97 réponses à ce sujet

[congokong]

Well, the OP defined evil as "actively metagaming to make the worst Thedas he can."

And I'd argue that a whole Clan being wiped out makes a worse Thedas than one were they are still alive.

That's true. Based on the OP that does qualify. My mistake.

[congokong]

@EliteMidget

 

Instead of talking in circles for a few pages we should just agree to disagree about almost everything on this topic.

[Elite Midget]

@EliteMidget

 

Instead of talking in circles for a few pages we should just agree to disagree about almost everything on this topic.

Not sure what you're disagreeing with exactly. Considering the situation the Templars had no reason not to follow through with what Meredith ordered as she was the ranking Templar Commander and they witnessed the Chantry blow up, because of an Apostate Mage, before their very eyes. So they were all caught up in the moment and Orsino didn't make matters better up to that point.

 

So it isn't hypocritical that the Templars don't care for Orsino, as he let the problem fester for years and tried to keep it hidden like a dirty secret, while they wished to show mercy to lower ranking Mages who surrender - Those random Mages and Bethany.

[Hydwn]

I just finished this playthrough, and wow - yeah, I have to agree, the most heartwrenching one is killing Bethany.  There are probably objectively worse decisions out there, but it was very hard not to reload after that one >_<

[fhs33721]

I just finished this playthrough, and wow - yeah, I have to agree, the most heartwrenching one is killing Bethany.  There are probably objectively worse decisions out there, but it was very hard not to reload after that one >_<

 

Yeah. If you ask me this choice is pretty much evil. Deep, deep black and not even a shade of very dark gray anymore.

I aso did a similar playthrough once and felt like a total assh*le at times

[Hydwn]

Yeah. If you ask me this choice is pretty much evil. Deep, deep black and not even a shade of very dark gray anymore.

I aso did a similar playthrough once and felt like a total assh*le at times

 

Very true.  It's a commonplace to say there's no villain in this game - that Meredith is just driven by her beliefs, and her mind poisoned by the idol.  But watching her kick Bethany off her sword like some filthy thing makes it pretty impossible to see her as anything but

[congokong]

Yeah. If you ask me this choice is pretty much evil. Deep, deep black and not even a shade of very dark gray anymore.

I aso did a similar playthrough once and felt like a total assh*le at times

On the bright side, at least you're not giving any preferential treatment to the mages you've condemned to death in this scenario.

[Elite Midget]

Very true.  It's a commonplace to say there's no villain in this game - that Meredith is just driven by her beliefs, and her mind poisoned by the idol.  But watching her kick Bethany off her sword like some filthy thing makes it pretty impossible to see her as anything but

Meredith is evil at that point, however putting Kirkwall's best interst isn't evil. There's a reason the Templars at the end, even if you side with the Mages, choose to oppose Meredith when Meredith threatens to kill Hawke whose Kirkwall's champion as the Templars, regardless of your decisions, DO respect Hawke. They also were led to believe that all they would do is detain Hawke for a short while than let them off with a warning as they know what Hawke has done for Kirkwall and even the Templars(indirectly or not).  They also know that Hawke had nothing to do with the Blood Mages, Demons, Abominations, or Orsino's stonewalling and incompetence.

[Hydwn]

Interesting side-note - if you drive too many companions out of your party, it locks the dialogue choices for the remainders allowing you to get rid of the others.  It seems to be a failsafe like the ones in Mass Effect, to make sure you don't drop below a minimum party.  I finished with Aveline, Anders, Varric, and Merrill, and everyone else dead or gone.

[congokong]

Interesting side-note - if you drive too many companions out of your party, it locks the dialogue choices for the remainders allowing you to get rid of the others.  It seems to be a failsafe like the ones in Mass Effect, to make sure you don't drop below a minimum party.  I finished with Aveline, Anders, Varric, and Merrill, and everyone else dead or gone.

The minimum amount of companions is 3 I believe; Aveline, Merrill, and Varric. All the others can be not recruited, killed, sent away, or not acquired because you didn't want to buy a day-one DLC.

[Hydwn]

The minimum amount of companions is 3 I believe; Aveline, Merrill, and Varric. All the others can be not recruited, killed, sent away, or not acquired because you didn't want to buy a day-one DLC.

 

You can kill Merrill, but it never gave me that option.  By that time I was so short on characters, that it wouldn't let me.  I'm guessing if I had, say, Fenris or Isabela still, it would have left me that option, and the option to give Fenris to Denarius or Isabela to Castillon would have locked instead.

 

In Mass Effect 1, if you haven't been recruiting people, Wrex will stay with you no matter what.  I'm guessing it's something similar.

[congokong]

You can kill Merrill, but it never gave me that option.  By that time I was so short on characters, that it wouldn't let me.  I'm guessing if I had, say, Fenris or Isabela still, it would have left me that option, and the option to give Fenris to Denarius or Isabela to Castillon would have locked instead.

 

In Mass Effect 1, if you haven't been recruiting people, Wrex will stay with you no matter what.  I'm guessing it's something similar.

I know she can be killed. I meant before the end-game. Most of the others you can be rid of in Act 1; Anders in Act 2.

 

I do remember hearing about Wrex automatically backing down on Virmire if Garrus and Liara haven't been recruited.

[Hydwn]

I know she can be killed. I meant before the end-game. Most of the others you can be rid of in Act 1; Anders in Act 2.

 

I do remember hearing about Wrex automatically backing down on Virmire if Garrus and Liara haven't been recruited.

 

It's nice.  The dev team really does think of everything.  For inquisition, they're warning that you can wind up with only one companion when the story ends, so it looks like the gloves are off

[congokong]

It's nice.  The dev team really does think of everything.  For inquisition, they're warning that you can wind up with only one companion when the story ends, so it looks like the gloves are off

...Well, I wouldn't go that far.... They didn't consider beforehand for example that Leliana might have been beheaded in Origins. Or that Anders might have been given to the Templars in Awakening. Or that Anders was said to have remained at the Vigil for the rest of his life. Or that Cullen might have went insane after Origins. Or that Leliana/Isabela's backstories seem to change.

 

Sure, they've put band-aids on these retcons; some better than others. But it's not like Mass Effect where almost every decision you made was remembered and not retconned out of convenience.

[Lulupab]

Lol how is letting Anders live an evil choice? He helps you save mages, its redemption enough.

Killing Bethany has to be the most evil decision in the game, hands down.

[themikefest]

Lol how is letting Anders live an evil choice? He helps you save mages, its redemption enough.

Would you say that if someone you knew or cared for died in the chantry because of his actions?

[Lulupab]

Would you say that if someone you knew or cared for died in the chantry because of his actions?

So its more evil if its personal? The reason I mentioned Bethany was not because she is Hawke's sister be she doesn't deserve to die, like at all. Chantry has done its share of crimes and then some. Maybe that particular didn't deserve it but the Chantry as an organization totally did and the one in the Kirkwall was a member.

Anders himself never questioned that what he did was wrong. He fully acknowledges that his actions were murder, and were morally contemptible, and that justice was required of him for what he did. What he understood is that it wasn't about right or wrong, it was about necessity. He believed that the system of imprisoning mages within Circles, under the watch of the Chantry's templars, was wrong, and would not accept it. And with that, he understood that unless someone was willing to take drastic measures, then nothing ever would change. He knew that the templars would rise against mages everywhere for his action, and that therefore all the mages locked within Circle towers would be forced to rise up against the templars in order to save themselves. By his actions, no mages would be able to take, say, Wynne's position that the templars and Circles are necessary, except for those mages who hated their own magic and wanted to embrace imprisonment or even suicide. They would have to either submit to templar tyranny, or fight to save their own lives. By extension. So he removed any stalemate--"there can be no compromise"--in the name of ending an indisputably broken system that served no one, at least in Kirkwall.

Even if this does not convince you gutting someone is not the answer. Anders is product of hate, he is by far the most tormented mage by chantry and its Templars and if the system continues I assure you there will be more like him. You obviously haven't seen a friend Anders before Meredith fight as you would have notice his willingness for redemption.

What Anders does can be considered evil, but not killing him is NOT evil. I have a bridge to sell to anyone who disagrees without at least reading my post and elaborating why they disagree with what I said sentence by sentence.

[Hydwn]

Lol how is letting Anders live an evil choice? He helps you save mages, its redemption enough.
 

 

People who were suggesting letting him live were suggesting it in the context of helping the Templars.  If you're full rival with him and have done his missions, he strongly implies that he'll commit suicide after.  Sebastian still leaves the party, and promises to invade with an army.  That qualifies in my books for a worst ending

[Lulupab]

People who were suggesting letting him live were suggesting it in the context of helping the Templars.  If you're full rival with him and have done his missions, he strongly implies that he'll commit suicide after.  Sebastian still leaves the party, and promises to invade with an army.  That qualifies in my books for a worst ending

Sebastian is really incapable of doing such a thing. He constantly whines and cannot do anything without Hawke's help. Just go back and think about it, when does he do something by himself? Or even decide by himself.

But I do agree that its the most evil route to take.

[Little Princess Peach]

the most evil desision in act three is you the customer is still playing the game and torchering those poor npc's to go through a crappy plot

[themikefest]

What Anders does can be considered evil, but not killing him is NOT evil. I have a bridge to sell to anyone who disagrees without at least reading my post and elaborating why they disagree with what I said sentence by sentence.

 

So you don't have a problem with not punishing him for what he did? What do you say to the people of Kirkwall who's family members were killed because of him if you let him live? What about the one's who demand he be executed for what he did? He's a piece of garbage. If you agree with him throughout the game and then the one time you don't, he assumes you're against him. His mentality is 'its my way or the highway'.

[Kenshen]

The most evil choices in Act III:

 

 

Get Merril somewhere in the neutral area to kill her and finish the wiping out of her clan.

 

 

Wow I didn't know we could do this.  Does Hawke have to be a mage or does this force us to spare Anders at the end? What do you consider neutral area?  Man if this is true this gives me a reason to play DA2 again.  Off to youtube I go.

[Elite Midget]

Lol how is letting Anders live an evil choice? He helps you save mages, its redemption enough.

Killing Bethany has to be the most evil decision in the game, hands down.

He gave a reason to start the war up right there, he tears Kirkwall apart, and he sentences nearly all the Mages of Kirkwall to death as he knew that the Templars would invoke the RoA if he blows up the Chantry and kills the Grand Cleric.

[tirnoney]

So you don't have a problem with not punishing him for what he did? What do you say to the people of Kirkwall who's family members were killed because of him if you let him live? What about the one's who demand he be executed for what he did? He's a piece of garbage. If you agree with him throughout the game and then the one time you don't, he assumes you're against him. His mentality is 'its my way or the highway'.

He's a terrorist to the people of Kirkwall or the templars. A lot of mages imprisoned in circles across Thedas might see him as a courageous freedom fighter. A good reflection of the real world in many ways.

[themikefest]

He's a terrorist to the people of Kirkwall or the templars. A lot of mages imprisoned in circles across Thedas might see him as a courageous freedom fighter. A good reflection of the real world in many ways.

I'm sure a lot of those mages wouldn't believe that if they were in Kirkwall knowing some of their friends were killed because of him