Yes, because we have option to roleplay evil, malicious, selfish and ruthless characters and this option should be as viable as a heroic or neutral paths.Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Again proving me right.
Only evil and despicable characters would kill her.
You hate Leliana, as it is obvious in the way you refer to her - with derogatory terms. Harpy. B***. Zealous nutcase.
Cultist wrote...
Yes, because we have option to roleplay evil, malicious, selfish and ruthless characters and this option should be as viable as a heroic or neutral paths.Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Again proving me right.
Only evil and despicable characters would kill her.
You hate Leliana, as it is obvious in the way you refer to her - with derogatory terms. Harpy. B***. Zealous nutcase.
Aside from other, not evil characters, that just killed her becasue she attacked them.
Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 04 septembre 2012 - 08:23 .
aLotion Soronnar wrote...
Cultist wrote...
Yes, because we have option to roleplay evil, malicious, selfish and ruthless characters and this option should be as viable as a heroic or neutral paths.Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Again proving me right.
Only evil and despicable characters would kill her.
You hate Leliana, as it is obvious in the way you refer to her - with derogatory terms. Harpy. B***. Zealous nutcase.
Aside from other, not evil characters, that just killed her becasue she attacked them.
So wait...you argue against my point that only malicious and evil characters would kill her by saying players have an options to play such characters?
That doesn't do anything to refute it ya know.
It's quite simple - if you character killed Leliana, he's either a stupid douche (for destroying the most potent source of healing known, an important archeologicla and cultural find, an acient and holy relic, for provoking and intolerance) or an evil nutso (for basicly killing because he can).
Spicen wrote...
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
So wait...you argue against my point that only malicious and evil characters would kill her by saying players have an options to play such characters?
That doesn't do anything to refute it ya know.
It's quite simple - if you character killed Leliana, he's either a stupid douche (for destroying the most potent source of healing known, an important archeologicla and cultural find, an acient and holy relic, for provoking and intolerance) or an evil nutso (for basicly killing because he can).
Well killing leliana would gurantee Reaver power, so i dont think its stupid. And i have to agree with rawgrim, SHE attacked first and died and BW kept her alive, so she needs to die again. And again, and again if need be. Boy, i can kill her all day, sounds like paradise.
Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 04 septembre 2012 - 10:01 .
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Spicen wrote...
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
So wait...you argue against my point that only malicious and evil characters would kill her by saying players have an options to play such characters?
That doesn't do anything to refute it ya know.
It's quite simple - if you character killed Leliana, he's either a stupid douche (for destroying the most potent source of healing known, an important archeologicla and cultural find, an acient and holy relic, for provoking and intolerance) or an evil nutso (for basicly killing because he can).
Well killing leliana would gurantee Reaver power, so i dont think its stupid. And i have to agree with rawgrim, SHE attacked first and died and BW kept her alive, so she needs to die again. And again, and again if need be. Boy, i can kill her all day, sounds like paradise.
And you can get the reaver power wihout killing her. And why would reaver power be more important than super-healing powder anyway?
Face ift - your ashes destroying character is worse than those Budha-statues destroying talibans. At least the statues didn't have an effect beneficial to the whole humanity.
And of course she attacekd first - you forced her to act that way by being a menace to society so she tried to stop you. Self-defnese doesn't work as an excuse in that case.
And again, you prove you have issues by reveling in murder. Even if the character in qustion was evil, such displays are distastefull at best. Adn when you enjoy murdering a good character...thats even worse.
Spicen wrote...
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
And again, you prove you have issues by reveling in murder. Even if the character in qustion was evil, such displays are distastefull at best. Adn when you enjoy murdering a good character...thats even worse.
Yes, i love killing her and revel in it. The same way you are immune to logic, even one of the commentor said you are biased. and the commentor was neutral. If love can be biased, so can be hatred. I love killing her, it is part and parcel of my RPG experience.
Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 04 septembre 2012 - 12:47 .
Guest_Nyoka_*
Well... the PC is still the only hope against the darkspawn, if Ferelden is to be saved. The attack is on the vexingly irrational side. Luckily, it's possible to talk her down from that, though strangely it's not an option for Wynne.And of course she attacekd first - you forced her to act that way by being a menace to society so she tried to stop you. Self-defnese doesn't work as an excuse in that case.
I don't think many actually agree with Kolgrim's religion, but would rather damage the Chantry and gain the memories and power of dragons, than leave an artifact open that the Chantry will try to grab and propagandize if possible. Though one can kill Kolgrim and leave the dragon alive to stop this too, which is what I did.Why would anyone agree with the crazy cultists to begin with? They want
to put blood on the ashes, like Andraste is a vampire or something.
Modifié par Xilizhra, 04 septembre 2012 - 12:52 .
Xilizhra wrote...
Well... the PC is still the only hope against the darkspawn, if Ferelden is to be saved. The attack is on the vexingly irrational side. Luckily, it's possible to talk her down from that, though strangely it's not an option for Wynne.And of course she attacekd first - you forced her to act that way by being a menace to society so she tried to stop you. Self-defnese doesn't work as an excuse in that case.
No one knows the Warden will be critical to stopping the Blight earlyI don't think many actually agree with Kolgrim's religion, but would rather damage the Chantry and gain the memories and power of dragons, than leave an artifact open that the Chantry will try to grab and propagandize if possible. Though one can kill Kolgrim and leave the dragon alive to stop this too, which is what I did.
Well, Leliana can't actually stop the Warden, only try to take revenge after the fact. Also, while the Blight could be stopped by others, it wouldn't be in time to save Ferelden.So if I start telling you that I'm the only one who can save the word and than start doing all evil crap, you won't try to stop me?
Keep in mind that my main playthrough did not defile the Ashes. Also, I love Leliana, as does my Warden. However, Kolgrim doesn't strike me as a liar; he's exceedingly, one might say insanely, earnest.Why would yo uactualyl belive Kolgrim is telling the truth AT ALL is beyond me. How do you know he won't kill you after you do the deed? How do you know taining the ashes or drinking whatever concotion he gives you wont' kill you? You don't.
You basicly believe a madman just because you want to stick it to the Cahntry. In the worst possible way - by denying the world a potent healing item, by destroying cultural and historical treasure and generally by being an ass.
Nope, that's one way to play a character, we already got examples of people killing her just because she attacked.Lotion Soronnar wrote...
So wait...you argue against my point that only malicious and evil characters would kill her by saying players have an options to play such characters?
That doesn't do anything to refute it ya know.
You operate at a false assumption that your point of view is the Absolute Truth.Lotion Soronnar wrote...
It's quite simple - if you character killed Leliana, he's either a stupid douche (for destroying the most potent source of healing known, an important archeologicla and cultural find, an acient and holy relic, for provoking and intolerance) or an evil nutso (for basicly killing because he can).
You don't have to follow their beliefs, just accept their payment)Nyoka wrote...
Why would anyone agree with the crazy
cultists to begin with? They want to put blood on the ashes, like
Andraste is a vampire or something.
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
She is working for the church in DA:O. When you first meet her, you can see she has a Seeker amulet in her inventory.
I don't recall any amulet. Even if there was any, it proves nothing other that she has an amulet with a known and pwoerfull symbolism.
And as I siad before - desecrating Andrastes remains is a vile act, especially for a elven mage.
I seriously doubt Bioware had even conceived of the Seekers at that point. From an in universe standpoint, I think the Seekers were scouting her but doubt she was actually a member until after the Blight.Rawgrim wrote...
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
She is working for the church in DA:O. When you first meet her, you can see she has a Seeker amulet in her inventory.
I don't recall any amulet. Even if there was any, it proves nothing other that she has an amulet with a known and pwoerfull symbolism.
And as I siad before - desecrating Andrastes remains is a vile act, especially for a elven mage.
Given that she shows up as a Seeker in DA2, its a pretty clear indication that she has been working for the church for a long time. Unless they hand out seeker amulets to everyone. Its kind of a smoking gun that she has that amulet in her inventory...
Lord Aesir wrote...
I would agree that they shouldn't have brought her back in the sequel. They should have replaced her role with Cassandra or something if she died. However, it takes a leap of irrational hate to say that this means she MUST die in the next game. An optional death, sure, but nothing more.
Rawgrim wrote...
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
She is working for the church in DA:O. When you first meet her, you can see she has a Seeker amulet in her inventory.
I don't recall any amulet. Even if there was any, it proves nothing other that she has an amulet with a known and pwoerfull symbolism.
And as I siad before - desecrating Andrastes remains is a vile act, especially for a elven mage.
Given that she shows up as a Seeker in DA2, its a pretty clear indication that she has been working for the church for a long time. Unless they hand out seeker amulets to everyone. Its kind of a smoking gun that she has that amulet in her inventory...
Modifié par Emzamination, 04 septembre 2012 - 02:46 .
Emzamination wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
She is working for the church in DA:O. When you first meet her, you can see she has a Seeker amulet in her inventory.
I don't recall any amulet. Even if there was any, it proves nothing other that she has an amulet with a known and pwoerfull symbolism.
And as I siad before - desecrating Andrastes remains is a vile act, especially for a elven mage.
Given that she shows up as a Seeker in DA2, its a pretty clear indication that she has been working for the church for a long time. Unless they hand out seeker amulets to everyone. Its kind of a smoking gun that she has that amulet in her inventory...
She didn't start working for the chantry until Awakening as her romance letter states shes headed to orlais for an interview.The seeker's circle description should tell you it has nothing to do with the seeker group.The amulet might possibly mean she was seeking meaning or freedom.
Rawgrim wrote...
Emzamination wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
She is working for the church in DA:O. When you first meet her, you can see she has a Seeker amulet in her inventory.
I don't recall any amulet. Even if there was any, it proves nothing other that she has an amulet with a known and pwoerfull symbolism.
And as I siad before - desecrating Andrastes remains is a vile act, especially for a elven mage.
Given that she shows up as a Seeker in DA2, its a pretty clear indication that she has been working for the church for a long time. Unless they hand out seeker amulets to everyone. Its kind of a smoking gun that she has that amulet in her inventory...
She didn't start working for the chantry until Awakening as her romance letter states shes headed to orlais for an interview.The seeker's circle description should tell you it has nothing to do with the seeker group.The amulet might possibly mean she was seeking meaning or freedom.
Keep in mind that Leliana lies for a living. I allways took everything she said with a pinch of salt.
Rawgrim wrote...
Leliana`s Song is being told by Leliana....a known liar.
Nyoka wrote...
Why would anyone agree with the crazy cultists to begin with? They want to put blood on the ashes, like Andraste is a vampire or something.
LobselVith8 wrote...
Perhaps The Warden might want to avoid getting into a physical confrontation with a force he or she may feel might outmatch his or her small, moitey crew.
LobselVith8 wrote...
Perhaps The Warden is concerned over what the Chantry might do if they get a hold of the ashes, given their history.
Modifié par thats1evildude, 04 septembre 2012 - 09:49 .
Retour en haut