327 réponses à ce sujet

[Olorin_85]

Hello everyone. I hope the pure speculative nature of this topic won't seal its fate to a premature block but, since the subforum's up, I thought I might as well expose a doubt that's been in my mind for quite some time.

So, same as many of you I have been tackling every bit of news about this game for a while now. Yesterday's open letter from Mark Darrah was quite a surprise and an exciting reading too. 

However, I find myself wondering how the distinctive "3 classes" pattern of the DA franchise will fit in a title which, by its title, will mainly be concerned with the whereabouts of the Inquisition or even, judging by some of the early rumours, with he whereabouts of its Commander. A Warrior-Rogue PC doesn't pose much of a challenge in explain how he/she enlisted in the Inquisition ranks, I suppose, though I'm eager to know what the team has in store for them in terms of background story (here's hoping we get some sort of playable prologue a la Origins).

However, I think Mages are much more difficult, in this respect. I mean, with all we've been told about magic being something dangerous, difficult to controll, strictly regulated, ill-viewed by both people and governments (aside from Tevinter, of course) and openly harrassed by, well, almost everyone, it makes me wonder how exactly a Mage could end up being the Inquisition commander, or even part of it.
Shouldn't the Inquisition be something like even more "mage-phobic" than the Templars are? Or are they that secret branch that every security organization has, dedicated to "fight fire with fire"? And if so, how exactly is a mage selected to enter it?

So, I'd like to hear if someone else has this same doubt and if he/she has come up with a possible explanation for it, or if we're just going to live with this doubt until "late 2013" comes

[Wrathion]

I don't think the Inquisition is an organization though. It just sounds nice after Dragon age III and it's probably just what this period of conflict will be called. Being called the Inquisitor because you're were the most important person person during this time would fit.
If it is an organization.
Secret Branch would make the most sense if it's not templar associated. But I hope you don't START OUT as commander of anything.

[Olorin_85]

Alexandrine Delassixe wrote...

I don't think the Inquisition is an organization though. It just sounds nice after Dragon age III and it's probably just what this period of conflict will be called. Being called the Inquisitor because you're were the most important person person during this time would fit.
If it is an organization.
Secret Branch would make the most sense if it's not templar associated. But I hope you don't START OUT as commander of anything.

That's an interesing pov. You're talking about the Inquisitor being something like "The Champion" from DA2, right? I dunno, though. Wouldn't it have been more appropriate, in that case, calling it DA3: Inquisitor?

The "Inquisition" subtitle makes me think about some sort of organization or group, wether secret or in plain, that acts in secret ways. 

I totally agree with you on the "commander" thing: would be nice to have to go up thrugh the ranks once more, discovering more and more about this Inquisition, starting as a recruit and moving up during the game. Fascinating.

[ElitePinecone]

(Trying to be vague because some of this strays into leaked information)

It looks rather likely that the Inquisition in Dragon Age 3 is connected to Thedas' historical, religious Inquisition in name only. For all intents and purposes, it's a new organisation set up to do one specific thing, which doesn't necessarily involve hunting down mages. It *may*, if that's the direction the player takes it in, but the organisation itself is not explicitly associated with any cause other than ending disorder. That's why the player can be a mage, and why (it seems) a player character can be sympathetic to mage freedom while actively participating in an Inquisition.

As I said in another thread, an 'inquisition' is (by definition) merely an investigation into the nature of things, it doesn't have to have all the associated religious/violent baggage that we attach to it and that Thedas attaches to it. It exists in DA3 as a new group dedicated to solving one problem, not to necessarily fighting a religious war (unless, I guess, the player wants it to).

What I do find interesting is the potential for subversion: both of the player's expectations of what an "Inquisition" should be, and the internal logic of the gameworld - it's possible we could use the rhetorical/legal power of being part of "an Inquisition" without actually having to resort to the methods it used or the causes it supported.

[Cultist]

I want to see how they will handle Blood Mage Inquisitor.

[berelinde]

 Historically, the Inquisition hunted mages, "heretics," and evidently anybody else with funny little ways. From the sound of the Codex entry, it sounded like a bunch of Andrastian witch hunters. After the signing of the Navarran Accord, they became the Templar Order. A mage protagonist in this role is... problematical, to say the least.

Since the idea was first raised, I have been plastering the forums with how little the idea of role-playing a canonically zealous protagonist appeals to me. I thought I was safe. I didn't think they would actually do it. Since their inception, BioWare has made games where some elements of the protagonist were defined (necessary, or the game would be impossible to write), but they have never made a game that told the player what his or her character actually believed. Bhaalspawn, hero of Neverwinter, Kalach-Cha (arguably not BW, but they have a forum for NWN2 here, so whatev), the Warden, Hawke, all of those characters had a pre-determined background, but that background made NO assumptions about the character's motivations or beliefs. Now, we're offered an Inquisitor protagonist. I do not want to have to role-play a character where the religious and political agendas are already part of the character's backstory. Considering the lore associations, I did not want to play this even with non-mage PCs. I'm not into that whole anti-hero thing, thanks.

Fortunately, I have a way of registering my lack of enthusiasm for this. Unless the protagonist is forced to join against values that s/he is given the opportunity to state openly and often ("You do realize that I vehemently oppose everything you stand for, your grace? Why would you want me to join when I would much rather see you lying in a pool of your own blood?"), there is no way I am buying this game. Probably not even then, if it's handled as clumsily as Best Served Cold and Orsino's endgame for the mage-siding Hawke.

My concern is that given the player outcry over apparent choices that have no real consequences, the solution was to take away the choices.

Since 2005, I have spent over $700 on BioWare games. I include duplicate copies I bought to replace worn-out or misplaced disks, but not copies I bought to give away as gifts. I am not narcissistic enough to think that anyone will miss me, but ultimately, the company may miss my money.

[esper]

berelinde wrote...

 Historically, the Inquisition hunted mages, "heretics," and evidently anybody else with funny little ways. From the sound of the Codex entry, it sounded like a bunch of Andrastian witch hunters. After the signing of the Navarran Accord, they became the Templar Order. A mage protagonist in this role is... problematical, to say the least.

Since the idea was first raised, I have been plastering the forums with how little the idea of role-playing a canonically zealous protagonist appeals to me. I thought I was safe. I didn't think they would actually do it. Since their inception, BioWare has made games where some elements of the protagonist were defined (necessary, or the game would be impossible to write), but they have never made a game that told the player what his or her character actually believed. Bhaalspawn, hero of Neverwinter, Kalach-Cha (arguably not BW, but they have a forum for NWN2 here, so whatev), the Warden, Hawke, all of those characters had a pre-determined background, but that background made NO assumptions about the character's motivations or beliefs. Now, we're offered an Inquisitor protagonist. I do not want to have to role-play a character where the religious and political agendas are already part of the character's backstory. Considering the lore associations, I did not want to play this even with non-mage PCs. I'm not into that whole anti-hero thing, thanks.

Fortunately, I have a way of registering my lack of enthusiasm for this. Unless the protagonist is forced to join against values that s/he is given the opportunity to state openly and often ("You do realize that I vehemently oppose everything you stand for, your grace? Why would you want me to join when I would much rather see you lying in a pool of your own blood?"), there is no way I am buying this game. Probably not even then, if it's handled as clumsily as Best Served Cold and Orsino's endgame for the mage-siding Hawke.

My concern is that given the player outcry over apparent choices that have no real consequences, the solution was to take away the choices.

Since 2005, I have spent over $700 on BioWare games. I include duplicate copies I bought to replace worn-out or misplaced disks, but not copies I bought to give away as gifts. I am not narcissistic enough to think that anyone will miss me, but ultimately, the company may miss my money.

I feel with you, I too feel a bit sick at being forced to play a charachther who starts out as pro-chantry enough to join a fraction/branch/whatever, it doesn't really matter that we can go anti-chantry later, the fact that our character started out with a belief in the chantry that strong, makes me dislike her already.

That said, I am holding out hope for it either being an organisation that is completely new an formed by the protagonist and just have a really bad thedas historical name because of mysterious reason, or that you get forced into join kicking and screaming if you character so pleases and can betray the chantry at the first given opportunity and rub it in their face how stupid they were to force the protagonist along.

[Knight of Dane]

I think we'll have a "origin" story where the Divine perhaps happen to see our character's skill and recognizes him/her as a fine candidate as the inquisitor.
As the inquisitor we'll represent the chantry's judgement, but I doubt bioware wouldn't give os options to be pro mage or neutral.

[Master Shiori]

Even if Inquisition were an organization that cropped up in wake of DA2, nothing in our (very limited) knowledge of that organization suggests they're anti-mage or that they wouldn't enlist the aid of a mage.

Right now, we know of no reason as to why a mage couldn't be part of them, provide we actually do end up joining the inquisition.

Modifié par Master Shiori, 18 septembre 2012 - 10:52 .

[esper]

@Master Shiori, the problem is that historically in Thedas the Inquestion were the pre-templar, templars. So the name automatically accossiate back to that.

I think that Knight of Dane's origin idea is what is most likely to happen, I just doesn't have a interest in playing a characther who would ever, work for the Divine in any way or form.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Master Shiori wrote...
Even if Inquisition were an organization that cropped up in wake of DA2, nothing in our (very limited) knowledge of that organization suggests they're anti-mage or that they wouldn't enlist the aid of a mage.

Right now, we know of no reason as to why a mage couldn't be part of them, provide we actually do end up joining the inquisition.

This.  Also, it's not as though every mage is going to side with the rebel mages.  Hawke in DA2 can be a mage and still side with the templars because, well, the alternative involves working with a bunch of crazy people.  (Not that the templars aren't crazy too, though.)

If anything, the Inquisitors are probably desperate to get their hands on sane mages who aren't running around fighting templars and causing trouble.  These mages would be valuable assets, not only for their combat skills, but also as an example to the warring mages and templars.

[kibblesticks]

ElitePinecone wrote...

(Trying to be vague because some of this strays into leaked information)

It looks rather likely that the Inquisition in Dragon Age 3 is connected to Thedas' historical, religious Inquisition in name only. For all intents and purposes, it's a new organisation set up to do one specific thing, which doesn't necessarily involve hunting down mages. It *may*, if that's the direction the player takes it in, but the organisation itself is not explicitly associated with any cause other than ending disorder. That's why the player can be a mage, and why (it seems) a player character can be sympathetic to mage freedom while actively participating in an Inquisition.

As I said in another thread, an 'inquisition' is (by definition) merely an investigation into the nature of things, it doesn't have to have all the associated religious/violent baggage that we attach to it and that Thedas attaches to it. It exists in DA3 as a new group dedicated to solving one problem, not to necessarily fighting a religious war (unless, I guess, the player wants it to).

What I do find interesting is the potential for subversion: both of the player's expectations of what an "Inquisition" should be, and the internal logic of the gameworld - it's possible we could use the rhetorical/legal power of being part of "an Inquisition" without actually having to resort to the methods it used or the causes it supported.

Wow, I was thinking the exact same thing only I couldn't word it properly.  Thanks for writing my thoughts for me.

C'mon guys, stop getting riled up over a name.  Just because "Inquistion" has negative/extremist connotations, doesn't mean DA3's Inquistion will adhere to them.  It might only be a chantry organisation for funding purposes, but really you have complete autonomy to get the job done.

What I imagine will happen is something like this:

- Big Bad attacks/makes itself known (like the darkspawn from DAO).  Everyone agrees the world is going to end if the Big Bad isn't stopped.

- Big Bad is known to be acting/advancing it's adgenda through traitors in the province.

- A group (The Inquisition) is formed to combat the Big Bad and to root out those who are traitorous/brainwashed/indoctrinated.

- You get pulled into the Inquistion's ranks by some weird turn of fate.

- You come to learn that come inquistors are corrupt and some are benign.

- Through much questing, bloodshed, betrayal and investigating, you build a team and earn their respect.

- You lead your team against the Big Bad.

- The end. Roll the DLC

Modifié par kibblesticks, 18 septembre 2012 - 11:38 .

[ElitePinecone]

kibblesticks wrote...
Just because "Inquistion" has negative/extremist connotations, doesn't mean DA3's Inquistion will adhere to them.  It might only be a chantry organisation for funding purposes, but really you have complete autonomy to get the job done.

Yep, I suspect this is what will end up happening, although I think even initially the power of the organised Chantry to influence events will be limited by the general chaos of the setting. I think it's more likely we'll be given the task by someone important but detatched from the Chantry proper, like Leliana. 

We shouldn't forget that even the pre-DA2 Chantry was riven by factional differences, we saw that the Divine herself is relatively sympathetic to the mages, and that her overriding concern was stability rather than doctrinal purity. She had enemies within the Chantry, but her concern would be an end to chaos rather than establishing a religious crusade. 

Cassandra and Leliana, for example, could be considered part of the moderate wing of the Chantry as a whole (gven their close relationship with the Divine) even before the church itself splintered and Lambert's Seeker faction went rogue, so to speak. Hypothetically if they were involved with any new Inquisition, I'd suggest it would be far more concerned with "inquiring" about things than joining Lambert's group in warring with mages. 

Given the small tidbits of info we got in the marketing survey I think it's extraordinarily unlikely that we'd be operating under the organised imprimateur of the Chantry, if it even still exists as a functioning organisation.

It also seemed to suggest that the player character would actually be *leading* the Inquisition, as "The Inquisitor", who helps found [or is drafted into?] the new organisation after a thing happens.

[berelinde]

Knight of Dane wrote...

I think we'll have a "origin" story where the Divine perhaps happen to see our character's skill and recognizes him/her as a fine candidate as the inquisitor.
As the inquisitor we'll represent the chantry's judgement, but I doubt bioware wouldn't give os options to be pro mage or neutral.

The first part,where we would be made to play a character who represents the chantry, is the part I have a problem with. I'm sure we will be given the opportunity to be pro-mage, but I refuse to play a character with a pre-determined religious agenda. I will be voting with my wallet.

As the months tick past, I am sure we will find out more information. I will be paying attention. As I said, there are circumstances where I would consider playing the game, e.g. the protagonist is a person from a non-chantry background who is conscripted involuntarily, given ample opportunity to state his beliefs, and not made to sound like a joke for daring to go against the grain. I would *not* be happy, even then, but I might be willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, I have other ways to spend my money.

Unfortunately, I play on PC, so there is no way to rent the game without purchasing it. A free demo before any pre-order deadlines would be nice.

[esper]

ElitePinecone wrote...

kibblesticks wrote...
Just because "Inquistion" has negative/extremist connotations, doesn't mean DA3's Inquistion will adhere to them.  It might only be a chantry organisation for funding purposes, but really you have complete autonomy to get the job done.

Yep, I suspect this is what will end up happening, although I think even initially the power of the organised Chantry to influence events will be limited by the general chaos of the setting. I think it's more likely we'll be given the task by someone important but detatched from the Chantry proper, like Leliana. 

We shouldn't forget that even the pre-DA2 Chantry was riven by factional differences, we saw that the Divine herself is relatively sympathetic to the mages, and that her overriding concern was stability rather than doctrinal purity. She had enemies within the Chantry, but her concern would be an end to chaos rather than establishing a religious crusade. 

Cassandra and Leliana, for example, could be considered part of the moderate wing of the Chantry as a whole (gven their close relationship with the Divine) even before the church itself splintered and Lambert's Seeker faction went rogue, so to speak. Hypothetically if they were involved with any new Inquisition, I'd suggest it would be far more concerned with "inquiring" about things than joining Lambert's group in warring with mages. 

Given the small tidbits of info we got in the marketing survey I think it's extraordinarily unlikely that we'd be operating under the organised imprimateur of the Chantry, if it even still exists as a functioning organisation.

It also seemed to suggest that the player character would actually be *leading* the Inquisition, as "The Inquisitor", who helps found [or is drafted into?] the new organisation after a thing happens.

The problem is some of us are not even interested in playing 'moderate' chantry wing. It is not just a mage/templar thing. It is be against the chantry thing.

I am simply not interesting in playing a character who volentary helps stabilize the chantry's power.

[Fredward]

I've been wandering about this too. Of course at this stage it is a LOT of supposition. The Inquisition does not have to have anything to do with the Chantry just because its namesake did. And I wouldn't like my character being religious enough to join zealots without my input either, but honestly, I don't think it's gonna be played like that.

Berelinde, I'm curious. If for instance the protag was raised from birth in some super secret Chantry sect and was kinda "brainwashed" into following their doctrine would that be a suitable type of backstory for their presence in a religious group? I could see this kinda explanation working for why a mage is present IF the Inquisition is a part of the Chantry. IF being the operative word.

[matiwariat]

Hmh, maybe the inquisition is only a description of the time period and the situation and we will have an origin story choice of sorts where we could chose if we are part of it or against it etc. It just seems weird to have a mage protagonist in such an organisation unless there is sometime really big I'm missing.

[berelinde]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Master Shiori wrote...
Even if Inquisition were an organization that cropped up in wake of DA2, nothing in our (very limited) knowledge of that organization suggests they're anti-mage or that they wouldn't enlist the aid of a mage.

Right now, we know of no reason as to why a mage couldn't be part of them, provide we actually do end up joining the inquisition.

This.  Also, it's not as though every mage is going to side with the rebel mages.  Hawke in DA2 can be a mage and still side with the templars because, well, the alternative involves working with a bunch of crazy people.  (Not that the templars aren't crazy too, though.)

If anything, the Inquisitors are probably desperate to get their hands on sane mages who aren't running around fighting templars and causing trouble.  These mages would be valuable assets, not only for their combat skills, but also as an example to the warring mages and templars.

No offense Master Shiori, but are you familiar with the lore? If the group is meant to be something completely independent of its historical counterpart, they probably should have chosen a different name.

Sable Rhapsody, if that is where they are going with this, it makes me even *less* likely to buy the game. I'd prefer to role-play one of the rebel mages.

[berelinde]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...


Berelinde, I'm curious. If for instance the protag was raised from birth in some super secret Chantry sect and was kinda "brainwashed" into following their doctrine would that be a suitable type of backstory for their presence in a religious group? I could see this kinda explanation working for why a mage is present IF the Inquisition is a part of the Chantry. IF being the operative word.

This would not be enough to make me buy the game. It would strengthen my decision not to.

[Vandicus]

Its not like we had a choice whether or not we joined the Grey Wardens. The Grey Wardens as an organization follow Andraste as a result of events during the Second Blight. While not quite an arm of the Chantry the player was forced to join an organization with religious affiliations during DA:O.

Is it unreasonable to have a character whose beliefs and impressions of the world stem from their particular background rather than from whatever 3rd person metagame philosophy we subscribe to? The characters can have better character development if they start out with "flawed" beliefs.

Modifié par Vandicus, 18 septembre 2012 - 01:25 .

[berelinde]

Sorry, Vandicus, that argument isn't going to fly. The Grey Wardens as an organization have no political or religious affiliations. Individuals may harbor whatever views they want, but as a group, their only concern is stopping the Blight.

My characters *do* have beliefs that stem from their backgrounds. They are all different. I would like it to stay that way rather than being locked into only one choice. Most of the characters I run are mages. One or two have been Andrastian, but it makes much more sense to run characters that actively reject the faith that has rejected them. Something along the lines of "Wait, you priests have been telling me since birth that mages are Maker-cursed and now you expect me to do *what* for you? GTFO."

[Ianamus]

[Warning] Potentially leaked info below.



Considering that among the rumoured potential companions were a Tevinter magister, a Grey Warden and Bloodthirsty Tal-Vashoth mercenary it seems more a "group of misfits uniting for a common goal" than a specifically religious institution.

I thought that the leak was implying that the majority of chantry leadership was destroyed in the beginning of the game anyway, maybe even up to the divine. You can't really be working under chantry rule when Cassandra your equal is the highest ranking Chantry member left.

And even if they are not the organisation being a branch of the Chantry doesnt immediately mean that your character is a chantry supporter. If your sole problem is that the inquisition might be part of the chantry then I guess you wouldn't be able to play the Mage origin story in DA:O, since the circle of Magi is (well, was) also a branch of the Chantry.

Modifié par EJ107, 18 septembre 2012 - 01:38 .

[ElitePinecone]

esper wrote...

The problem is some of us are not even interested in playing 'moderate' chantry wing. It is not just a mage/templar thing. It is be against the chantry thing.

I am simply not interesting in playing a character who volentary helps stabilize the chantry's power.

I'd state again that the Inquisition does not even look like it's religious or pro-Chantry, it just happens to have some ex-Chantry members. It has a couple of very specific raisons d'etre (excuse my Orlesian), to investigate the cause(s) of the chaos afflicting Thedas, and restore peace to the world through any means necessary. That doesn't, at all, have to mean restoring Chantry power. 

(SPOILERS) - I've hidden the text below, remember if you quote it the spoiler-colour-tag won't work. 

According to the leaked marketing survey:


In the middle of a peace conference, the Chantry leadership is practically wiped out by an event right at the start of the game - this is the catalyst for the Inquisition, and the reason why the player character sets out to discover who is pulling the strings and inciting all the wars, chaos and disorder.  The survey's very short plot intro literally mentions "something new" arising in the form of the Inquisition - explicitly created to find out the source of the magical disaster, not as an arm of the Chanty. If the Chantry even still exists - with most (all?) of its leadership dead - it's in no position to demand anything from the player: the marketing survey said "it's up to you how you lead the Inquisition". 

I highly, highly, highly doubt that DA3 would make you support the Chantry unless you want to, even if the organisation still exists in a formal sense after the start of the game. Remember that the Seekers already seceded in Asunder, many Templars broke away to hunt mages by themselves, and the majority (?) of the Chantry's civilian religious leadership is wiped out right at the get-go. The Inquisition looks like a group set up precisely because the Chanty could not guarantee peace, and was destroyed in the process. 

The companion list looks as though it includes Cassandra, a Grey Warden, a Tevinter magister (albeit not a power-hungry one), a rogue Qunari and Cullen. The Inquisitor not only can be a mage, but works with mages and parts of the Chantry that aren't killing each other. The organisation is a bunch of outcasts from around Thedas, not an outpost of existing power structures. Cullen, Leliana and Cassandra have no place in the formal Chantry after DA2/Asunder, if the Divine is dead - Cullen rejected Merideth's extremism, Leliana depended on Justinia's favour, and Cassandra, as an ally of the Divine, would be no friend of the Lambert faction. 

I'm speculating here, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if Cullen, Cassandra and possibly Leliana join/found the Inquisition precisely because the Chantry proper is in no state to find out what happened, with most of its leaders dead. Though they'd probably argue for a restoration of Chantry power, I'd imagine the player would be under no obligation to acquiesce to that.

Modifié par ElitePinecone, 18 septembre 2012 - 01:56 .

[Jerrybnsn]

By its definition, an inquisition is an "institutional organization" created to root out heresy. The Inquisition also has the power to try and execute heretics. Why a mage would be trusted and utilized for such an institution is going to depend on the clever writing skills of the DA team.

Now if Bioware doesn't intend to use the Inquisition in these terms than perhaps they should have chosen a different word to describe what they do mean.

[ElitePinecone]

berelinde wrote...
If the group is meant to be something completely independent of its historical counterpart, they probably should have chosen a different name.

I'd argue that's precisely why they chose it. The word "Inquisition" carries great weight in Thedas, even if it's not given official Chantry sanction. An organisation adopting the namesake of the historical Inquisition, even without the same aim or catalyst, still has power from historical memory. 

There's also the potential for subversion, an Inquisition in name but not in nature. The marketing survey says:

"we have many ways to investigate and solve Thedas' problems - from diplomacy to personal contacts to spying to politics to actual warfare. Adopting the namesake of an Inquisition while explicitly rejecting its methods and brutality could lead to some fascinating gameplay elements - particularly if some companions or factions believe harsher methods are necessary to get to the cause of the problems."