142 réponses à ce sujet

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

And if not evil can the Inquisitor be exceptionally cruel and callous towards both party members and the world at large? I realise there will be difficult choices but is it possible to play an "alignment" of sorts or at least go in an ethical direction? Many thanks High Lords of Bioware.

[n7stormrunner]

depends.... do you care if the world ends? if you companions decide it is better off with out you and push the issue?

[Chaia]

If Shepard could be a git whilst saving the galaxy, I don't see why the Inquisitor can't be cruel whilst saving Thedas. 

[Mes]

You want to open the veil tears instead of close them, don't you. 

 

And become the great lord Sauron! Mwaaaaahaha! 

[SerCambria358]

I dont see why not, these options have always been a part of DA and ME

[JakeLeTDK]

So sth like Kotor 1? Kill your friends and rule Thedas as the new God? Well well, somebody did some thinking

[Innsmouth Dweller]

If Shepard could be a git whilst saving the galaxy, I don't see why the Inquisitor can't be cruel whilst saving Thedas. 

i'm more interested in whether the Inquisitor can somehow bring more chaos and destruction to Thedas rather than saving it, killing every or most of companions/followers in the process. or at least sacrifice them to gain more power.

[Chaia]

i'm more interested in whether the Inquisitor can somehow bring more chaos and destruction to Thedas rather than saving it, killing every or most of companions/followers in the process. or at least sacrifice them to gain more power.

Interesting idea, kinda reminds me of what Morrigan says at the end of the 'Fires Above' trailer - "Darkness closes in, will you stand against it? Or lead this world to its bitter end."

 

It might just be trailer talk, but hopefully its something we can choose from

[Karach_Blade]

I found the sith lord! 

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

I found the sith lord! 

Or Bane the Black Lord...

[ArtemisMoons]

So you want to lead yourself right to a game over screen? lol

[Eternal Phoenix]

Roleplaying a chaotic/evil character shouldn't just equate to a game over scene. The problem is having meaningful divergence when playing this kind of character would be expensive for development. There is really no way to know what kind of evil choices the player will be able to make or what kind of consequences they will result in. Still, roleplaying as chaotic evil shouldn't be equated to a fail state of the game.

 
Having the option to kill a group of mages/templars/wardens (or whatever) instead of being diplomatic with them to get what you want, won't be expensive in development costs. All Bioware games to date have had options like these so Inquisition should be no exception. I doubt we can be chaotically evil to the point where we're the devil in disguise but the option to be ruthless and to murder should be there again as it was in the prior two DA titles (with more ruthlessly bad options in Origins).
 
The world is in a cataclysmic state. Playing a ruthless Inquisitor who murders all who might stand in his/her way to save the world would be fitting to the story just like it was in Origins where you could completely tear through the survivors of the Circle tower even though they're innocent (that's just to name one example).
 
So I agree, "roleplaying as chaotic evil shouldn't be equated to a fail state of the game." This evil character might still save the world but for different reasons and he or she would leave a bigger body trail along the way too. I remember, in Origins, The Warden could turn around to Alistair and literally say something along the lines of "I'm doing this for the reward and I don't care about being a Grey Warden." By this you could establish The Warden as a person who didn't care and was only in it for gold, fame and glory rather than for saving the world for good intentions.

[Mockingword]

Since "evil" is entirely subjective, you're already free to be as "evil" as you want.

[In Exile]

Self-destructive chaotic stupid is not an option in Bioware games. Shameless cruelty makes no sense in the world, because your party members should straight up murder you at the first sign of something like that. 

[Bob from Accounting]

You should go argue 'evil is subjective' in a court of law and see how far you get.

[Mockingword]

Self-destructive chaotic stupid is not an option in Bioware games.

Unless you're Loghain! Ohohohohoho!

[Mockingword]

You should go argue 'evil is subjective' in a court of law and see how far you get.

I dare say they'll brush it aside as irrelevant, since the morality of an action has little if any relation to its legality.

[In Exile]

Unless you're Loghain! Ohohohohoho!

The protagonist can't do that, which is my point. And Loghain wasn't chaotic evil, even if it was stupid. 

[Eternal Phoenix]

Self-destructive chaotic stupid is not an option in Bioware games. Shameless cruelty makes no sense in the world, because your party members should straight up murder you at the first sign of something like that. 

 

Tell that to the injured soldier of Ostagar and The Warden's companions who stood there as he slit his throat and laughed about it. Or tell that to this elf who can be killed in the sight of the entire Ostagar camp. Or tell that to Brother Genitivi when The Warden throws a knife back in his head. Or...

 

(I can go on...)

 

Point is, in Origins, you could shamelessly murder many NPC's.

 

Not to mention Baldur's Gate and NWN allowed you to slaughter entire towns so chaotic stupid and evil have been options in Bioware games although subsequent Bioware games have lessened how chaotic you can be but it's still there.

[Mockingword]

The protagonist can't do that, which is my point. And Loghain wasn't chaotic evil, even if it was stupid. 

I'm being glib.

[In Exile]

I dare say they'll brush it aside as irrelevant, since the morality of an action has little if any relation to its legality.

 

You're completely wrong. The morality of an action is a fundamental justification of the nature and structure of criminal law penalties. For example, part of the legal justification for the difference between murder and manslaughter is the notion that we ought to have an ordinal classification of crimes turning on common-sense morality.  It's often why sentencing laws are declared unconstitutional. 

[KaiserShep]

You should go argue 'evil is subjective' in a court of law and see how far you get.

 

Any good lawyer will bring plenty of darkspawn heads as evidence to support an acquittal.

[In Exile]

Tell that to the injured soldier of Ostagar and The Warden's companions who stood there as he slit his throat and laughed about it. Or tell that to this elf who is killed in the sight of the entire Ostagar camp. Or tell that to Brother Genitivi when The Warden throws a knife back in his head. Or...

 

(I can go on...)

 

You can. You would be wrong. Because the game is stupidly broken when garbage like that happens. Just as broken as how you can use blood magic in front of templars and they don't do anything. 

[Mockingword]

You're completely wrong. The morality of an action is a fundamental justification of the nature and structure of criminal law penalties. For example, part of the legal justification for the difference between murder and manslaughter is the notion that we ought to have an ordinal classification of crimes turning on common-sense morality.  It's often why sentencing laws are declared unconstitutional. 

Or the legal system is wrong, for thinking it's founded on any sort of objective morality, rather than the mere widespread perception of morality.

 

I dunno why your text went giant at the end there.