Which Is An Evil Army?
#1
Posté 13 mars 2012 - 11:17
#2
Posté 14 mars 2012 - 12:11
As for your second question, there is also no good or evil meter, the answers are more pragmatic, more rough etc, all depending on the context. And the position isn't fixed either.
#3
Posté 14 mars 2012 - 12:58
Krabman7 wrote...
There is no "good" or "evil" army. Everytime you must make a choice between having one of two parties assist you (Mages/templars, Dwarves/golems, Elves/Werewolves), it's pretty much morally ambiguous IMO.
As for your second question, there is also no good or evil meter, the answers are more pragmatic, more rough etc, all depending on the context. And the position isn't fixed either.
oh really? geez this whole time in my first playthrough i picked the top bar which is the first answer to try to get the good ending lol well thanks for clearing that up for me
#4
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Posté 14 mars 2012 - 04:58
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Modifié par Nizaris1, 14 mars 2012 - 04:59 .
#5
Posté 14 mars 2012 - 06:08
#6
Posté 14 mars 2012 - 08:55
1. Making the Circle of Magi an even more oppressive institution than it already is, and senselessly persecuting mages.
2. Allowing a power-hungry tyrant to murder and enslave Dwarves.
3. Committing genocide against Elves and allowing the Werewolf curse to continue.
FYI, murder, slavery, and genocide are evil. There's nothing ambiguous about it. Technically, the Darkspawn are not evil since they lack free will or even the understanding of right and wrong.
Modifié par Sir Pounce-a-lot, 14 mars 2012 - 09:01 .
#7
Posté 14 mars 2012 - 09:55
The social order of Ferelden is oppressive toward mages, and the templars take up the task of being the agents of that oppression over the practice of magic. I'd be more inclined to lay the blame where it was deserved: at the feet of Fereldan society. It is the moral teachings of the Andrastrian Chantry, after all, that the templars enforce.
I agree with the idea that darkspawn, if they lack free will and understanding of right and wrong, are not evil. Perhaps the difference lies between being "dark" in nature and being "evil" in nature.
Yet the darkspawn, or at least some of them, live on after the Archdemon is slain. So I always wondered what that meant. Do darkspawn have some ability to act and make choices even when no Archdemon is telling them what to do? And if they can do that, then perhaps they can also learn to resist evil....?
#8
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Posté 15 mars 2012 - 06:37
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Modifié par Nizaris1, 15 mars 2012 - 06:38 .
#9
Posté 15 mars 2012 - 09:00
I think that the Architect was the one that wanted the Darkspawn (a name given to them by humans) to be able to resist the call of the Archdemons (which were tainted Old Gods, and therefore, not inherently evil).
Modifié par Sir Pounce-a-lot, 15 mars 2012 - 09:01 .
#10
Posté 15 mars 2012 - 04:49
Cody2Hottie wrote...
Krabman7 wrote...
There is no "good" or "evil" army. Everytime you must make a choice between having one of two parties assist you (Mages/templars, Dwarves/golems, Elves/Werewolves), it's pretty much morally ambiguous IMO.
As for your second question, there is also no good or evil meter, the answers are more pragmatic, more rough etc, all depending on the context. And the position isn't fixed either.
oh really? geez this whole time in my first playthrough i picked the top bar which is the first answer to try to get the good ending lol well thanks for clearing that up for me
Lol, that's Mass Effect you're thinking of, I suspect.
DA's decisions have no good/bad or paragon/renegade equivalent - just clear choices and their consequences. You might gain or lose the approval of your companions though, depending on the companions you have at the time.
In my opinion this works much, much better than a good/evil points system.
#11
Posté 15 mars 2012 - 09:33
#12
Posté 15 mars 2012 - 09:47
Sir Pounce-a-lot wrote...
True, the Templars aren't evil, but the Chantry is a somewhat oppressive institution that denies many people their rights as people. Templars are just the foot soldiers of that order that follow orders. The law enforcement of the Taliban that imposed Sharia law in Afghanistan were similar agents of their theocracy. A Templar may do good things as well, but they care less about right or wrong than they do about the institution that they serve. So, is their alignment 'lawful neutral'? Maybe. Still, there are aspects of the Chantry's theocracy that are evil, and by supporting the annullment of the Circle, you are strengthening those aspects. More to the point, you are persecuting a group of people that, by that point, is almost (if not completely) innocent.
I think that the Architect was the one that wanted the Darkspawn (a name given to them by humans) to be able to resist the call of the Archdemons (which were tainted Old Gods, and therefore, not inherently evil).
Perhaps I wasn't being very clear in my earlier post.
In all my playthroughs so far I have always recruited the mages over the templars. So I agree with your view of annulment of the Circle. I suppose I was thinking more along the lines that the Templars stand down the plan to annul the Circle once the Warden succeeds in rescuing the First Enchanter. The most interesting part of being a Warden (for me, at least) is being able to intervene and prevent the Templars from doing a great injustice.
#13
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 01:48
Nizaris1 wrote...
Even if the Warden is so evil in the game, psychotic killer on the loose, killing people with no reason, kill dog....in the end, the Warden is the Hero of Ferelden...a good guy :-)
Pretty much this. You can kill all of your companions (except morrigan, at least not until witch hunt), slaughter the mages and elves for fun, leave orzammar in a state of near civil war, sacrifice isolde only to let the demon keep posessing connor, become king and claim gwaren for you own. Everyone still thinks you're a top bloke.





Retour en haut







