147 réponses à ce sujet

[PsychoBlonde]

And that is my point, they are so common that they can help but be generic, it would be nice to see an "evil" that has no interest in being redeemed.

 

Such a person would be a caricature, not a character.  If someone genuinely knows they're evil and that there's no justification for their actions, yet pursues that course of action ANYWAY, that person is a rabid dog that needs to be put down.  There is no development, no future, and no interest in such a character.  My axe, your skull.  End of discussion.

[TheodoricFriede]

For the same reason everyone is into zombies.

 

Popular opinion isnt always the correct one.

 

Frankly im a bit tired of redemption stories. Sometimes i just want to kill an evil dude.

 

I kill Logain and make his Daughter watch.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I imagine not every evil person in the world is in a position to benefit from the demonic invasion. Imminent death is a pretty substantial motive to help.

I'm under the impression that the majority of the Tevinter bunch we encounter might not actually mind the tear. I'm not sure it actually does mean imminent death for everyone. I think it could end up being a more complicated situation than just, "we must fix this or the world ends". 

 

I imagine there are others that might see it as what seems like more of a threat than not, but the question is whether they'd support your methods over someone else's. We obviously see ourselves as the only ones capable of fixing anything, because we're looking at it from a meta standpoint, but if you don't know the Inquisition is lead by the protagonist, then it's easy to think you're just as likely to succeed and more likely to benefit throwing in with a lot more supportive of your goals. A lot of the people DA deems "bad" are red templars, or blood mage/abominations, or something to that effect that are just crazy and impossible to reason with. The one I could see working is an Antivan Crow, but I imagine we'd be more likely to see that if we were going to Antiva. It seems difficult to get one where we're going in a different way than we got Zev, just having someone send one after us.  

[Former_Fiend]

I'm under the impression that the majority of the Tevinter bunch we encounter might not actually mind the tear. I'm not sure it actually does mean imminent death for everyone. I think it could end up being a more complicated situation than just, "we must fix this or the world ends". 

 

I imagine there are others that might see it as what seems like more of a threat than not, but the question is whether they'd support your methods over someone else's. We obviously see ourselves as the only ones capable of fixing anything, because we're looking at it from a meta standpoint, but if you don't know the Inquisition is lead by the protagonist, then it's easy to think you're just as likely to succeed and more likely to benefit throwing in with a lot more supportive of your goals. A lot of the people DA deems "bad" are red templars, or blood mage/abominations, or something to that effect that are just crazy and impossible to reason with. The one I could see working is an Antivan Crow, but I imagine we'd be more likely to see that if we were going to Antiva. It seems difficult to get one where we're going in a different way than we got Zev, just having someone send one after us.  

 

I'm not talking about the Tevinters, specifically. There are plenty of evil people outside of Tevinter who might not share their view of the hole in the sky being awesome.

[Tenebrae]

What exactly do you define as a "malevolent" companion?

 

One person's saint is another person's sinner. I find most members of the Chantry to be far more sinister than the average Tevinter magister.

 

Unsurprisingly, I disagree with your statement that Morrigan is at best a "cartoonish portrayal of evil." She was never written to be evil per se, but rather representative of the conflicts inherent to Thedas. 

 

 

Which suggestions, specificly, are we talking about here?

• Harness the power of the Anvil? Sure, it's a risk, but it could prove critical in thwarting future Darkspawn invasions.
• Perform the Dark Ritual? She cared for the Warden and did not want to see him or her die. Also, she has an agenda which she is pursuing that neither you nor I are privy to.
• Accept Caladrius' blood ritual? From a purely pragmatic standpoint, it makes sense to me. Anything to increase the power of the Warden.
• Killing Flemeth? Can't argue with that. Morrigan gains her mother's Grimmoire in the process and, at the bare minimum, buys herself sometime before Flemeth attempts to possess her body.
• Aiding the Warden on his quest to defeat the Darkspawn?

Her reasoning seems pretty sound to me.

I didn't mention the anvil because i view that decision as common sense, golems are useful and effective against dark spawn and i would be a fool to destroy such a weapon, i didn't need Morrigan to tell me that.

 

1.Killing the elves for volatile werewolf's just because.

2.She disapproves if you save Redcliffe which could provide soldiers and supplies to the army. = Valuable Resources.

3. The ritual was Flemeth idea not Morrigans.

4. As for killing Flemeth, that was also common sense, when you find someone is out to posses your body not killing him would be foolish.

 

and her crowing moment:

 

Killing the circle of magi just because she didn't like them, and wasting a  very valuable Resource.

 

As for what defines a "malevolent" companion, for me it is a lack of remorse, a will to do what needs to be done, no bellyaching about collateral damage, and most importantly the ability to make intelligent choices whether they involve saving a village or destroying it, all that should matter is how our actions would contribute to achieving our overall goals

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I'm not talking about the Tevinters, specifically. There are plenty of evil people outside of Tevinter who might not share their view of the hole in the sky being awesome.

Well, I talked about the others that I could think of in the second paragraph. lol

 

Basically, I'm saying that I'm not sure an "evil" person would likely be convinced that the Inquisition is the best way for them to approach the situation. In games like this, we typically go around dealing with all the people that thought they had a better way to deal with the situation and those people are often the "evil" groups. Those people siding with you instead only really makes sense if you know you are the protagonist and basically can't fail. They wouldn't have any reason to assume your way is the only way and every other path is doomed to failure. So, the hard part would be explaining why they think supporting you is in line with their beliefs. Handling something like the breach isn't really enough. I'm sure a lot of people think they can handle the breach, or else we wouldn't be fighting basically everyone else in the world as we go along.  

[Tenebrae]

Such a person would be a caricature, not a character.  If someone genuinely knows they're evil and that there's no justification for their actions, yet pursues that course of action ANYWAY, that person is a rabid dog that needs to be put down.  There is no development, no future, and no interest in such a character.  My axe, your skull.  End of discussion.

That is assuming that character even subscribes to notions of "good" and "evil", seeing as both those things are matter of perspective the character may simply recognize that you would view their action as evil, while they would see them as practical. 

 

And Disney villains are a caricature yes but a well written malevolent companion wouldn't be, just look at some of the more popular villain protagonist, Kain, Kratos, Niko Bellic, Magneto and many more.

[Tenebrae]

Fair enough. I still disagree with you, but I commend you for your use of hyperbole.

 

You said that all of her suggestions where "highly idiotic," and when she does offer you advice that you admit is sound, you shoot her down and say, "I would have come up with that myself" or "that's just common sense."

 

Also, bear in mind that Morrigan is not a real person. She is comprised of pixels which float across your screen. If she recommends something stupid in the game, I would chalk that up to poor writing rather than Morrigan being "idiotic."

 

God knows the other characters in Dragon Age have their moments as well.

I will amend the word all as she did provide what i consider sound advice when it comes to the anvil, is still believe it to be common sense though.

 

I do agree that Morrigan is not the sole culprit, but she is the token "evil" party member and because of my love affair with competent villains her ineptitude earns her my ire

[Tenebrae]

I see redemption as pragmatic, in a way. If you kill someone evil, you remove the evildoer, but if you redeem them, you both remove an evildoer and gain a benefactor. Coaxing may be more work, but it's also a net gain.

 

Would you really waste a powerful ally/resource?

 

What if their help is invaluable would you really dismiss them because they are what you would call an "Evildoer" all because they wont bend to your moral standards?

 

That just seems wasteful, if you believe them to be a danger (whether to you directly or to the so called innocent) after your goal i achieved deal with them appropriately, but use them to achieve your goal.

 

And what if they are just pretending? How can you be sure they are redeemed ? Maybe they have deduced that the best way to move forward towards achieving your shared goal is to pretend that they have seen the "light", and when you part ways at the end they can simply return to their more pragmatic ways.

[DaySeeker]

Anti-heroes are not evil- you're using the term incorrectly- they are flawed; they lack heroic and altruisitic motivations and traits.    

[Ryzaki]

I'm not talking about the Tevinters, specifically. There are plenty of evil people outside of Tevinter who might not share their view of the hole in the sky being awesome.

Yeah I would love a morally bankrupt but not idiotic companion in a BW game.

[SgtSteel91]

 

 

And what if they are just pretending? How can you be sure they are redeemed ? Maybe they have deduced that the best way to move forward towards achieving your shared goal is to pretend that they have seen the "light", and when you part ways at the end they can simply return to their more pragmatic ways.

 

You stop them and probably kill them.

[SgtSteel91]

She [Morrigan] disapproves if you save Redcliffe which could provide soldiers and supplies to the army. = Valuable Resources.

 

 

Can you actually say this, that taking time to save Redcliff will give resources in the fight against the Blight, to her when you make the decision? I know there are parts of the game where companions will object to your decisions and you are given a persuade option that will give less or even positive approval for them.

[DaySeeker]

I didn't mention the anvil because i view that decision as common sense, golems are useful and effective against dark spawn and i would be a fool to destroy such a weapon, i didn't need Morrigan to tell me that.

 

1.Killing the elves for volatile werewolf's just because.

2.She disapproves if you save Redcliffe which could provide soldiers and supplies to the army. = Valuable Resources.

3. The ritual was Flemeth idea not Morrigans.

4. As for killing Flemeth, that was also common sense, when you find someone is out to posses your body not killing him would be foolish.

 

and her crowing moment:

 

Killing the circle of magi just because she didn't like them, and wasting a  very valuable Resource.

 

As for what defines a "malevolent" companion, for me it is a lack of remorse, a will to do what needs to be done, no bellyaching about collateral damage, and most importantly the ability to make intelligent choices whether they involve saving a village or destroying it, all that should matter is how our actions would contribute to achieving our overall goals

 

I always viewed Morrigan's suggestions and reactions to your decisions as manipulation.  She would switch views or say things that were kind of silly.  I thought she was always testing you to see how much influence she had on you.  

[Tenebrae]

Anti-heroes are not evil- you're using the term incorrectly- they are flawed; they lack heroic and altruisitic motivations and traits.    

 

Evil is subjective, Kain is willing to sacrifice anyone and everything in order to free himself and the world from the wheel of fate and if it came down to the world being free or his own survival then Kain would choose himself as he always did, he is the arch-type i am rooting for he wouldn’t dismiss a strategy because it  is "evil" he would weigh the benefits against the drawbacks and then make his decision, he would give no thought to morality if it didn’t benefit him or aid him in achieving hi goal.

 

To most people he would be considered malevolent, that is why i am using that term to describe my preferred "evil" or "malevolent" companion.

[Tenebrae]

I always viewed Morrigan's suggestions and reactions to your decisions as manipulation.  She would switch views or say things that were kind of silly.  I thought she was always testing you to see how much influence she had on you.  

 

Now if that was confirmed i would find her much more to my liking, her testing her level influence on you and mocking you in her head for being a gullible fool, useful but a fool non the less, and isn't that the best kind of fool?

[Tenebrae]

Can you actually say this, that taking time to save Redcliff will give resources in the fight against the Blight, to her when you make the decision? I know there are parts of the game where companions will object to your decisions and you are given a persuade option that will give less or even positive approval for them.

 

It would lend you the support of a popular if not powerful noble who can serve as a bulwark against Loghain and thus aid you i achieving your overall goal, that’s assuming that saving Redcliff wouldn’t for some reason provide you soldiers and supplies, yes the town is devastated but the arlshipis not.

[ShadowLordXII]

This is nonsense.  If a character does not change, is not forced to change, does not want to change it is not a story.  There is no motion.  The idea that every redemtion story is the same is ludicrous.  Redemption is a core desire of human beings who have lived, made mistakes, been forced through hard times and decisions, realizes their error and wants to be better.  CHaracters with different types of moral codes, cultures, worldviews- interesting.  Evil characters are charicatures. 

 

^This. Zevran and Sten have no pride for their mistakes in their life (specifically Zevran killing his friend when she was innocent and Sten murdering the farmers and losing his sword) and will express a desire to make up for this once you've made a strong connection with them. They're clearly grey characters, but this aspect of their character makes them more likeable to grey/good pc's who'd like to work with the best of their companions. Self-reflecting and admitting that you made a mistake is often seen as a sign of character growth and maturity, especially when they try to work for some form of repentance or redemption.

 

Even though Morrigan is unapologetic about her agenda or her attitude, even she's not completely evil. She's a product of her upbringing and can open up more to the pc without making her less interesting.

 

Even evil characters are boring if there isn't something "human" about them. That's why Meredith worked as an antagonist (save for the red lyrium stuff), whether you agreed with her or not, you could see why she believed the way that she did. There's context to her attitude and actions which makes you wonder if there's some truth to what she believes.

 

Evil can even be interesting when it's horrifying and inhuman. Think about examples like the reapers, darkspawn, evil wizards, slavers, vicious tyrants, sith, or the xenomorphs. They're so cruel, vicious and evil in their methods that why they're evil doesn't really matter. They're so far on the other side of the spectrum that trying to reason or build empathize with them is pointless and a waste of time. They're too set in their ways to ever even want to change. When that matters is how you will stop them and what will happen if you fail which can also be interesting and build a good amount of tension for the story.

[Tenebrae]

^This. Zevran and Sten have no pride for their mistakes in their life (specifically Zevran killing his friend when she was innocent and Sten murdering the farmers and losing his sword) and will express a desire to make up for this once you've made a strong connection with them. They're clearly grey characters, but this aspect of their character makes them more likeable to grey/good pc's who'd like to work with the best of their companions. Self-reflecting and admitting that you made a mistake is often seen as a sign of character growth and maturity, especially when they try to work for some form of repentance or redemption.

 

Even though Morrigan is unapologetic about her agenda or her attitude, even she's not completely evil. She's a product of her upbringing and can open up more to the pc without making her less interesting.

 

Even evil characters are boring if there isn't something "human" about them. That's why Meredith worked as an antagonist (save for the red lyrium stuff), whether you agreed with her or not, you could see why she believed the way that she did. There's context to her attitude and actions which makes you wonder if there's some truth to what she believes.

 

Evil can even be interesting when it's horrifying and inhuman. Think about examples like the reapers, darkspawn, evil wizards, slavers, vicious tyrants, sith, or the xenomorphs. They're so cruel, vicious and evil in their methods that why they're evil doesn't really matter. They're so far on the other side of the spectrum that trying to reason or build empathize with them is pointless and a waste of time. They're too set in their ways to ever even want to change. When that matters is how you will stop them and what will happen if you fail which can also be interesting and build a good amount of tension for the story.

 

You have missed my point, i do not endorse stupid "evil" i loathe it and find it insulting, read my post i don't support "evil" at all i just wish for a companion who would place necessity above morality and wont whine about it later, that character would know we did what was necessary and pragmatic and we're the option there we would have done differently if it was possible, after all good publicity is important.

 

And i do like Zevran and Sten, but theirs is a tale of repentance not redemption, Sten is a soldier on a mission (and he is damn good at it, hell he is the most pragmatic companion we have) and Zevran is a reluctant assassin (yes he acts like he likes his job but dig deep enough and you'll find that he is reluctant and riddled with guilt.)

 

To use a more recent and popular example Tywin Lannister, he does what he has to and he does at well, if there is a way to keep good publicity he will take it but if the situation calls for sheer brutality he will oblige, not by himself of course he does have a tool for every job after all, no need to dirty ones own hands if it can be avoided.