little or no explanation, is bad.
It's like, watching a horror movie, you see an idiot rushing into a room, ending up cornered and easy prey to Jason Voorhees or else. I facepalm all the times because it makes no sense.
In my opinion, DA2 played a little too much on murky, ambiguous situations/characters; I ain't amazed at the many threads about the story.
Characters should be put into events that really can't admit any other solutions than those you're proposing (Templars or Mages). What happens in Act III doesn't feel like it's the only way to go.
It's still a game I enjoy but sometimes its voids are tricky to fill without cringing myself.

Writing is not just about plot ideas. I think everyone can have a good idea without being anything close to a writer. I find it much more difficult to write believable dialogues with gestures, etc. I mean the whole set up of a scene to make it 'work'.

[Kimberly Shaw]

Avissel wrote...

The whole problem with a "neutral" choice is that they were setting it up for Hawke to matter on a global scale.

"The guy who walked away and did nothing." Isn't a very important figure.

/facepalm

In the scenario we have described, a neutral choice still has you fight the same end battles.

You were Champion and Viscount of the city where the Mage/Templar war started. You killed the First Enchanter AND the Knight Commander of the Templars.

What are you even talking about? Do you think before you type things?  Good lord sometimes I wonder about the average intelligence of the posters here. Please do defend yourself because I'm baffled why you would even type what you did.

[AlexXIV]

theauthority wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

I think people here are close to a resolution, but there are just some parts that don't mesh. Writing is tougher than a lot of people think. My sister's a writer, so I know. I'm not - mostly because of figuring out stuff like this. I don't envy Gaider's job.

I don't envy Gaider as well, when you write comics or videogames it seems like you're more exposed to gunfire than any other writer, fan-proof vests ain't been patented as far as I know.

Yet, to leave so many doubt unanswered or lingering, with little or no explanation, is bad.
It's like, watching a horror movie, you see an idiot rushing into a room, ending up cornered and easy prey to Jason Voorhees or else. I facepalm all the times because it makes no sense.
In my opinion, DA2 played a little too much on murky, ambiguous situations/characters; I ain't amazed at the many threads about the story.
Characters should be put into events that really can't admit any other solutions than those you're proposing (Templars or Mages). What happens in Act III doesn't feel like it's the only way to go.
It's still a game I enjoy but sometimes its voids are tricky to fill without cringing myself.

Well I said it a while ago already. Or wrote it in a post rather. My problem is not the duality of an ending. As in that a player is confronted with a situation where he/she can only go right or left without middle way. The problem is that there is a middle way and the game does not sufficiently explain why it is blocked. Hawke can say 'F... you men, this is not my problem.' And why not? That's what disturbs me. So I say let us go the middle way and THEN force Hawke into a situation where he/she has no choice but fighting the Harvester and Meredith. That would at least feel like a consequence for the first time in the game. You turn your back to the conflict and it bites you in the butt.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 15 avril 2011 - 05:01 .

[theauthority]

AlexXIV wrote...

theauthority wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

I think people here are close to a resolution, but there are just some parts that don't mesh. Writing is tougher than a lot of people think. My sister's a writer, so I know. I'm not - mostly because of figuring out stuff like this. I don't envy Gaider's job.

I don't envy Gaider as well, when you write comics or videogames it seems like you're more exposed to gunfire than any other writer, fan-proof vests ain't been patented as far as I know.

Yet, to leave so many doubt unanswered or lingering, with little or no explanation, is bad.
It's like, watching a horror movie, you see an idiot rushing into a room, ending up cornered and easy prey to Jason Voorhees or else. I facepalm all the times because it makes no sense.
In my opinion, DA2 played a little too much on murky, ambiguous situations/characters; I ain't amazed at the many threads about the story.
Characters should be put into events that really can't admit any other solutions than those you're proposing (Templars or Mages). What happens in Act III doesn't feel like it's the only way to go.
It's still a game I enjoy but sometimes its voids are tricky to fill without cringing myself.

Writing is not just about plot ideas. I think everyone can have a good idea without being anything close to a writer. I find it much more difficult to write believable dialogues with gestures, etc. I mean the whole set up of a scene to make it 'work'.

I know what you mean but the epilogue is not really about characters - if it were, Orsino wouldn't resort to Blood Magic and Meredith wouldn't use a lyrium-made cursed sword. I don't see these twists as believable, they leave a bitter taste in my mouth because they feel... well, necessary to leap the story forward. I just hear the plot's gears kicking in with a screeching sound.
Again, that's just me, I'm not trying to proselytize or blindly blame it on the writers, I still think DA2's rushed release was the reason for cutting - or dumbing - down a lot of the story.

[AlexXIV]

theauthority wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

theauthority wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

I think people here are close to a resolution, but there are just some parts that don't mesh. Writing is tougher than a lot of people think. My sister's a writer, so I know. I'm not - mostly because of figuring out stuff like this. I don't envy Gaider's job.

I don't envy Gaider as well, when you write comics or videogames it seems like you're more exposed to gunfire than any other writer, fan-proof vests ain't been patented as far as I know.

Yet, to leave so many doubt unanswered or lingering, with little or no explanation, is bad.
It's like, watching a horror movie, you see an idiot rushing into a room, ending up cornered and easy prey to Jason Voorhees or else. I facepalm all the times because it makes no sense.
In my opinion, DA2 played a little too much on murky, ambiguous situations/characters; I ain't amazed at the many threads about the story.
Characters should be put into events that really can't admit any other solutions than those you're proposing (Templars or Mages). What happens in Act III doesn't feel like it's the only way to go.
It's still a game I enjoy but sometimes its voids are tricky to fill without cringing myself.

Writing is not just about plot ideas. I think everyone can have a good idea without being anything close to a writer. I find it much more difficult to write believable dialogues with gestures, etc. I mean the whole set up of a scene to make it 'work'.

I know what you mean but the epilogue is not really about characters - if it were, Orsino wouldn't resort to Blood Magic and Meredith wouldn't use a lyrium-made cursed sword. I don't see these twists as believable, they leave a bitter taste in my mouth because they feel... well, necessary to leap the story forward. I just hear the plot's gears kicking in with a screeching sound.
Again, that's just me, I'm not trying to proselytize or blindly blame it on the writers, I still think DA2's rushed release was the reason for cutting - or dumbing - down a lot of the story.

Yeah actually the plot would have worked without lyrium idol or harvester. Just then there would have not been much of a boss fight and obviously they are very important for this kind of game ...

Just saying human reaper baby as another example ... imo

Modifié par AlexXIV, 15 avril 2011 - 05:05 .

[Shamajotsi]

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

Avissel wrote...

The whole problem with a "neutral" choice is that they were setting it up for Hawke to matter on a global scale.

"The guy who walked away and did nothing." Isn't a very important figure.

/facepalm

In the scenario we have described, a neutral choice still has you fight the same end battles.

You were Champion and Viscount of the city where the Mage/Templar war started. You killed the First Enchanter AND the Knight Commander of the Templars.

What are you even talking about? Do you think before you type things?  Good lord sometimes I wonder about the average intelligence of the posters here. Please do defend yourself because I'm baffled why you would even type what you did.

You somehow missed the "global scale" part of the post. Avissel has a point that it won't do for Varric to say "For the mages, Hawke was like meh and never really cared about him..." because that is what could a neutral ending could be. In the other two endings, Hawke is significant not for whom he killed but for what side he chose. He is either a shiny example for the mages or a scarecrow. That's why even if there was a neutral ending it should not be limited only to "he kills Orsino and Meridith", but also has to have some sort of a global significance.

So I think you are the person who doesn't go into the not-so-small details of the posts of the others before going foamy-mouth .

And by the way, is there a way to change the name of the thread, because "Epic Fail" is not what we're discussing anymore ?

[Rockpopple]

It's a stretch, but you can sorta explain the Lyrium and the Harvester.

Meredith is a killing machine and a Templar trained in bending Lyrium to her will. Is it really a stretch to say she wouldn't buy an interesting pure-lyrium idiol, melt it down and turn it into a weapon? This is a Knight-Commander in one of the most Apostate "infested" nations outside of Tevinter. It's not a stretch to say she wouldn't feel she needed a leg up, especially since she was already pretty paranoid about Blood Mages to begin with.

Orsino is already established as a dark Mage of sorts. The fact that he was involved in Leandra's death and helped another sicko Mage study and practice Necromancy means that Orsino wasn't above that kind of dark magic himself. But like Merrill, maybe he thought he could control it easily.

Then in the end Annullment is coming. He knows the 1st wave of Templars is just that: the 1st wave. He knows an entire city of killers trained in not only nullifying the effects of Magic, but denying magic to the people whose only form of self-defense is magic are coming, and they're all hell-bent on killing every man woman and child in the building - nay, the city - with the gift. What's to say he wouldn't turn to Blood Magic in a desperate bid to save as many Mages as he could?

So to me, both scenarios are believable.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 15 avril 2011 - 05:11 .