885 réponses à ce sujet

[Dark83]

If my mage walks into a room full of Emissaries, a single Mana Clash will either kill them outright, or completely neutralize them regardless. I less-than-three Mana Clash.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

robertthebard wrote...



How?  By leaving?  Did I miss the option where she burns down Redcliffe Castle and kills all within if you refuse?

Did you miss the part where I explained evil is not limited to action, but thought and intention?

Actually, at this point, you have Gregoir promising you a full army of Templars.  So technically, no, you don't need the army of mages.  The far easier thing to do would be to sweep the tower, and take the Templar army, at least, at face value.

Morrigan's perspective is not one of pure practicality. She thinks the mages are worthless and should die anyway because they are of the circle. We are talking from her perspective.

So she's evil for thinking that having an army of golems would increase your chance of success?  After all, this is what's offered when you initially get the choice.  I have yet to not break the anvil, and I have yet gotten more than a -1 approval, since the threat entails simply asking her if she'd like to be a golem.  The end of that little dialog is "I might, if I was only looking for power".  That's a pretty extreme threat.

After knowing what the anvil costs in terms of lives, souls, ect, and its creator is right before you telling the evils its caused (such as people being forcibly made into golems) yet she simply does not care who or what gets hurt by the thing. Use it because it's powerful, quick, and convient, the cost to others, irreleveant, because anyone beyond you, is irrelevant. That is an evil attitude. She backs down because you threaten her. Basically, Morrigan only respects displays of power.

Again with the double standards.  How many posts do you have in this thread trying to convince people that Morrigan is a heartless worm that should be turned into the Templars the first chance you get?

None, First off, because I wouldn't turn anyone into the Templars because I despise them and the Chantry. I am arguing from a D and D perspective, how alignment wise, she is best either neutral or chaotic evil. I say her attitudes and mentality would be classified well within the evil range. maybe you should pick up a guide and actually study alignment descriptions.

Second, I suggest you actually either read, or get some sort of reader comprehension.  I don't think any of my arguements state that evil=instant smite. Her alignment is evil, but being evil does not mean it makes a person instant killable. Evil is a concept you seem to fail to grasp, and how it relates to the thinking and actions of a person. I think your understanding of evil might be simplistic at best. And I stated before, evil isn't simply running around and killing people for kicks. An evil person need never so much as scratch another person in life, yet is just as capable of causing harm to others.

You may very well post over and over, and may even reply to this post trying to show me how wrong I am, just so you can further your own agenda.  You're an evil git.

I think you need to take a chill pill and actually bother reading things.

"Evil git"? Isn't that cute.

[Creature 1]

robertthebard wrote...

Creature 1 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
All of this is really quite simple to see, and Sten would disagree with the choices as well, for the same reasons.  If they are too weak to help themselves, they aren't worth saving anyway, as they won't be any help later on.

This isn't true.  Throw my mage character in a room with a bunch of genlock and hurlock grunts and she will be the only one walking ou the door.  Throw her in a room with a bunch of mages and, well, probably no one will walk out the door because the AI is stupid about AoE attacks. . .  But if they weren't they would mana clash/crushing prison/petrify/paralyze her and she would be dead in a split second.  The fact that the mages weren't doing too well against the abominations does not mean that they wouldn't be useful against darkspawn hordes.  Yes, Morrigan was stupid not to see this.  They should put "Morrigan, you're being stupid again" as a possible response to all of her objections to various choices you make. 

So what happens when you throw that mage into a room full of Emissaries?  Using Grunts as your example is pointless, since I got the Whirling Dervish achievement killing them with Whirlwind, all one hit kills.  Hooray for your mage that can walk out of a room where one Fireball will kill everyone in it?  Really good example there.  The point being, Sten will view them as too weak to help themselves, which means they are too weak to be of use stopping the blight.  If they are unable to save themselves, how are they supposed to be of any help later on?  To elaborate a bit, if you help the templar that is held by the Desire Demon in the tower, you take a hit on your approval.  So tell me, since he says he should have to help himself during the cutscene, what I should believe he believes?

Umm, like I said above (highlighted for you), my mage would die--and with the AI's penchant for fireballing their friends, so would everyone else.  Some other mages would survive, but you have to be specced anti-magic, and my mage definitely is not.  And speccing anti-magic is detrimental to their effectiveness against non-mages or healing utility, so not something you want every mage to be able to do. 

As I said above, Sten is wrong (a common situation, since his mind appears unable to function outside the limits of his cultural prejudices), since you appear to be agreeing with Sten I guess you're wrong too.  Being unable to prevail in every situation is not equivalent to be useful in none.  Wynn as you meet her in the tower is not ideally specced to solo it (although I'd love to see someone try and succeed) but that doesn't mean you should leave her corpse on the floor.  In other situations she may be vital for your character's survival, pun intended. 

"Help"?  You can help the Templar?  I don't think it is really helpful for him that he invariably ends up dead. . . 

[FlintlockJazz]

robertthebard wrote...

Creature 1 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
All of this is really quite simple to see, and Sten would disagree with the choices as well, for the same reasons.  If they are too weak to help themselves, they aren't worth saving anyway, as they won't be any help later on.

This isn't true.  Throw my mage character in a room with a bunch of genlock and hurlock grunts and she will be the only one walking ou the door.  Throw her in a room with a bunch of mages and, well, probably no one will walk out the door because the AI is stupid about AoE attacks. . .  But if they weren't they would mana clash/crushing prison/petrify/paralyze her and she would be dead in a split second.  The fact that the mages weren't doing too well against the abominations does not mean that they wouldn't be useful against darkspawn hordes.  Yes, Morrigan was stupid not to see this.  They should put "Morrigan, you're being stupid again" as a possible response to all of her objections to various choices you make. 

So what happens when you throw that mage into a room full of Emissaries?  Using Grunts as your example is pointless, since I got the Whirling Dervish achievement killing them with Whirlwind, all one hit kills.  Hooray for your mage that can walk out of a room where one Fireball will kill everyone in it?  Really good example there.  The point being, Sten will view them as too weak to help themselves, which means they are too weak to be of use stopping the blight.  If they are unable to save themselves, how are they supposed to be of any help later on?  To elaborate a bit, if you help the templar that is held by the Desire Demon in the tower, you take a hit on your approval.  So tell me, since he says he should have to help himself during the cutscene, what I should believe he believes?

Hmm I see you missed my earlier post about Sten's opinion on mages, so I'll sum it up again here.  Sten dislikes mages because the Qunari hate mages in general, it's got **** all to do with them being 'weak', ergo your point is irrelevant as it has more to do with him hating mages than some philosophy.

Modifié par FlintlockJazz, 17 décembre 2009 - 11:08 .

[Rathalin]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote..

Talk to her. She can't "do" anything per say, since you are the character in control. It's what makes her happy and what pisses her off. You get your answer.

there are points when doing "acts of good" or at least, acts that are not harmful, will certainly progress your goals. Guess what. She disapproves.   

Not to mention her main purpose for helping you out was, in the end, suckering a Warden into fathering god/demon baby. Thus, with that as her main goal in mind, it's not so much that doing small acts of good interfere with "the party's quest" but delay her own personal agenda. Sure, if you're a male, she might end up with a few regrets as she wanders the wilds, but generally, her own personal agenda to produce the old god outweighs any feelings for you, nor does it stop her from knowingly hurting you.

Her evil lies in the fact that she promote and encourages such things, and often, her suggestions, from the RPG standpoint, would realkly not benefit you at all. Example: mage's tower. She starts going off about how all the mages should be killed and slaughtered for submitting to Chantry rule, when as far as you know, you desperately need the support of the Circle mages to help you defeat the blight. So, you try to be reasonable, explain things, suggest a little empathy and pragmatism, she still scoffs. She simply wants to see the mages all die because she sees them all as weak and pathetic living under the Chantry. A mentality that is reflective of evil and chaos. She wants to see people suffer because she does not like them, even though she knows nothing of them.

Anvil of the Void: Agree to destroy the anvil, massive hissy fit. Only when you threaten her does she back down. Zevran, true to CN alignment, will at first think saving the anvil is a great idea, but when you explain to him that it pretty much enslaves and destroys people for the use of others, he will conceed your point. Morrigan, on the other hand, only does so through threats, because she knows you to be more powerful than she.

If it does not directly benefit Morrigan, or fit into her own notions of life or her own ambitions, she will get very angry. She does not care who or what gets hurt by her actions or suggestions, so long as her ends are achieved. That, in itself, is very evil.

So you think she is evil because:

She was raised in the wild and follows the rules she learned in the wild. Strong survive and the weak get killed by the strong. How is that even remotely evil.

She didn't like you telling someone that owned a shop he had to sell things to a mob for the prices they wanted? Boohoo, try going into a store and threatening the owner if he doesn't lower his prices for you, do you think anyone you know would approve of your actions? Are they evil for their dissaproval?

So you went to Redcliffe to satisfy Alistair's desire, even though it had nothing to do with the treaties Duncan sent you to find in the wilds. Why would she approve of your actions? Let's think about it for a moment. You are one of two remaining wardens in Fereldan, at least that you know of, and you are needed to stop the blight. You want to risk your lives to save a bunch of villagers from an "unknown" evil. She has been made to come with you by her mother, whom is very powerful and would likely punish her very severely if she returned and you were dead. So why would anyone, let alone Morrigan, approve of your stupid decision? Risk the entire nation, or a few villagers that have a militia and knights already defending them?

As for the mages, she disagrees with you helping Wynne, not with wiping out the circle. She actually expressed her reluctance when I wiped them out. She does think they are better off dead then living in a cage, but that is because of her own fear of being locked up in the tower herself. And why not? Templars have hunter her mother and herself since she was a child. Not for anything she has done, but just because she exists. Once again, nothing evil about her thought process at all.


The anvil of the void. You have met an ancient golem that claims the anvil needs to be destroyed. Why? You can use it and not make control rods. He is the one that came up with using a control rod so they could force the golems to their will, that makes him evil and not the anvil. The fact is, you have the job of stopping a hoarde of evil monsters, and you wanted to destroy something that could potentially turn the tide forever in favour of the wardens, why would anyone approve of that?

Now for the big one, the ritual. Grey wardens drink the blood to destroy the archdemon right? But they also kill themselves in the process. This also destroys the soul of a god that the darkspawn tainted. Her ritual not only saves your life and destroys the archdemon, but it actually frees the gods soul from the taint and gives it a new life. That she gives her own body to carry this new life, and subjects herself to being taken by a tainted warden, should be considered a selfless act.

[Dark83]

Rathalin wrote...

She didn't like you telling someone that owned a shop he had to sell things to a mob for the prices they wanted? Boohoo, try going into a store and threatening the owner if he doesn't lower his prices for you, do you think anyone you know would approve of your actions? Are they evil for their dissaproval?

Wow, talk about twisting the facts. Everyone acknowledges your threat/coersion as a good act - as in helping the community by forcing the exploitive merchant to give fair prices. Morrigan explicitly disapproves because you helped the community - she is rather vocal about you helping solve petty problems. She doesn't disapprove because you threatened a merchant. She dissapproves because you helped.

[eschilde]

Dark83 wrote...

Rathalin wrote...

She didn't like you telling someone that owned a shop he had to sell things to a mob for the prices they wanted? Boohoo, try going into a store and threatening the owner if he doesn't lower his prices for you, do you think anyone you know would approve of your actions? Are they evil for their dissaproval?

Wow, talk about twisting the facts. Everyone acknowledges your threat/coersion as a good act - as in helping the community by forcing the exploitive merchant to give fair prices. Morrigan explicitly disapproves because you helped the community - she is rather vocal about you helping solve petty problems. She doesn't disapprove because you threatened a merchant. She dissapproves because you helped.

Not to mention, no change in approval if you walk away, +approval if you get rid of the chantry priest

[Ulicus]

Well, to nitpick, she disapproves because you helped and didn't get anything out of it. You turned down a sovereign's worth of silver, the merchant doesn't give *you* a discount and so the act doesn't seem to directly benefit your mission in any way. Of course, you could argue that you're trying to restore the reputation of the Grey Wardens bit by bit, but you don't have the opportunity to tell her that, alas.

Modifié par Ulicus, 18 décembre 2009 - 01:19 .

[Dark83]

Rathalin wrote...
So you went to Redcliffe to satisfy Alistair's desire, even though it had nothing to do with the treaties Duncan sent you to find in the wilds. Why would she approve of your actions? Let's think about it for a moment. You are one of two remaining wardens in Fereldan, at least that you know of, and you are needed to stop the blight. You want to risk your lives to save a bunch of villagers from an "unknown" evil. She has been made to come with you by her mother, whom is very powerful and would likely punish her very severely if she returned and you were dead. So why would anyone, let alone Morrigan, approve of your stupid decision? Risk the entire nation, or a few villagers that have a militia and knights already defending them?

Wow, talk about short sighted. (Hey, just like a certain swamp witch!) You go to Redcliffe because Arl Eamon is the only one who can oppose Loghain at the Landsmeet. You need political support, and goodwill as well as to repair your reputation. I'm sorry that this isn't an American movie-like scenario where you're awesome and everybody knows it when they see it, and all you have to do is beat up the bad guy. Your name has been dragged through the mud, and you need to recover political support to unite the nobles under you. You need political support. The reason to defend the town is also simple - even Sten gets it when you explain it. You need Arl Eamon's help. Saving his town puts him in your debt. It's all politics.

[Rainen89]

Actually, saving his life puts him in your debt, you can gain his support and let Redcliffe burn for all anyone cares, you're doing it to save a village, not for Eamon. I'm fairly certain you lose redcliffe soldiers if you do abandon them, but you do not "need" them. You need eamon, you do not need the village. Considering pretty much every teyrn/arl/bann has had their land destroyed/corrupted by the blight I don't think anyone would really care or sympathize. Sten said it best, you'd save this village while countless more fall to the blight." You're doing the "good" thing, not the logical thing.

Modifié par Rainen89, 18 décembre 2009 - 01:22 .

[eschilde]

Rainen89 wrote...

Actually, saving his life puts him in your debt, you can gain his support and let Redcliffe burn for all anyone cares, you're doing it to save a village, not for Eamon. I'm fairly certain you lose redcliffe soldiers if you do abandon them, but you do not "need" them. You need eamon, you do not need the village. Considering pretty much every teyrn/arl/bann has had their land destroyed/corrupted by the blight I don't think anyone would really care or sympathize. Sten said it best, you'd save this village while countless more fall to the blight." You're doing the "good" thing, not the logical thing.

Well, in the game, there's no way to go directly to Eamon. You need to either save Redcliffe or wait for it to fall. Either way, you are wasting the same amount of time in game (one night), so if you think about it that way, it's better to save Redcliffe so you'll have more able-bodied men at the end to help defend against the Blight. That would remain true if there was a way to go directly to Eamon; and if you could go directly to him I would imagine he would ask you to help save the village. Also, considering that you are not cool enough to get horses, saving one village in a night might beat saving no villages because you were traveling. But, you can't say any of that to your companions so it doesn't count!

[Rainen89]

Right, but you're not risking your life unecessarily to do so, you just come back later. Don't get me wrong, I thought it was poorly written and the whole "use this key to get into a secret passage" was beyond cliche and made no sense. However, despite all the bravado that accompanies saving the village, you're not helping your cause. You are for the sake of stopping the blight letting lothering and countless other settlements within the bannorn fall to the blight. Redcliffe is just one more while it is nice to save as many people you have no idea what will come out, you only know you won't die because you're the protagonist and if you do die it's just a reload away from correcting whatever problem you made. From a story's perspective saying you should save a village because it's the "right" thing to do is like saying you should have stayed at lothering to stop the blight there. Hundreds of people died there as well, but we don't care about them, or the other settlements that fall.



But yes, we should have had the option to wait for the invasion to begin and sneak into the castle to eamon that way, that would have went along with the "we don't have time" theory and would've supported Morrigan/sten's objection. That was indeed poorly written but you're still endangering yourself further for a group of people that contribute absolutely nothing to you seeing Eamon, or saving Eamon.

[robertthebard]

FlintlockJazz wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Creature 1 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
All of this is really quite simple to see, and Sten would disagree with the choices as well, for the same reasons.  If they are too weak to help themselves, they aren't worth saving anyway, as they won't be any help later on.

This isn't true.  Throw my mage character in a room with a bunch of genlock and hurlock grunts and she will be the only one walking ou the door.  Throw her in a room with a bunch of mages and, well, probably no one will walk out the door because the AI is stupid about AoE attacks. . .  But if they weren't they would mana clash/crushing prison/petrify/paralyze her and she would be dead in a split second.  The fact that the mages weren't doing too well against the abominations does not mean that they wouldn't be useful against darkspawn hordes.  Yes, Morrigan was stupid not to see this.  They should put "Morrigan, you're being stupid again" as a possible response to all of her objections to various choices you make. 

So what happens when you throw that mage into a room full of Emissaries?  Using Grunts as your example is pointless, since I got the Whirling Dervish achievement killing them with Whirlwind, all one hit kills.  Hooray for your mage that can walk out of a room where one Fireball will kill everyone in it?  Really good example there.  The point being, Sten will view them as too weak to help themselves, which means they are too weak to be of use stopping the blight.  If they are unable to save themselves, how are they supposed to be of any help later on?  To elaborate a bit, if you help the templar that is held by the Desire Demon in the tower, you take a hit on your approval.  So tell me, since he says he should have to help himself during the cutscene, what I should believe he believes?

Hmm I see you missed my earlier post about Sten's opinion on mages, so I'll sum it up again here.  Sten dislikes mages because the Qunari hate mages in general, it's got **** all to do with them being 'weak', ergo your point is irrelevant as it has more to do with him hating mages than some philosophy.

No.  Again, no.  You broght this to simply mages with your example, and my example of the tower isn't a mage, but a templar.  You will also get disapproval from Sten for helping Redcliffe, and you will take a -10 from Sten for promising to look for Owen's daughter.  Is she a mage too?  Wait, maybe Owen is the mage?  No?  Then what does Sten hating mages in general have to do with finding Owen's daughter in the castle, when you're already going to be in there?  Why such a big hit?  Because Sten feels like she should be able to take care of herself.  Nevermind the fact that, in my case, I have just hopped around 3/4 of Ferelden getting his sword back.  However, your off.  Helping Owen in no way has anything to do with helping mages, and yet, during the dialog, he will ask "Is this one of those promises we have no intention of keeping?", to which Morrigan replies, "I certainly hope so".  This leads to Owen asking an "er, what" thing to which Sten replies "I wasn't addressing, you human", or something along that line.  So again, your obsession with Sten hating mages does not apply to the point I was making.  I will add that despite this, there are surprisingly few people running around calling Sten evil.

[Rainen89]

Sten getting upset about you saving Owen's daughter has more to do with him not thinking you'll keep your word. Qunari view "giving their word" as a blood oath. You do not go back on your word for a qunari. Saying you'll save some girl and bring her back to her father (promising btw.) that you'll return her safe even though the castle is infested with some evil and later known undead. Is what pisses him off. Not some anti-mage propoganda.

Qunari do not hate mages, they just believe that safety and caution supercedes an individuals right to happiness. If someone is a mage they have the possibility (lore wise.) to destroy everything around them. Something a non mage wouldn't be able to do. Therefore they do inhumane and horrible things to them, but it is not out of hate. It is out of caution.

Modifié par Rainen89, 18 décembre 2009 - 01:46 .

[eschilde]

Rainen89 wrote...

Right, but you're not risking your life unecessarily to do so, you just come back later. Don't get me wrong, I thought it was poorly written and the whole "use this key to get into a secret passage" was beyond cliche and made no sense. However, despite all the bravado that accompanies saving the village, you're not helping your cause. You are for the sake of stopping the blight letting lothering and countless other settlements within the bannorn fall to the blight. Redcliffe is just one more while it is nice to save as many people you have no idea what will come out, you only know you won't die because you're the protagonist and if you do die it's just a reload away from correcting whatever problem you made. From a story's perspective saying you should save a village because it's the "right" thing to do is like saying you should have stayed at lothering to stop the blight there. Hundreds of people died there as well, but we don't care about them, or the other settlements that fall.

But yes, we should have had the option to wait for the invasion to begin and sneak into the castle to eamon that way, that would have went along with the "we don't have time" theory and would've supported Morrigan/sten's objection. That was indeed poorly written but you're still endangering yourself further for a group of people that contribute absolutely nothing to you seeing Eamon, or saving Eamon.

That's not necessarily true, saving Eamon's people would score points, normally.. you don't know how he'd react if you and Teagan walked up and Teagan said, "I bring you the Grey Wardens that ditched your village while it was being attacked by the undead." Saying, "I bring you the Grey Wardens who saved the village," sounds a lot better and would make a person more inclined to help. You also should consider that Loghain is someone who Eamon respected and felt could make good decisions up until the point he found out Loghain was poisoning him. You don't know what Eamon thinks or will do, about anything. Just because Teagan felt one way about Loghain doesn't necessarily mean that Eamon would agree. I'm not talking about how the game factors it, but how you could justify saving the village to Morrigan and Sten given the option.

[eschilde]

Qunari do not hate mages, they just believe that safety and caution supercedes an individuals right to happiness. If someone is a mage they have the possibility (lore wise.) to destroy everything around them. Something a non mage wouldn't be able to do. Therefore they do inhumane and horrible things to them, but it is not out of hate. It is out of caution.

Really? I thought it was because they thought of mages as a lesser kind of being, because of the things they could do. Sort of like how a rabid dog with rabies probably needs a muzzle. Yeah, it is out of caution, but it's also because they fear/despise them.

[Rainen89]

Except you know that eamon (or will if you ask around lothering.) is dying and in trouble your main priority and time spent is for treaties and saving him. Yes it's selfish and yes it would've sounded better if you did save the village. However, your priority is Eamon, who you now know is in a coma and needs immediate supernatural help. Granted this argument would go much better if you weren't "wasting a day" to ditch the village and instead could go in earlier, but yeah. The point is that Eamon will be in your debt regardless for saving him from death, saving his village/people and family will make him happier yes, much happier but he will still be in your debt by saving him. It's true you don't know how he'll react but you also don't know that the village can't defend themselves.

It's not out of hatred, fear yes certainly fear. But sten (when talking to shale about it.) Does say they don't "hate" mages it's just something that simply must be done.
" It is not something that one should take pleasure in. It is done because it is necessary" I'm not saying they love them, but what they do is out of fear/caution. Not outright hatred. I'm sure people harmed by wild/dangerous mages do hate them, but the policies are in place as a precaution. Sten's comments on mages being less than men is probably a remark to how mages do not seek the same policies enforced on them, they are less than beasts/men because they do not appreciate the danger they can inflict on the world.

Modifié par Rainen89, 18 décembre 2009 - 01:56 .

[robertthebard]

Dark83 wrote...

Rathalin wrote...
So you went to Redcliffe to satisfy Alistair's desire, even though it had nothing to do with the treaties Duncan sent you to find in the wilds. Why would she approve of your actions? Let's think about it for a moment. You are one of two remaining wardens in Fereldan, at least that you know of, and you are needed to stop the blight. You want to risk your lives to save a bunch of villagers from an "unknown" evil. She has been made to come with you by her mother, whom is very powerful and would likely punish her very severely if she returned and you were dead. So why would anyone, let alone Morrigan, approve of your stupid decision? Risk the entire nation, or a few villagers that have a militia and knights already defending them?

Wow, talk about short sighted. (Hey, just like a certain swamp witch!) You go to Redcliffe because Arl Eamon is the only one who can oppose Loghain at the Landsmeet. You need political support, and goodwill as well as to repair your reputation. I'm sorry that this isn't an American movie-like scenario where you're awesome and everybody knows it when they see it, and all you have to do is beat up the bad guy. Your name has been dragged through the mud, and you need to recover political support to unite the nobles under you. You need political support. The reason to defend the town is also simple - even Sten gets it when you explain it. You need Arl Eamon's help. Saving his town puts him in your debt. It's all politics.

This is a funny arguement, since Loghain says that the Warden was the only one that could influence the Landsmeet against him.  You need Eamon to call it, but he's far from influential once the ball is rolling.  However, if you do Redcliffe first, Eamon will tell you that you need to finish the treaties first.  I guess I know where his priorities are, replacing the army lost at Ostagar.  So, taking this into account, I'd say you need the treaties first.  Of course, Morrigan will still disapprove of saving the village, even if you do it last, as will Sten.  However, more to the topic title here, it's neither Chaotic Stupid, nor bad writing that my party members may have opinions differing from mine, and express them.  BTW, has anyone tried to pickpocket Teagan?

[eschilde]

Rainen89 wrote...

Except you know that eamon (or will if you ask around lothering.) is dying and in trouble your main priority and time spent is for treaties and saving him. Yes it's selfish and yes it would've sounded better if you did save the village. However, your priority is Eamon, who you now know is in a coma and needs immediate supernatural help. Granted this argument would go much better if you weren't "wasting a day" to ditch the village and instead could go in earlier, but yeah. The point is that Eamon will be in your debt regardless for saving him from death, saving his village/people and family will make him happier yes, much happier but he will still be in your debt by saving him. It's true you don't know how he'll react but you also don't know that the village can't defend themselves.

It's not out of hatred, fear yes certainly fear. But sten (when talking to shale about it.) Does say they don't "hate" mages it's just something that simply must be done.
" It is not something that one should take pleasure in. It is done because it is necessary" I'm not saying they love them, but what they do is out of fear/caution. Not outright hatred. I'm sure people harmed by wild/dangerous mages do hate them, but the policies are in place as a precaution. Sten's comments on mages being less than men is probably a remark to how mages do not seek the same policies enforced on them, they are less than beasts/men because they do not appreciate the danger they can inflict on the world.

The way Sten talks about the mages when you go to the Tower makes it sound like he personally does not like them. Necessary, yes, fear, yes, but I think there is also an element of disgust or revulsion.

Considering that it only takes you one night to save Redcliffe, I would consider it to be easily justifiable and not really a huge waste of time. Maybe Bioware forced you to defend or destroy Redcliffe outside the castle, to give you decision in the first place. If you'd gone to the castle on your own you would have saved the village immediately, unless you decided to just not kill anything inside, right?

[Rainen89]

Sten talks about mages like that because of the danger they are putting everyone else in, wanting to kill something can be brought on by many more things than just anger. The argument for redcliffe isn't just the time, it's that you're risking your life when you don't have to. The waste of time point is that it'd be a waste to go off to every other village saving them from X just because it's the right thing to do. You stopped for redcliffe, why not them?

[eschilde]

Rainen89 wrote...

Sten talks about mages like that because of the danger they are putting everyone else in, wanting to kill something can be brought on by many more things than just anger. The argument for redcliffe isn't just the time, it's that you're risking your life when you don't have to. The waste of time point is that it'd be a waste to go off to every other village saving them from X just because it's the right thing to do. You stopped for redcliffe, why not them?

Because you're there already. If you had been in Lothering when it was attacked by darkspawn, would you have stayed and fought them off, or left because it was a waste of time? Given the chance, would you just leave Lothering without even killing the darkspawn at the exit? The only difference between Lothering and Redcliffe was that the monsters looked different. No, it's not your responsibility to kill the undead, and maybe you could potentially get killed by them, but you could consider it extra training (like justifying Haven to Sten ^^) or something. Yes, defending Redcliffe is the 'good' option, but there's not really that much going for the 'evil' option. I'd need a better reason than "because you might potentially get killed," since that's pretty much the premise of your entire journey..

[Rainen89]

Yeah, it is the premise but you also have no idea how bad it is. You are at lothering and leave it to be destroyed by the darkspawn. It's the same thing, Alistair even commented about how you left them to die. (He wasn't mad mind you, but he accepts that you couldn't save them.) Lothering is in fact no different than Redcliffe because like the two you leave them, Lothering is just inevitable destruction, where Redcliffe you can intervene but you do damn Lothering by leaving them. While yes you do constantly put yourself in danger you also don't do reckless things like try to conquer a darkspawn horde w/o first getting an army to back you.

• Alistair: So what do you think will happen to all those people we left behind in Lothering?
• Leliana: some of them will find their way to Denerim. Many will die. As the Maker wills.
• Alistair: Don't you wish you could have stayed there? To help more people, I mean?
• Leliana: If the Blight isn't stopped, everyone will die. This is the greater good we're serving, both of us, right here.
• Alistair: So it's all right to let some people die for the greater good? I... I'm not so sure about that. I felt bad leaving all those people there, all panicked and helpless.
• Leliana: You're doing what you must, Alistair. There will be worse to come yet... you will need to steel yourself, you know this.
• Alistair: I've never been very good at that. The steeling myself part. I find it better sometimes to just be a little weak. I'm all right with that, really.
• Leliana: I don't believe you. And either way, it's not as if any of us has a choice.

Modifié par Rainen89, 18 décembre 2009 - 02:46 .

[eschilde]

Rainen89 wrote...

Yeah, it is the premise but you also have no idea how bad it is. You are at lothering and leave it to be destroyed by the darkspawn. It's the same thing, Alistair even commented about how you left them to die. (He wasn't mad mind you, but he accepts that you couldn't save them.) Lothering is in fact no different than Redcliffe because like the two you leave them, Lothering is just inevitable destruction, where Redcliffe you can intervene but you do damn Lothering by leaving them. While yes you do constantly put yourself in danger you also don't do reckless things like try to conquer a darkspawn horde w/o first getting an army to back you.

That's not what I was asking. Yes, you abandon Lothering. But if you were at Lothering while it got attacked by darkspawn, would you stay to defend it? How about just staying until the village is mostly evacuated? The difference between Lothering is that it gets sacked by thousands or tens of thousands of darkspawn, vs. Redcliffe, which is winnable, and the monsters are spawning from a place you need to go. You are right, Lothering is inevitable destruction but it's also your duty to fight the darkspawn and end the Blight; does that mean you kill all the ones you see or ignore some in favor of the bigger picture?

Defending Redcliffe doesn't really seem reckless in how it's presented to you. Sten and Morrigan's objections aren't that you could die doing it but rather that it's a waste of time. That isn't to say you couldn't possibly die, just that this isn't something you should make your problem, but given the time frame and everything else, unless you are planning to ditch Redcliffe in favor of pursuing a treaty in the hope that Eamon magically wakes up in an empty castle, your time is probably most efficiently used just killing the damn things and going up to the castle the next day.

Or, you know, you could go to camp, sleep with someone, come back, and kill the undead in the castle instead of in the village.

[Rainen89]

You don't know that it's winnable, you also don't know that the villagers couldn't do it themselves. From Sten's perspective he doesn't even understand that you have to deal with Loghain at all, he thinks you just need to kill the Archdemon, from Morrigan's perspective I'm pretty sure it's about not wanting you to die, given her sole reason for being there had to do with the ritual. Again, I'm aware that in the game the "time frame" doesn't support there objections. You simply don't have the time to explain politics to Sten, nor guarantee that the army is only a small one and that you and some villagers will have no problem saving them. To be fair, you have no idea what you'll be fighting or how much you'll be fighting when it does come. You only know you're risking your life for a village because it's the "right" thing to do.

[druidofwarp]

Rathalin wrote...

So you think she is evil because:

She was raised in the wild and follows the rules she learned in the wild. Strong survive and the weak get killed by the strong. How is that even remotely evil.

She didn't like you telling someone that owned a shop he had to sell things to a mob for the prices they wanted? Boohoo, try going into a store and threatening the owner if he doesn't lower his prices for you, do you think anyone you know would approve of your actions? Are they evil for their dissaproval?

So you went to Redcliffe to satisfy Alistair's desire, even though it had nothing to do with the treaties Duncan sent you to find in the wilds. Why would she approve of your actions? Let's think about it for a moment. You are one of two remaining wardens in Fereldan, at least that you know of, and you are needed to stop the blight. You want to risk your lives to save a bunch of villagers from an "unknown" evil. She has been made to come with you by her mother, whom is very powerful and would likely punish her very severely if she returned and you were dead. So why would anyone, let alone Morrigan, approve of your stupid decision? Risk the entire nation, or a few villagers that have a militia and knights already defending them?

As for the mages, she disagrees with you helping Wynne, not with wiping out the circle. She actually expressed her reluctance when I wiped them out. She does think they are better off dead then living in a cage, but that is because of her own fear of being locked up in the tower herself. And why not? Templars have hunter her mother and herself since she was a child. Not for anything she has done, but just because she exists. Once again, nothing evil about her thought process at all.


The anvil of the void. You have met an ancient golem that claims the anvil needs to be destroyed. Why? You can use it and not make control rods. He is the one that came up with using a control rod so they could force the golems to their will, that makes him evil and not the anvil. The fact is, you have the job of stopping a hoarde of evil monsters, and you wanted to destroy something that could potentially turn the tide forever in favour of the wardens, why would anyone approve of that?

Now for the big one, the ritual. Grey wardens drink the blood to destroy the archdemon right? But they also kill themselves in the process. This also destroys the soul of a god that the darkspawn tainted. Her ritual not only saves your life and destroys the archdemon, but it actually frees the gods soul from the taint and gives it a new life. That she gives her own body to carry this new life, and subjects herself to being taken by a tainted warden, should be considered a selfless act.

1. You know what dies fast in the wilds? The lone wolf. Doesn't matter how alpha he is, he'll die. Her philosophy is incredibly foolish from her perspective. The Archdemon is pretty powerful and everyone is crap compared to it, by her logic we all deserve to die to it. However we can fight it by being united, there is strength in numbers which is why the pack of wolves can bring down much more powerful prey. Saving this village helps add to your strength in numbers ostensibly.

2. I don't know what country you are from but I assume since it has internet that things like price-gouging after disasters are very illegal there, and wrong since you purposely exploit those less fourtunate for a higher profit simply because of your excessive greed.

3. This is as important as a treaty in and of itself, you want Ferelden's military support. You can say that you only gain that support theoretically if you are lucky, but I could say the same thing about the Dalish and Dwarves being that you have to hope they actually want to honor those treaties.

Also what is with people saying you risk your life by defending these villagers? You risk it more not helping. You are told that the assailants are the walking dead able to raise more walking dead. If you let the village fall you have many more zombies to contend with and no outside support, as opposed to standing against them with an army of knights and villagers at your back if you decide to help.

The argument that you are sneaking in to avoid them seems pretty invalid too. Its obviously something with power to get all these zombies running around what makes you think you can sneak up on it? When you do sneak up on it what stops it from summoning all those zombies right to zerg and eat you? Game Over, and it could have been avoided if you thinned the zombie numbers and used the army of villagers to then retake the castle. Morrigan needs to be less selfish, but i suppose we all do .

4.She also is disgusted with the mages for not trying to escape the templars, she seems to think its easy but i guess I would too if I had a superpowered abomination shapechanger protecting me my entire life

5. I dont think the ritual is evil at all, but I also dont really see her as being selfless for it. She basically runs off with it with no real explanation why, thats a bit of a red flag right there that her intentions probably aren't all that noble. Besides she got to do my PC whom she likes (or so she has led me to believe )