41 réponses à ce sujet

[Gnoster]

Considering it has been done in DA2 already, I think it would be an unfortunate way to go. Now if a companion goes against you because of certain choices you made, that's fine, but scripting a companion to betray you no matter what will be the Anders situation all over again - been there, done that, move on to newer storylines please say I.

[Napoleonicus]

Ah, but I have to be the devil's advocate. Who exactly did Anders betray? I certainly didn't feel betrayed. If I had the chance, I would have set the charges for him myself. My character, and certainly myself, don't have much love for the Chantry and it's holier than thou attitudes and self-appointment as the jailors of the magically gifted. Betrayal is quite subjective.

[Gnoster]

Ah, but I have to be the devil's advocate. Who exactly did Anders betray? I certainly didn't feel betrayed. If I had the chance, I would have set the charges for him myself. Betrayal is quite subjective.

 

True, I guess it depends on how you look at it and how you played the game. I see it as a betrayal due to Anders lying about what the ingredients are for and because my Hawke constant fought and argued for peace between mages and templars.

My main point is Anders' actions were 100% scripted, which I disliked. I would rather you as the player could have investigated and discovered Anders' plans, and then either stopped him (e.g. by killing him), left him to do his thing, or outright helped him (just to put some examples of branching storyline out there). And that kind of scripting is something I would hate to see in DAI with a companion.

[Napoleonicus]

If friend/romanced/pro mage: He doesn't tell you the plan and tricks you into helping him. Note the line 'Or does your support for mages stop at mere words, now we see your true colours...' (or whatever it was, it was still VERY snarky)

He may have tricked me, it doesn't change the fact that in the end, his actions did not disagree with me or my positions. It's like say... you were asking me to get you flour. Just because you don't tell me what it was for doesn't mean I'll be mad that you made me a cake with it. I suppose I don't get what you mean to say

[Napoleonicus]

True, I guess it depends on how you look at it and how you played the game.

 

I suppose I tipped my hand a bit with the Renegade star on my avatar

[Napoleonicus]

It's more the dialogue leading up to it. It's more 'If you DON'T get me the flour, you OBVIOUSLY HATE CAKES and therefore YOU SUCK!'

I can't find the actual lines sorry

Ah! That actually makes a lot of sense. Rude and shifty he was, and I remember that. Considering I would have done it myself, it was no big deal, and I can see how it would be seen as a betrayal of some kind. It still hinges on the angle you take in the overall arc of the story however. 

 

Also if you look at the ingredients he asked you to gather, you could clearly know what it was he was planning. They were the components for a bomb, and I realised that when he asked for saltpeter.

 

I can overlook someone being evasive and protective when hatching a masterplan. I suppose I am quite a bit like that myself. I don't share much about the stories I write until I can let them unfold in the hands of the reader. Also if had any doubts my friends would try to talk me out of something I truly believe in, I would simply not impart them with any part of my plans. In this case, his plan, his guilt. He spared you from the potential consequences of his actions by not making you a direct part of them. (He still somewhat accessorizes you, i'll admit )

[Chari]

It'll be Cole or Solas, I bet

[adorkable-panda]

I really think it's Vivienne, she is the "ambition" after all and in the trailer even the FemQuizzy didn't know what her true intentions were. 

[Mercedes-Benz]

I suspect it will be one of the Mages, the emo spirit of death, or Iron Bull. 

 

[Han Shot First]

For what it is worth, Varric is posed like Judas in that shot of the Inquisition arranged like The Last Supper. 

[silentspec111]

For what it is worth, Varric is posed like Judas in that shot of the Inquisition arranged like The Last Supper. 

 

I think by that logic it should be Sera because from little i know she is in the exact place where Judas was in the Last Supper...that or Viv by the way she was to only one not looking at the Inquisitor....hmm.....conspiracy afloat it seems....

[ClassicBox]

It was Schmooples.. in the dining room.. with the candlestick!!1!

 

I think there won't be a straight-out betrayal no matter what, but I do think they if you go against a companions beliefs enough they might end up doing something questionable. I think they won't see it as backstabbing but rather doing what they think is right while the Inquisitor probably won't. x3

[Elhanan]

If there is, it will be expected.

[azarhal]

She'd betray us if we're incompetent jerks who do nothing that the Inquisition stands for, in her eyes.

 

That's called a game-over.
 

I expect there to be a traitor (or even more than one), but it might not be a companion. With the number of people recruited by the Inquisition, it should be easy for the "big bad" to plant some spies/saboteur close by.

[TK514]

Dorian.  His backstory will be a lie to get us to trust him, and then he'll betray the Inquisitor to Magisters who are interested in using her/his Fade Hand to breach the Fade and potentially the Black City once more.