With people like Branka, Bhelen or Duncan in charge, bad consequences are pretty much inevitable.
I think you mean: "In a game like Dragon Age, bad consequences are pretty much inevitable." 
I disagree with pretty much all your points except your last line, which, while true, means absolutely nothing where golems are concerned.
I always considered destroying it and killing Branka a pretty easy choice because of all this. Dwarven society is jacked up the wazoo as it is. I wouldn't want nutcases like Branka with that damn anvil jacking it up even more.
Hence why I loath the lack of an option to persuade Caridin of it's need in the dwarven people's dire hour.
Despite all of it's inherent problems, I can see an argument for preserving the Anvil due to the crisis of the empire and the endless war that they're losing against the darkspawn. For that reason, I actually sided with Branka in my latest playthrough without condoning anything that she had done.
It still felt like a punch to the gut.
It was a difficult choice for my character after he heard from Caridin, read Caridin's journal and saw everything that Branka had done to her house (again 2 houses in one). Yet, he also read many accounts from soldiers, shaperates and etc about how the dwarves had been fighting the darkspawn for hundreds of years and were steadily losing. He also saw the halls of the Deep Roads and thaigs, great and small, overrun with darkspawn and other fell creatures. He saw the great hall of Bownammar now used as a breeding ground for Broodmothers and then he saw Caridin isolated behind all of it, withholding the Anvil from his people and sitting back to watch them die because of his own personal consciousness.
Would Caridin still be as insistent on withholding the Anvil if he saw the state of his people? If he saw just how far the darkspawn had encroached? That only two thaigs were left?
Also one must consider that after the dwarf kingdoms are destroyed, nothing will stop the darkspawn from instinctively surging onto the surface without an Archdemon to lead them. Then what? Preserving the Anvil could not only potentially help the dwarves despite it's costs, but it could also serve as another effective means of fighting the darkspawn and ebbing their spread.
I'd just rather trust a persuaded and experienced Caridin with it than crazy, obsessed and traitorous Branka. But I guess that's the inherent design of the dilemna right? You won't always have solutions to situations that are ethically pleasing blah, blah, blah? It would work here except that there is a very logical and ethical solution within hairs-length if it were only implemented. Nothing suggests that Caridin cannot be persuaded to preserve the Anvil except for his insistence. But since Branka can be persuaded to destroy the Anvil despite her obsession, why can't Caridin be persuaded to see the greater picture?
Hence why I loath the lack of an option to persuade Caridin of it's need in the dwarven people's dire hour.
Despite all of it's inherent problems, I can see an argument for preserving the Anvil due to the crisis of the empire and the endless war that they're losing against the darkspawn. For that reason, I actually sided with Branka in my latest playthrough without condoning anything that she had done.
It still felt like a punch to the gut.
It was a difficult choice for my character after he heard from Caridin, read Caridin's journal and saw everything that Branka had done to her house (again 2 houses in one). Yet, he also read many accounts from soldiers, shaperates and etc about how the dwarves had been fighting the darkspawn for hundreds of years and were steadily losing. He also saw the halls of the Deep Roads and thaigs, great and small, overrun with darkspawn and other fell creatures. He saw the great hall of Bownammar now used as a breeding ground for Broodmothers and then he saw Caridin isolated behind all of it, withholding the Anvil from his people and sitting back to watch them die because of his own personal consciousness.
Would Caridin still be as insistent on withholding the Anvil if he saw the state of his people? If he saw just how far the darkspawn had encroached? That only two thaigs were left?
Also one must consider that after the dwarf kingdoms are destroyed, nothing will stop the darkspawn from instinctively surging onto the surface without an Archdemon to lead them. Then what? Preserving the Anvil could not only potentially help the dwarves despite it's costs, but it could also serve as another effective means of fighting the darkspawn and ebbing their spread.
I'd just rather trust a persuaded and experienced Caridin with it than crazy, obsessed and traitorous Branka. But I guess that's the inherent design of the dilemna right? You won't always have solutions to situations that are ethically pleasing blah, blah, blah? It would work here except that there is a very logical and ethical solution within hairs-length if it were only implemented. Nothing suggests that Caridin cannot be persuaded to preserve the Anvil except for his insistence. But since Branka can be persuaded to destroy the Anvil despite her obsession, why can't Caridin be persuaded to see the greater picture?
This.
I found it hard to believe that Branka could destroy the anvil after obsessing for 2 years. I suppose Caridin not being swayed as easily is a bit more believable because he's been affirmed in his beliefs for centuries. If the dwarven empire dying around him hasn't moved him (does he know?) then what words could the Warden say to change his mind?
For those who played Mass Effect, this reminds me of a similar situation. In Mass Effect 3 Mordin Solus wants to cure the genophage to soothe his conscious. From what you know of the krogan doing so would be a disaster. He reminds me of Caridin. Caridin is allowing the dwarves to die out because of idealism and guilt. He fears hundreds of souls being enslaved to save the dwarves. But how many dwarves have died from the ever continuing darkspawn encroachment without the aid of new golems? Caridin's decision to hide the anvil has crippled the empire and cost many more lives than those lost to the anvil.
A hard lesson to learn is that there are necessary evils in the world and things that taken alone are evil must sometimes be committed to combat evil; in this case the darkspawn. So is using the anvil the right thing to do? There is no true right answer here. It's practicality versus idealism.
Where the right to sacrifice, to die, becomes the duty to die? A slippery slope. Golems never guaranteed victory... And every dwarf that becomes a golem is lost to his/her people
With the Darkspawn, however, many dwarves being lost to their people is a given. Some of them will even become resources for the enemy. And the pursuit of golem-creating technology will probably never be abandoned, and only become more and more attractive to the dwarven people if the Darkspawn problem grows acute. That being the case, any dwarves that volunteer for the 'Anvil will offset this to some degree and perhaps even save lives.
I do not condone its use as punishment for political prisoners, but, society's political issues are for them to figure out. The Anvil is just a tool.
With the Darkspawn, however, many dwarves being lost to their people is a given. Some of them will even become resources for the enemy. And the pursuit of golem-creating technology will probably never be abandoned, and only become more and more attractive to the dwarven people if the Darkspawn problem grows acute. That being the case, any dwarves that volunteer for the 'Anvil will offset this to some degree and perhaps even save lives.
I do not condone its use as punishment for political prisoners, but, society's political issues are for them to figure out. The Anvil is just a tool.
It is not just a tool. It is total control and enslavement of another member of your society. There is also the basic principle that justice is blind. How many criminals are really criminals? Who decides? The commoner warden was a criminal but by any other society's principles he was not. I would argue their problems are more about infighting and inbreeding. This society doesn't know how to elevate its finest talent. The casteless are better fighters if trained. The legion of the dead proves this. You also see an example of this in awakening during the The Kal'hirol questline.
The main problem I see with Persuading Caridan is that he can no longer touch the Anvil so you wouldn't have any one able to use it.
The main problem I see with Persuading Caridan is that he can no longer touch the Anvil so you wouldn't have any one able to use it.
He can't destroy the Anvil. The cutscene where he forges the crown makes clear he's able to put metal against it and hit the metal with a hammer.
It is not just a tool. It is total control and enslavement of another member of your society.
At its worst, sure, but there are also a host of reasons why one may want to go under the hammer voluntarily. They may be sick, crippled, old/near death, or simply even feel like the cause is worth sacrificing their body (<-- for which reason we have people IRL who serve their country's military in the first place, and fight to keep other people safe). Bottom line: it can be used for good or for evil, as is the case with any tool.
There is also the basic principle that justice is blind. How many criminals are really criminals? Who decides? The commoner warden was a criminal but by any other society's principles he was not. I would argue their problems are more about infighting and inbreeding. This society doesn't know how to elevate its finest talent. The casteless are better fighters if trained. The legion of the dead proves this. You also see an example of this in awakening during the The Kal'hirol questline.
... Is that an argument for the 'Anvil, or against it? Justice systems are never perfect.
Again, though, with new innovation/advancement comes new sociopolitical challenges. In this case, it's a question of how to use the Anvil of the Void in fair and acceptable ways. It's up to the people of society to figure those things out, and the solutions come with time.
And I'm telling you, the pursuit of golem creation will not be abandoned -- it's just too lucrative. Golems of Amgarrak DLC all but proves this.
If it were a choice, I'd have left the Anvil alone. There's not enough dwarves to make up for losing any to the Anvil, but it's something they can use later in the future. That, or accept the casteless and surface dwarves and there will be enough dwarves to use the Anvil again. It'd be difficult to get dwarven society to accept the second choice however.
If it were a choice, I'd have left the Anvil alone. There's not enough dwarves to make up for losing any to the Anvil, but it's something they can use later in the future. That, or accept the casteless and surface dwarves and there will be enough dwarves to use the Anvil again. It'd be difficult to get dwarven society to accept the second choice however.
It is a choice, sort of. iirc, you can side with Branka, and then convince her to kill herself for what she's done.
The 'Anvil remains intact, and secret.
It is a choice, sort of. iirc, you can side with Branka, and then convince her to kill herself for what she's done.
The 'Anvil remains intact, and secret.
I think she destroys it if you do this, actually.
Golems never guaranteed victory... And every dwarf that becomes a golem is lost to his/her people
If you read the Orzammar history codex you learn that using golems was getting them victory. They were slowly reclaiming their territory lost to the darkspawn. Then Caridin hid the anvil. In the present, the dwarves are barely holding onto the little territory they have left.
I going through Kal'Hirol again. It states that the Golems failed to keep back the darkspawn. It appears that 200 casteless held them off for 5 days. I'm not thinking the Golems guarantee them victory. It could guarantee a revolt.
I going through Kal'Hirol again. It states that the Golems failed to keep back the darkspawn. It appears that 200 casteless held them off for 5 days. I'm not thinking the Golems guarantee them victory. It could guarantee a revolt.
I remember the codex in Orazammar History 2 or something saying how the dwarves were retaking their lost territory. Then Caradin hid the anvil. I don't know what you read. I didn't see it.
Look at it statistically. How could the golems not be instrumental in battling the darkspawn? The current dwarven forces are slowly losing as they are. If you hypothetically turned those forces into golems you have an army 12x the strength as before. Note: the shaper said a golem is worth a dozen dwarves. Keep in mind many golems would be made off castless and prisoners; not necessarily warrior caste dwarves.
Anything can be instrumental in fighting something else. That doesn't mean they'll win.
I remember the codex in Orazammar History 2 or something saying how the dwarves were retaking their lost territory. Then Caradin hid the anvil. I don't know what you read. I didn't see it.
Look at it statistically. How could the golems not be instrumental in battling the darkspawn? The current dwarven forces are slowly losing as they are. If you hypothetically turned those forces into golems you have an army 12x the strength as before. Note: the shaper said a golem is worth a dozen dwarves. Keep in mind many golems would be made off castless and prisoners; not necessarily warrior caste dwarves.
You find the information in Awakening. The Golems couldn't hold back the Darkspawn. The two hundred casteless did for five days.
"How could the golems not be instrumental in battling the darkspawn?"
I have to ask would you be a Golem? If not, then it is also a practice that could lead to civil war. It is problematic at best. As far as I can see there are other more useful paths.
You find the information in Awakening. The Golems couldn't hold back the Darkspawn. The two hundred casteless did for five days.
"How could the golems not be instrumental in battling the darkspawn?"
I have to ask would you be a Golem? If not, then it is also a practice that could lead to civil war. It is problematic at best. As far as I can see there are other more useful paths.
If the golems couldn't hold back the darkspawn being 12x as strong as a dwarf then how are the dwarves holding them back now? Either I'm missing something or the writers are contradicting themselves. Maybe they didn't make enough golems.
I wouldn't want to be a golem, no. But I also wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of any necessity in war. Ex: sacrificing the few for the many.
If the golems couldn't hold back the darkspawn being 12x as strong as a dwarf then how are the dwarves holding them back now? Either I'm missing something or the writers are contradicting themselves. Maybe they didn't make enough golems.
I wouldn't want to be a golem, no. But I also wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of any necessity in war. Ex: sacrificing the few for the many.
Just because you are stronger doesn't mean a win. Teamwork, strategy and feedback often gets you better results. Soldiers could signal you if the plan needs adjustments or signal you when it is time to move to the next stage. You need an active intelligent team. The Golems aren't thinking for themselves.
There are better ways.
Just because you are stronger doesn't mean a win. Teamwork, strategy and feedback often gets you better results. Soldiers could signal you if the plan needs adjustments or signal you when it is time to move to the next stage. You need an active intelligent team. The Golems aren't thinking for themselves.
There are better ways.
From what we know these alternatives aren't working. I'd never suggest using golems as a first choice. I'd consider it in desperation which is exactly what the dwarves are in.
Golems wouldn't be strategists. They'd be vanguards and damn good ones. Their existence would only help in battling the darkspawn.
Just because you are stronger doesn't mean a win. Teamwork, strategy and feedback often gets you better results. Soldiers could signal you if the plan needs adjustments or signal you when it is time to move to the next stage. You need an active intelligent team. The Golems aren't thinking for themselves.
There are better ways.
It's not impossible for there to be golems that think for themselves. It's just uncommon.
It's not impossible for there to be golems that think for themselves. It's just uncommon.
Don't all golems think for themselves? They just cannot move unless a control rod commands them to? From Shale's reflections she often talked with her former master but just couldn't kill him. When Shale was awakened she didn't find anything strange about being able to speak with the Warden until she sensed that something about the control rod was different. Based on this it's assumed golems have regular intelligence but just cannot be mobile without command.
The only golems I know of that have demonstrated any intelligence at all were Shale and Caridin. Caridin never had a control rod fashioned, and Shale had his control rod break down. All the rest were moved by control rods.
Edit-the golems you face in the dwarven quest move once you move in range, so obviously some might develop some short range abilities. Maybe not actual intelligence, simply following predetermined commands.
The only golems I know of that have demonstrated any intelligence at all were Shale and Caridin. Caridin never had a control rod fashioned, and Shale had his control rod break down. All the rest were moved by control rods.
Edit-the golems you face in the dwarven quest move once you move in range, so obviously some might develop some short range abilities. Maybe not actual intelligence, simply following predetermined commands.
But Shale reflected on talking with her master when her control rod worked. Ex: asking where in the Deep Roads she was found. And it wasn't like she said upon awakening, "I can speak?!" It wasn't unusual for her.
Maybe it's just a plothole.
Edit-the golems you face in the dwarven quest move once you move in range, so obviously some might develop some short range abilities. Maybe not actual intelligence, simply following predetermined commands.
...now I want to defeat golems using the Sussman Anomaly. Curse their simpler, more robust but less flexible hard-coded rule based AI system!
Retour en haut