351 réponses à ce sujet

[cronshaw]

...can we kill him/her? Here's hoping the answer is yes

 

If there is a good narrative reason for Hawke to die I don't have a problem with it

but if it's just there to satisfy people who think license is the sign of a good game then it's stupid

[wright1978]

He/she was a mediocre character in what was (on the whole) a pretty average-to-bad game. Killing him/her would be a metaphorical killing of dragon age 2 and all the bad memories associated with it. 

 

Please Bioware, fans need this catharsis. 

 

I thought he/she was a very good character in an interesting if flawed game.

As a fan i certainly don't want him/her to die

[WildOrchid]

Such obsession with killings....

 

 

As a fan i certainly don't want him/her to die

 

Same.

[Ferico21]

Gasp*

What! No, never kill Hawke. Hawke never dies.

Hawke is love. Hawke is life.

[Eralrik]

It's all an Indoctrination threat Hawke will be riding in like a cowboy at the top of a Reaper landing in front of the Inquisitor's Keep, with Merril at his side! Anders is taped to the bottom of the Reaper.

 

Seriously I enjoyed DA2 and it's story, loved the fact that he/she wasn't the world saver like the Warden was during the blight and I've never intentionaly killed any of my party members or wanted and of my hero's dead. Though Hawke could have used a pair of glasses following behind Merridith and not reconizing the Idol <slap Hawke silly for that blunder>.

[BloodyTalon]

The other big question is if Hawke is killable and their love interest tags along  cause has Varric said at the end of DA 2 they are the only ones who didn't leave Hawke's side the LIs.

Will they be killable also?

[tntfists]

This is my first time back to BW boards (nice new look and stuff, congrats!) and it's good to see that players still want to murder and/ or sleep with everyone including themselves

[Arijharn]

But the issue is still the scope Petrice's influence in Act1 versus all the potential influence, and fanatics she's obtained during the timeskip before Act2. While her hypothetical death in crime central Lowtown versus the Qunari occupied dock would require some serious explaining as to why the Qunari military would target a single unremarkable Chantry sister, and risk giving away Petrice's plan. Hawke being investigated for the murders seems more likely than Kirkwall's city officials taking a few rumors seriously.
 
Elthina covering for the Qunari's execution of Petrice on Chantry grounds is an Act2 event which happened because public opinion and civil unrest towards the Qunari was negative. The Qunari overstayed their welcome and converted Chantry faithful. Act1 had none of that. I wouldn't be surprised if an Act1 mob was instead formed because of the influx of Ferelden refugees.

Plus Aveline arresting Hawke is debatable. Hawke saved her life outside of Lothering while she got her promotion through their assistance. In Anders' first quest she could potentially participate in trespassing the Chantry after dark, and kill a platoon of Templars (shady). Then there's her witnessing of Kelder's potential execution, despite the Magistrate wanting him alive, and her potential participation in a smuggling mission. Aveline could potentially fall victim to blackmail or feel indebted to Hawke and probably overlook his murder of Petrice and Varnell. Heck if she's not in the party at the time she only has hearsay to go on when investigating, and we know how that went for Emeric when he initially investigated Gascard DuPuis.

I doubt Hawke killing Petrice would've stopped her plan since the writers could have someone like that Crazy Elf chick in Act2 pick up the slack, but Hawke having the option to neutralize a clear threat would've been nice.

 

1) We're not to sure how 'unremarkable' Petrice is, and given that she has a Templar confidante, it's pure supposition on your basis to say that it wasn't wide spread, even the Arishok can be inferred to be aware of his presence is being a bit of a powderkeg and doesn't wish to set it off because his priority throughout Acts 1 and 2 is gaining the Tome of Kosluth (or... whatever it's called). The Viscount is concerned about the Qun as well throughout Act 1 & 2 due to Seamus, suspecting he was captured. The fact that Seamus willingly absconded with them further raises the 'alert' of the Qun presence in the city. Furthermore, you can't argue with any degree of reliability that Petrice only gained converts to her cause in Act 2 mainly because all the power players are concerned about the Qun presence since day 1. The Qun are a well known military force by that time and considering they have no idea why they are even in the city in the first place, they do not want to poke the Sleeping Giant.

 

2) Aveline is a guard captain, Petrice is a chantry sister. There is going to be political fallout if Petrice is killed, why is that just not common sense? At the very least, questions will be asked. Aveline may feel torn, but she is a guard captain who got Jerric kicked out of his post on corruption charges. Wouldn't it be ironic if she didn't pursue Hawke out of some sense of entitlement? While Aveline may herself play fast and loose with the law such as with your example of Keldor, she never takes part in anything patently unjust. As obvious as Petrice's schemes are to us, remember that Petrice herself was meticulous in keeping her own hands tidy. Keldor isn't an appropriate example because he's a killer.

[Marshal Moriarty]

On the issue of the weapon that Meredith is carrying, you have to be careful of literal inpretations. What we the player are seeing is not necessarily the reality of the character. Do you for example imagine that Mage Hawke really swans about town and into the Gallows Courtyard wearing robes and carrying whacking great mage's staff strapped to his back? Do you really think he or Bethany took out those mercs during the intro to Kirkwall with extravagant spells and staff blasts (given that they were standing in the middle of the Gallows square which they have just been told is the Kirkwall Circle of Magi, and in front of a dozen Guardsmen, Are your characters as they run about town, really carring 50 health potions, 30 stamina potions, 5 Battleaxes, 4 swords, 2 shields, etc etc etc. They must have a lot of hidden pockets, if they are...

 

The visuals are just an abstraction to give us the general idea of who people are, and what they look like in the moments that really matter. The logistics of what they are carrying, wearing, wielding, we are just supposed to let slide. We can assume that until the revelation at the end, nobody has seen the Lyrium weapon that Meredith is using, or that it is inconspicus enough unless directly unsheathed and powered up or something. Just as we can assume that Mage Hawke and Bethany etc are actually being much more discreet in their choice of clothing and what spells they use, and how they cast them, so as not to alarm and draw attention to themselves.

 

 

And again with Petrice, how high ranking she is at that time isn't important. Just look at the riots in Missouri right now. The guy who was killed was just some guy. What mattered was that he was black and was shot by a white cop. That's the bit that mattered. Petrice is member of the chantry, known (to her supporters and friends in the chantry) to be actively anti-Qunari. If she dies when she was out in a shady area of town, then they will know what she was doing there. Rather than answer some awkward questions about what would cause Petrice to be there so late at night, they would move to implicate the Qunari and make up their own reason for her being there.

 

Plus the fact is that it just isn't the done thing to murder people in cold blood! I mean, maybe it is where you come from, but for most people, even if you think they might be up to something, you don't lop their head off! Or else we'd all be like Travis Bickle from Taxi Driver. 'We think this politician is shady and will not live up to his promises - SO WE'LL SHOOT HIM!' Contrast that with when Bickle shoots Harvey keitel and his cronies at the end of the movie - a move that is seen as justfiable and indeed laudable by the public. Because his character has committed crimes that everyone knew about. Its all a matter of being able to show people why you acted. If you can show them the person in question had committed crimes, then your actions to stop them have some context. If you murder them because you think they might be up to something, then they'll just dub you as some nut who should be arrested.

[The Hierophant]

1) We're not to sure how 'unremarkable' Petrice is, and given that she has a Templar confidante, it's pure supposition on your basis to say that it wasn't wide spread, even the Arishok can be inferred to be aware of his presence is being a bit of a powderkeg and doesn't wish to set it off because his priority throughout Acts 1 and 2 is gaining the Tome of Kosluth (or... whatever it's called). The Viscount is concerned about the Qun as well throughout Act 1 & 2 due to Seamus, suspecting he was captured. The fact that Seamus willingly absconded with them further raises the 'alert' of the Qun presence in the city. Furthermore, you can't argue with any degree of reliability that Petrice only gained converts to her cause in Act 2 mainly because all the power players are concerned about the Qun presence since day 1. The Qun are a well known military force by that time and considering they have no idea why they are even in the city in the first place, they do not want to poke the Sleeping Giant.

Your entire point conflates Act1's and Act2's Kirkwall's attitude and opinion of the Qunari when the narrative shows that there's clearly an escalation of civil unrest brought upon the Qunari's continued presence and conversions over the years.
 

2) Aveline is a guard captain, Petrice is a chantry sister. There is going to be political fallout if Petrice is killed, why is that just not common sense? At the very least, questions will be asked. Aveline may feel torn, but she is a guard captain who got Jerric kicked out of his post on corruption charges. Wouldn't it be ironic if she didn't pursue Hawke out of some sense of entitlement? While Aveline may herself play fast and loose with the law such as with your example of Keldor, she never takes part in anything patently unjust. As obvious as Petrice's schemes are to us, remember that Petrice herself was meticulous in keeping her own hands tidy. Keldor isn't an appropriate example because he's a killer.

What political fallout? It's a big stretch to assume that Petrice's questionable number of followers in Act1 would even be able to use her death to turn the populace against the Qun. Act1's Kirkwall's populace being successfully riled up against the Qun is not guaranteed due to the debatable levels of tension between both parties, and the competency of Petrice's followers without their leader.

And Keldor's an appropriate example of Aveline witnessing vigilante justice and Hawke slighting a high ranking official, while she can participate in the killing of Templars who were ordered to catch an apostate on Chantry ground no less. Heck, there's nothing in the narrative in regards to her portrayal that strikes down the possibility of her begrudgingly helping Hawke through either guilt or blackmail.

Aside from Petrice being plotshielded to save the Devs resources in regards to the costs of branching narratives the hypothetical reasons for Hawke not having the option to kill Petrice just seems inconsistent since no reason is given in-story.

[Marshal Moriarty]

I don't know where you're from, but cold cold blooded murder is not an option that most people would consider, especially in the case of a holy woman. Keldor's murder has all kinds of preparatory dialogue and sequences. We are left in no doubt that if we leave him alive, he will be set free again to continue killing because the father loves his son, regardless of what he is. He has harmed and nearly killed a girl right there in the dungeon giving them cause, *and* he wants them to do it. And even then, Fenris offers to do it for you, if you don't feel able to take such actions.

 

As for the Templars in the chantry, they attack you when Anders loses control - what choice is there at that point? Its very different from walking up to a Templar in a dark alley and sticking a knife in his face because hey, one day he might draw a sword against you. When Grace proposes killing Ser Thrask, many of your party object to the idea, whereas some consider that one life weighed against the chance to save dozens who are in front of you, could be worth it. The point is your party don't just throw murder out as a casual solution to their problems, when you aren't dealing with hired goons and hoods who are actively threatening you. As Varric points out, killing people like that happens - its' all part of the game' as he says.

 

But murdering members of the general citzenry, and people with important connections? That's a very different thing. If Hawke gave that kind of order, it would take most of the party completely by surprise, because that until then has never been what they do. Again to use the Travis Bickle analogy, a vigilante might think its okay to stalk the streets and kill gang members, drug runners, pimps etc. But if they decided to just start slaughtering city officials and people they felt were corrupt in office? That the people would not understand - it would just look like some crazed lunatic was on the loose in the city. Hell, just look at the whole Batman concept - that character is all about vigilante behaviour and how far is too far, who can you act against and be a hero, and who will you be ostracised for acting against, even if they are guilty of crimes? Because it just isn't the way society works. and thankfully isn't the way that most people think. I.e its implied if not outright stated that the only thing that allows Travis Bickle and Batman to take action like this against society's villains, is that they are crazy, and don't have that same impediment that most people have to just killing someone out of hand, Even for them, this crisis of morality and justification consumes their lives, their every waking momont.

 

The game doesn't cheapen moments like this. If they were going to kill Petrice, they'd need a hell of a good reason to overcome the natural disinclination people have to such extreme solutions. Killing pirates, slavers, mercs, blood mages, serial killers  etc is different - often its a case of when, not if violence will erupt, so your people get in the first strike. But this is different - killing somone like Petrice just isn't an option for most people, which is most people don't have any issue with not being able to kill her. Its why many here on this thread have expressed 'What? You want to *kill* her... and in Act 1?!) DA2 gives you the script for Hawke, and basically allows you to decide on the acting style and tone you will use. Think how there are lots of different versions and productions of Shakespeare's plays - they all use the same text, they are all faithful to the words on the page, but they are all different. That's the case here - you can't really make Hawke into a completely different kind of person, who takes completely diffeent kinds of actions than the character she is written as, but you can work within that to establish your voice as the character. Whatever you do, Hawke will always love her family, will always want to improve herself in the city, and isn't some homicidal maniac who treats killing regular citzenry as 'just another day at the office'.

 

As for the people's feelings on the Qunari. The Qunari are a known threat that invaded Thedas and are feared as invaders and conquerors. Their whole phillosophy means that the arrival of a subtantial force usually entails armed conflict - they do not integrate en masse into other cultures, because they believe that true peace and purpose can only be achieved if everyone converts to the Qun. The people and indeed the city officials and chantry may not understand everything about the Qun, but they get the 'Qunari show up - war breaks out' bit. With fifth columnists like Petrice about, and with the Arishok generally unwilling to consider talking to the people of Kirkwall (at first at least), the situation is hardly calm. 

[The Hierophant]

Moriarty, what in the flip? Who cares about irl law when we're dealing with a fantasy world in which the pc can give a middle finger to the legal procedures/the system like how Hawke can assume the role of judge, jury and executioner when killing Keldor, the Magistrates son. Have Fenris execute that slaver who was defenseless, and antagonise the Templars repeatedly despite them being the defacto power of Kirkwall. There was no doubt amongst Hawke and crew that she set them up, especially after Ketojan's warning casted doubt on her good intentions, and Petrice's admittance of the scheme. Yet you say only the player knows of her attempt on Hawke's life?

Plus if the people of Kirkwall in Act1 were so anti Qun like some suggest then Petrice had the rest of Act1, and the timeskip before Act2 to fabricate a story or setup a situation in which Varnell, herself or her followers were victimised by the Qun, but she didn't. Why? Is it because Act1's public aren't so easily riled up, or Petrice's limited influence?

[Killdren88]

Gotta love murder fantasies people develop when playing video games. Just get yourself a copy of the Sims and that should quench your blood lust. It does for me.

[Eralrik]

My family considers me the Morality Paladin as I take the I shall do no harm to my friends and teammate's and I carry this practice into the game's I play.

I was raised to respect people and treat them as I myself would like to be treated and carry this thinking into Video games and thus my son's call me the diplomat, because I always try to find a peaceful solution.

 

My two son's 18 and 10 have diffrent views though my 18 year old is finding it harder and harder to play the evil bad guy, lately in SWTOR his Juggernaut has some bad but mostly light side choices, he told me it's ok to mix some of the bad with the good to even things out.

 

My 10 year old he could care less, he play's fallout and Dishonored he goes on total killing spree's murders everyone and anything and then he goes out and brags about it to his friends, I let him play Dragon Age 1 & 2 and you know what his comment was can I kill the Warden and Hawke and play someone else.

 

So the thoughts of murdering people in game's because their sickenly nice or not angery enough like my 10 year old says he wants a totaly emotionless main character so he can feel justified in whole sale wanton murder of every citizen in a game and feel it's ok.

 

So in my opionon it's all in the age group and Maturity level of those seeking and wishing to kill off annoying characters in games.

[polemists02]

While I would not like any protagonist to die off screen or be killed I would not mind if hawke had some motive that lead him to be viewed as a villian at some point in this game. I would like to duel hawke. Then we can laugh about the misunderstanding and go grab a brew with varic.

[Aremce]

Okay, so this thread has successfully made me uncomfortable. Needless to say, I'm one of those people who loved DA2 and their Hawkes. But I still agree that the option (!) to kill Hawke would make sense - in certain scenarios. Like when your Inquisitor supports the templars while your Hawke ran off with Anders ...

[Chron0id]

It depends TC.  If we're talking default FemHawke then no.  How anyone could destroy such a beautiful creature is beyond me.  Her default design was so quintessentially perfect it bordered on the otherworldly. 

 

Now, default Male Hawke on the other hand.....*shudders*

[MerchantGOL]

It depends TC.  If we're talking default FemHawke then no.  How anyone could destroy such a beautiful creature is beyond me.  Her default design was so quintessentially perfect it bordered on the otherworldly. 

 

Now, default Male Hawke on the other hand.....*shudders*

How can you hate on this Paragon of manliness?

 

[Marshal Moriarty]

Taking real life examples helps to evaluate how realistic (or not) the situations are. Your assertion that just because its a fantasy world, you can do whatever you want, is absurd. You've been coddled too much by Bioware's other games and Elder Scrolls etc etc. Those games do not present realistic situations, because your character is artificially empowered to be above the law, and/or is so unusually powerful that any attempt by authorities to bring you to justice would fail. Take the farcical situation in Skyrum - you can kill the Emperior's cousin in broad daylight by walking up to her and stabbing her in the face. Then by sheathing your weapon and surrendering, you can fine a patry 1000 gold fine (given that you almost certainly have tens of thousands of gold coins), and then everyone's fine - and nobody even remembers or mentions that you commited the crime!

 

In DA2, Hawke cannot simply blow into town, upend all the apple carts, change the whole order of how the place is run, kill everyone he pleases, then jet out again before any of the consequences kick in. As I've explained, painting all acts as the same is a lazy and inaccurate thing to do. The issue with Keldor is completely different - he has commited many despicable crimes with his own hands, and his corrupt father is preventing justice from being done. You have plenty of cover on this - Elren is wealthy and important, and given a chance to speak out and bring his case to a higher authority, he would. He could be just as important an ally. Plus, people are not going to care one bit if a child murderer is killed, but they certainly will if a chantry sister is. Petrice has not actually *done* anything - indeed she can point to her actions as saving a mage who the Qunari have brutalized and kept in a condition that nobody would tolerate, if it was a human or elven mage. She knows that nobody is going to side with you on this - you are nobody, she is somebody, and she was saving an abused victim from a grim fate. That is how it will look to people. Your accusations that she lead you to a place where you *might* be attacked, hardly stand up against that, and she knows it. If you killed her, it would viewed as an outrageous over-reaction, even to those who believed you (because they would ask why you didn't simply report her, instead of attacking an unarmed woman).

 

Hawke has to live in the town, and he has to stay on the good side of the powerful factions. The idea that he'd just start murdering priests because 'he has a funny feeling about her' is preposterous. And besides, it would solve *nothing*. You cannot beat zealots and their followers with violence. They will just replace their fallen, and become stronger for having their beliefs confirmed by people taking action to try and silence their 'truth'. The only way to defeat this kind of poison is to expose it, to show people what they really are, and for that you need evidence and testimony from credible sources. Hot headed and unilateral action on matters this sensitive would be a staggeringly poor move. Other games have lulled you into expecting the kind of grossly over simplified solutions to complex problems.

 

And frankly, murdering an unarmed woman in cold blood isn't the soluton to *any* problem. Its a bit troubling that you seem to need that explained.

 

To return to the specific issue though, passions can be inflamed on these issues out of nowhere. The missouri riots are proof of that. No matter how much you think society has moved on, or that people don't really care about issues, all it takes is the wrong event to happen at the wrong time, and it all kicks off. If a preacher was killed in Britiain today, people wouldn't be that bothered at first - they'd be unsettled as they would be in any murder case, but that's all. However, if it were suggested that radical Islamists could have had something to with it, and that the preacher was known for anti-Islam views, berating their various creeds. Then people would start to wonder how he died, did Islamists really murder a preacher in Britain, what if they do it again. And what began as a non-story, would suddenly be on the National News as the lead story. Islamist extremists suspected of Priest Murder etc etc.

 

Bioware's recent games have been getting away from the whole Darkside/Lightside issue. You can't really make an 'Evil; version of Hawke, just a more forceful and more no-nonsense and focused one. Similarly, you can't have an Evil Shepard. They've started to move away from all that, and on the rare occasions when such an option is included, people rightly decry it as a bizarre and out of place decision. The 'Kill Samara/Recruit Morinth' option in Mass Effect 2 is often held up as such - all polls seem to suggest that less than 3% of people choose this option, because it gives no justification and there is no precedent for such an outrageous action in anything that Shepard has done.

 

I'm done talking about this. If you honestly think Hawke killing an unarmed holy woman would have solved all these problems, then you go right ahead and believe that. I think this thread has proved that most people do not share your view, and that far from being obviously the solution, killing Petrice would be exactly the wrong thing to do, nor would it be an action that would even occur to most people, because cold blooded murder against unarmed priests is (thankfully) considered a rather extreme option. This game is not the old kind of Bioware games, where you are free to be 'Really Good' or 'Really Evil' - you are playing the part of Hawke, and interpreting and improvising within the basic framework of what the character is (i.e, extremely talented, charismatic but fundamentally ordinary and down to earth). So there's no sacrificing captive elves in blood magic rituals to increase your health, or options to desecrate the holiest artifact in the land, just because you wanted some better stats etc etc.

 

Its a more down to earth game, where you have neither the privileges of high ofiice and VIP status, but neither do you have the mandate or onus on you to feel like everything is your problem and must be solved by you. Hawke grows into that position over the 3 Acts - he/she does not start out as someone who is tasked with keeping the city safe, and her only real duty is to her family and keeping them fed and safe.

[CIA]

Moriarty can you give a tl;dr please

[The Hierophant]

Moriarty reread my posts.

I didn't say that killing her would have averted the Qunari attack since Petrice was only the straw that broke the camel's back, whereas that Hawke being unable to kill her had no instory explanation given to the player and made the PC look non proactive in the face of a threat.

You argue that Petrice couldn't be killed because it'll lead to a singular conclusion, Hawke's imprisonment/execution, and anti qun riots. I argue the opposite, that there's no guarantee of her death leading to what you suggest due to there being multiple possibilities and factors, that we unfortunately couldn't experience due to the game's short dev cycle.

So far i'll agree to disagree about Petrice and leave it at that.

[Teddie Sage]

Remember when video games didn't cause so much debates? Yeah... Me neither.

[Killdren88]

Remember when video games didn't cause so much debates? Yeah... Me neither.

 

Wait you mean people debated over Pong and Mario?

[WildOrchid]

It depends TC.  If we're talking default FemHawke then no.  How anyone could destroy such a beautiful creature is beyond me.  Her default design was so quintessentially perfect it bordered on the otherworldly. 

 

Now, default Male Hawke on the other hand.....*shudders*

 

You!

I like you.

 

 

In all seriousness tho, i hope we won't get to kill warden/hawke and or them dying for the sake of the story.

[AresKeith]

How can you hate on this Paragon of manliness?

 

 

Because he looks like this