132 réponses à ce sujet

[x-aizen-x]

In RPGs and games in general we always have to play the hero in some form. Which i understand why. But DAI, since the game is clearly going to be huge in every kind of way i want to be able to be the "villian"... at least from a certain point of view. My warden killed the guy that was injured in the wilds. But thats as far as we could go in DAO.

When i say evil i dont mean rasing and legion of doom and terror and being the most evil warlord thedas has ever seen. I mean it could range from putting power over everthing ooooorrrrr... it could be a situation were some one who i have romaced has been captured and she is being held from behind with a knife 2 her throat and in order to kill the guy who has her i drive my sword threw her therfore hiting him but kiling them both. And when she ask i say "if you were weak enough to get captured then your no use to the inquisition or me *walks away*"

Thats an example of what i meang by ranges.

Why do you want these kind of choices?

Because i want to see were they will take the game. by being this way int he game i also find out the kind of followers i have and who is loyal to my cause. i was shocked when that hypocrite leiliana attack me when all i did was drop a little dragon blood into the famed andraste's ashes. this way i can also form the kinda rep i want the iqui to have.

[Veruin]

People have different definitions of being evil.

For example:
" it could be a situation were some one who i have romaced has been captured and she is being held from behind with a knife 2 her throat and in order to kill the guy who has her i drive my sword threw her therfore hiting him but kiling them both. And when she ask i say "if you were weak enough to get captured then your no use to the inquisition or me"

I don't view that as evil. I view that as being a dick.

Also,  at Leliana being a "hypocrite"

Modifié par Veruin, 28 janvier 2014 - 03:23 .

[The Elder King]

I'd say sacrificing the elves in the alienage quest in DAO, or selling Fenris to Danarius are the most 'evil' choices we got so far.
I don't understand why Leliana is an hypocrite. She's very religious, and those Ashes were supposed to be Andraste's. How do you think a non-hypocrital person as faithul as Leliana would've reacted?
P.S.: did you take your example from Naruto?

[x-aizen-x]

hhh89 wrote...


P.S.: did you take your example from Naruto?

If I did?

[The Baconer]

x-aizen-x wrote...
I mean it could range from putting power over everthing ooooorrrrr... it could be a situation were some one who i have romaced has been captured and she is being held from behind with a knife 2 her throat and in order to kill the guy who has her i drive my sword threw her therfore hiting him but kiling them both. And when she ask i say "if you were weak enough to get captured then your no use to the inquisition or me *walks away*"

Modifié par The Baconer, 28 janvier 2014 - 03:42 .

[Lulupab]

Also saving the day and damning the consequences are not evil, they are gray.

[Knight of Dane]

x-aizen-x wrote...

In RPGs and games in general we always have to play the hero in some form. Which i understand why. But DAI, since the game is clearly going to be huge in every kind of way i want to be able to be the "villian"... at least from a certain point of view. My warden killed the guy that was injured in the wilds. But thats as far as we could go in DAO.

When i say evil i dont mean rasing and legion of doom and terror and being the most evil warlord thedas has ever seen. I mean it could range from putting power over everthing ooooorrrrr... it could be a situation were some one who i have romaced has been captured and she is being held from behind with a knife 2 her throat and in order to kill the guy who has her i drive my sword threw her therfore hiting him but kiling them both. And when she ask i say "if you were weak enough to get captured then your no use to the inquisition or me *walks away*"

Thats an example of what i meang by ranges.

Why do you want these kind of choices?

Because i want to see were they will take the game. by being this way int he game i also find out the kind of followers i have and who is loyal to my cause. i was shocked when that hypocrite leiliana attack me when all i did was drop a little dragon blood into the famed andraste's ashes. this way i can also form the kinda rep i want the iqui to have.

Hi Aizen, I hope you don't take my presence in your thread personal again, but I would like to ask you what about Leliana's attack was hypocritic? I don't understand this assessment.


As for the topic itself, I never really play evil myself, but I don't mind the option to be present for those who do. (I support open play style)
I have played more cynical characters though, like in Origins where I could choose the werewolves over the elves simply because a army of werewolves sound stronger, for example.

I doubt we will get straight "evil" choises, but I hope bioware weave some options into the narrative that would be morally questionable. The best choices are the ones that weigh morale vs. gain.

Modifié par Knight of Dane, 28 janvier 2014 - 03:46 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Evil is subjective.

[x-aizen-x]

Knight of Dane wrote...

x-aizen-x wrote...

In RPGs and games in general we always have to play the hero in some form. Which i understand why. But DAI, since the game is clearly going to be huge in every kind of way i want to be able to be the "villian"... at least from a certain point of view. My warden killed the guy that was injured in the wilds. But thats as far as we could go in DAO.

When i say evil i dont mean rasing and legion of doom and terror and being the most evil warlord thedas has ever seen. I mean it could range from putting power over everthing ooooorrrrr... it could be a situation were some one who i have romaced has been captured and she is being held from behind with a knife 2 her throat and in order to kill the guy who has her i drive my sword threw her therfore hiting him but kiling them both. And when she ask i say "if you were weak enough to get captured then your no use to the inquisition or me *walks away*"

Thats an example of what i meang by ranges.

Why do you want these kind of choices?

Because i want to see were they will take the game. by being this way int he game i also find out the kind of followers i have and who is loyal to my cause. i was shocked when that hypocrite leiliana attack me when all i did was drop a little dragon blood into the famed andraste's ashes. this way i can also form the kinda rep i want the iqui to have.

Hi Aizen, I hope you don't take my presence in your thread personal again, but I would like to ask you what about Leliana's attack was hypocritic? I don't understand this assessment.


As for the topic itself, I never really play evil myself, but I don't mind the option to be present for those who do. (I support open play style)
I have played more cynical characters though, like in Origins where I could choose the werewolves over the elves simply because a army of werewolves sound stronger, for example.

I doubt we will get straight "evil" choises, but I hope bioware weave some options into the narrative that would be morally questionable. The best choices are the ones that weigh morale vs. gain.

Leiliana is a total "you know what". she goes on and on about the maker this and the maker that. But she did nothing when i let the warewolfs slaugther the dalish. She did nothing when i let redcliff get destroyed by the darkspawn. she did nothing when i killed the warewolfs after turning them human. She did nothing when i let a tyrant like bahlen become king of the dwarves, She did nothing when i killed wayne for getting in my way. She help kill hundreds of people weather they are inoccent or not and did nothing to stop me. She gets made because i choose morrigan over her. But when i sprinkle a little blood on some ashes she freaks out attacks me. When she knows why we were there in the first place. She heard me tell kolgrim i was going to do it. Let me tell you somthing. im not the kinda player who just kills of my whole party cause they looked at me wrong(like some players do for some reason) so i did not want to kill her. But the fact that she attacked over some damn ashes that again, she knew what i was going to with them, is preatty retarded. THE ONLY REASON I EVEN LET HER BE IN MY PARTY IS CAUSE HOW BADASS SHE LOOKED IN THE TRAILER. so i was trying to find at least somthing about her thats from the leiliana in the sacred ashes trailer.

But i like having as many party members as i can and  i dont like lossing. I let zevern live even though he tried to freakin kill me. so yea she was juse an arse in my op

[thebigbad1013]

Evil just for the sake of being evil never appealed to me. However playing a character who is willing to do whatever it takes to accomplish his goal, even if that means some pretty extreme things, has always been an interesting concept to me. Is that person "evil?" That is indeed subjective, which is why I don't like the term "evil choices".

That being said, if we are talking about killling a woman you supposedly love (considering you romanced her) in the way that you described....that's the kind of thing that I, personally, could never do because there's no way a choice like that makes sense to me. That, to me, is evil for the sake of being evil and that does not appeal to me.

Hope that makes sense.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

bigbad1013 wrote...

Evil just for the sake of being evil never appealed to me. However playing a character who is willing to do whatever it takes to accomplish his goal, even if that means some pretty extreme things, has always been an interesting concept to me. Is that person "evil?" That is indeed subjective, which is why I don't like the term "evil choices".

That being said, if we are talking about killling a woman you supposedly love (considering you romanced her) in the way that you described....that's the kind of thing that I, personally, could never do because there's no way a choice like that makes sense to me. That, to me, is evil for the sake of being evil and that does not appeal to me.

Hope that makes sense.

That's about how I play the Warden and Shepard. And how I generally treat reality.

[Knight of Dane]

x-aizen-x wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

x-aizen-x wrote...

In RPGs and games in general we always have to play the hero in some form. Which i understand why. But DAI, since the game is clearly going to be huge in every kind of way i want to be able to be the "villian"... at least from a certain point of view. My warden killed the guy that was injured in the wilds. But thats as far as we could go in DAO.

When i say evil i dont mean rasing and legion of doom and terror and being the most evil warlord thedas has ever seen. I mean it could range from putting power over everthing ooooorrrrr... it could be a situation were some one who i have romaced has been captured and she is being held from behind with a knife 2 her throat and in order to kill the guy who has her i drive my sword threw her therfore hiting him but kiling them both. And when she ask i say "if you were weak enough to get captured then your no use to the inquisition or me *walks away*"

Thats an example of what i meang by ranges.

Why do you want these kind of choices?

Because i want to see were they will take the game. by being this way int he game i also find out the kind of followers i have and who is loyal to my cause. i was shocked when that hypocrite leiliana attack me when all i did was drop a little dragon blood into the famed andraste's ashes. this way i can also form the kinda rep i want the iqui to have.

Hi Aizen, I hope you don't take my presence in your thread personal again, but I would like to ask you what about Leliana's attack was hypocritic? I don't understand this assessment.


As for the topic itself, I never really play evil myself, but I don't mind the option to be present for those who do. (I support open play style)
I have played more cynical characters though, like in Origins where I could choose the werewolves over the elves simply because a army of werewolves sound stronger, for example.

I doubt we will get straight "evil" choises, but I hope bioware weave some options into the narrative that would be morally questionable. The best choices are the ones that weigh morale vs. gain.

Leiliana is a total "you know what". she goes on and on about the maker this and the maker that. But she did nothing when i let the warewolfs slaugther the dalish. She did nothing when i let redcliff get destroyed by the darkspawn. she did nothing when i killed the warewolfs after turning them human. She did nothing when i let a tyrant like bahlen become king of the dwarves, She did nothing when i killed wayne for getting in my way. She help kill hundreds of people weather they are inoccent or not and did nothing to stop me. She gets made because i choose morrigan over her. But when i sprinkle a little blood on some ashes she freaks out attacks me. When she knows why we were there in the first place. She heard me tell kolgrim i was going to do it. Let me tell you somthing. im not the kinda player who just kills of my whole party cause they looked at me wrong(like some players do for some reason) so i did not want to kill her. But the fact that she attacked over some damn ashes that again, she knew what i was going to with them, is preatty retarded. THE ONLY REASON I EVEN LET HER BE IN MY PARTY IS CAUSE HOW BADASS SHE LOOKED IN THE TRAILER. so i was trying to find at least somthing about her thats from the leiliana in the sacred ashes trailer.

But i like having as many party members as i can and  i dont like lossing. I let zevern live even though he tried to freakin kill me. so yea she was juse an arse in my op

Okay I can see where you are coming from here.

In part he approval system is at fault here because it robs the experience from a lot of reactivity. In a way Leliana does react to these things, but only if her approval drops far enough down (she will leave) but I agree that Leliana, and other characters for that matter, had really passive reactions for that matter.

(I don't think it fits Alistair or Wynne either to sit idly by while you directly slaughter innocents.)
But ultimately some of those choises can be excused with "what's best for the blight" role play narrative. Arguments could be made for many of those points.

Not that I wouldn't like more reactivity. Companions ultimately just going "okay..." in many cases bug me too.

[wiccame]

Leliana isn't really a hypocrite, I think she is more a person trying to change but has the occasional 'slip up'. She doesn't attack when you first agree to defile the ashes, because 1 the game wont let her and 2 you have the chance to change your mind when you get there, do you not?
There are plenty of places where her belief in the maker/trying to be good comes out.
She doesnt want you killing Connor, she tries to stop Swiftrunner from killing Zathrien, she wants to help Jowan, just to mention a few....
As for being evil...I think we have plenty of chances to come across a a pretty bad person, I think it just fails to follow through with consquences...killing the wounded soldier got you a ticking off from Alistir but immediately forgotten...you can practice blood magic with out any reprocussions, that sort of thing. I would love to see Alistair Wynne or Leliana cringe whenever I throw up blood wound 

Modifié par wiccame, 28 janvier 2014 - 04:20 .

[Viking_Warrior]

If there is a evil path I hope it's not the usual schoolyard bully option (Darkside Revan) or just beeing a crazed murderous lunatic. Characters like that are not believable, as they would have been hunted down by every law enforcer and bounty hunter in the setting.

I think Palpatine from Star Wars is a great example of how evil characters could be played. Giving everyone a friendly pat on the shoulder and beeing their friends, but secretly plotting and scheming, and in the end wins over the senate trough political scheming, gaining ultimate power by fooling everyone to think it's for the best. Then use that power to crush the Jedis.

Modifié par Viking_Warrior, 28 janvier 2014 - 04:23 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Eh "Evil" options are only fun if they can be justified pragmatically or if they're so insanely over the top that it goes right into hilarious.

[Sundance31us]

Would punching Isolde and executing Conner (or having her do it) even though there might have been an alternative available evil?

Technically speaking I was playing the urgency of the dialogue (my Warden wasn't a mage, the Tower had been annulled, blood magic was out of the question and Morgan wasn't in the party). There was, however, an underlying motive that the arl's family wasn't going to get out of the Redcliffe tragedy scot-free.

[The Elder King]

x-aizen-x wrote...

hhh89 wrote...


P.S.: did you take your example from Naruto?

If I did?

Nothing. I was just curious, since I instanstly thought about it.

[phunx]

The example of evil was pretty silly. There are civilians in all wars. If your army kills people (love interest or not) who "aren't strong enough to be in it" then you are an evil leader to me.

[Nuloen]

i would like options like:
go fight with mages against templars:innocent:, or practice blood magic ritual to revive army of undead to defend mages and serve your other purposes
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
to enchant your self with taint(or red or corrupted lyrium) to get greater power:devil:, or to destroy the source of this taint(lyrium, whatever):innocent:
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
fight and kill dragon:innocent:

or make some kind of deal with it so it will fight against demons and other enemies (like Venatori) (or simply dont attack you)

although its not purely evil

Modifié par Nuloen, 28 janvier 2014 - 05:13 .

[Thomas Andresen]

Evil is subjective.

So much this. Always.

When people have brought this up previously, their examples have generally not struck me as "dick-head"-moves, or completely void of any kind of foresight. If that's what "evil" boils down to, I don't want it in the games at all.

On the other hand, I loved the dark side ending in KotOR. And I loved the closed fist ending in Jade Empire. But I also found the endings on the other side of the spectrum to be just as fun, if for different reasons.

[ElitePinecone]

Rassler wrote...

Also saving the day and damning the consequences are not evil, they are gray.

Yeah.

I'd say being pragmatic, ruthless, and relentlessly focused on the outcome by no means implies "evil". It's entirely possible, in that philosophy, to cause great harm to prevent even larger disasters. 

(Which I guess veers closer to utilitarianism, too.)

It's actually closer to what Mass Effect's Renegade was meant to be like, before it became a weird mix of sadism and ruthlessness. A person absolutely focused on saving the day wouldn't stop to gleefully murder a random person or spnd time bullying anybody, unless it contributed to the success of their task.

[SeptimusMagistos]

I actually wish Bioware would step away from 'kick a puppy' choices because they inevitably spoil their 'red' alignment. You always end up with one alignment that's a fairly consistent philosophy and another one that starts out as a fairly interesting philosophy...and then gets ruined because Bioware feels compelled to dump every 'be a jerk' option into it, so there's no reason to ever go that route unless you're planning to be stupidly evil.

If Bioware just told players that they'll have to accept that they're the hero and let them pick what kind of hero they are, you could have a morality system that was actually interesting.

[x-aizen-x]

Nuloen wrote...

i would like options like:
go fight with mages against templars:innocent:, or practice blood magic ritual to revive army of undead to defend mages and serve your other purposes
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
to enchant your self with taint(or red or corrupted lyrium) to get greater power:devil:, or to destroy the source of this taint(lyrium, whatever):innocent:
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
fight and kill dragon:innocent:

or make some kind of deal with it so it will fight against demons and other enemies (like Venatori) (or simply dont attack you)

although its not purely evil

yea this is wat i meant^

[happy_daiz]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

I actually wish Bioware would step away from 'kick a puppy' choices because they inevitably spoil their 'red' alignment. You always end up with one alignment that's a fairly consistent philosophy and another one that starts out as a fairly interesting philosophy...and then gets ruined because Bioware feels compelled to dump every 'be a jerk' option into it, so there's no reason to ever go that route unless you're planning to be stupidly evil.

If Bioware just told players that they'll have to accept that they're the hero and let them pick what kind of hero they are, you could have a morality system that was actually interesting.

^ This.

That's a lot of why I never bother with 'evil' or 'renegade' type options. Some are absolutely absurd, and are obviously intended to be the polar opposite of the diplomatic/nice choices. That isn't really the way things work, and it's hard to be compelled/suspend disbelief, or to not feel guilty about being a complete pixel sociopath.

[Secretlyapotato]

hhh89 wrote...

x-aizen-x wrote...

hhh89 wrote...


P.S.: did you take your example from Naruto?

If I did?

Nothing. I was just curious, since I instanstly thought about it.

Lol I did too. >.<