I always let him live. We do what must be done to combat the Blight, and fighting it requires risks be taken. If there's even a chance that he can turn darkspawn from mindless monsters into people on a large scale, we have to take it. He did pretty well in Awakening the Messenger; hopefully his other Disciples are as moral.
Other things I chose using similar logic: let Branka keep the Anvil, let Avernus continue his research without restraint, and performed the Dark Ritual.
I let him live because he seemed to have good intentions for the most part and was a living thinking being....so I thought I owed him a chance. Reading posts in this thread though I'm getting the feeling it is going to come back and bite me lol. Oh well, for me in the moment it still feels like the right choice, might just change a few things around for my "Best Case Scenario" world state which I'm using for a later import. 
of course I killed him. Anders used to say: "Don't negotiate with demons"
I've read The Calling, but I still let him live. If I remember correctly he pretty much said he'd abandoned his method from the book because he'd discovered the reverse Joining method between then and the Warden meeting him, so that potentially eliminates the ickiness of converting all life to Darkspawn.
From a narrative standpoint it's a much more interesting choice than just killing him, I think. It's a big risk with potentially huge rewards - not just for the Blights but for things in general. The possibility that the dwarves could negotiate with thinking beings and perhaps regain some of their old territory for example.
Sure, it could all go horribly wrong, but then every thinking race in this lore has had its bad moments, at least it's not an endless zerg rush of infectious beings that haven't the capability to even think of stopping. As long as you have a chance of reasoning you have a chance of peace - or at least that was how I justified it at the time.
Let him live. My rationale at the time being that he was a thinking being that didn't want to cause harm. He might have f'ed that up severely, but working closely with him to point out that some of his ideas are flat out stupid/need more preparations should hopefully keep him from accidentally causing anymore blights/something worse.
I do not regret my choice because of metagame knowledge. Basically due to the fact that he is killable, he cannot cause any more major issues in the future unless either a. he survives being killed or b. it was going to happen anyways. If it he can survive death (such as by body jumping), then I'd rather have him under the Wardens' watchful eye then skulking about in the shadows. And if it is going to happen anyways, then at least I have an interesting character cause it. Plus with him alive, there exists the chance that he could open up additional options in plot lines that might not be available if he is dead.
Let him live, Broodmother was a greater priority at the moment and I can always kil him later.
I completely agree with you. In my estimation, the Architect and his awakened are a far worse threat than the blights, because they have all the danger of darkspawn without the one single bleak hope Thedas had so far - that killing the AD causes the horde to retreat. With the exception of the Messenger, they've all been pure evil, and the Messenger still arguably does as much harm as good.
As best I understand it, his original plan was the mass genocide of every non-darkspawn race in thedas by turning them all into ghouls (and by extension mutating many women into brood mothers, so there was a mass scale rape as part of his genocide). He dropped this plan, though it's not clear if he realized how stupid it is since his darkspawn need to mass rape women to actually create more of themselves and without GW blood he can't make them sentient (though I don't know if he could do he reverse joining by that point).
I'd just like to point out that we don't know whether the females would have become broodmothers. Genevieve was successfully transformed and she didn't turn into a broodmother.
My canon warden let him live. Part of me really wants to change that decision in the Keep. But I'll probably live with the choice instead and see what happens.
Guest_Israfel_*
of course I killed him. Anders used to say: "Don't negotiate with demons"
Ah, Anders, the great moral teacher of the Dragon Age.
I did not kill him figured he would be useful later
I let him live. I live to see if this comes back to bite me or not. His arguments were very convincing; he could be a strong ally in DA:I if the story line goes in that direction. He may have knowledge of the Elder One.
I have not read any of the novels.
At first i killed him and wasn't satisfied so i reloaded and spared him. I doubt we will see him again but it would be interesting if we did.
of course I killed him. Anders used to say: "Don't negotiate with demons"
Ah, you can always trust what Anders has to say, such a reliable voice of reason
He's not a demon. I let the Arch live; such knowledge shouldn't go to waste.
What's that Velanna?
Let him live, and I really hope to see him again, sooner or later. Was a great character.
I just killed him today. First time playing through Awakening.
I killed him cos he dropped some nice loot 
That's the only reason I need to kill someone haha
Is killing him is the bad way ?
and let him live is the good way ?
I let him live
Maybe he'll become a threat later but I think he really tries to make the darkspawns evolves into free creatures and not brainless monsters enslaved to the call of the Old Gods and if a disciple, like the messenger, could fight with me to defend a city against his own kind with honor, it's definitely an opportunity I couldn't let go without trying
And I still believe he is not like corypheus (maybe) but a real darkspawn born free from the call
Maybe he really forgot like many people said but until it's proven, I'll doubt about it
I have done both with different wardens. More times than not, I kill him. While he may truly desire peace and have the best intentions for 'his' people, the fact remains that the Darkspawn are basically corruption given form and not compatible with the rest of the 'living world'. They have to corrupt other races in order to breed, which makes them a parasite or virus at best. Their very presence destroys life and even corrupts the ground upon which they tread such that life dies.
No matter how well meaning he may be.... He can't change the taint of what they are.
Nope, kill all the way. For me the biggest moral dilemma for helping darkspawn is Broodmothers. There's no way I can allow them to continuing on living and reproducing by those methods.
I let him live, if only because he's more useful to keep alive for the moment.
Once he stops being useful and my warden deems him more trouble than he's worth, then he'll be put to the sword.
He's a risk but one my Warden Commander is willing to take to stop the Blights.
And after Witchhunt, my warden now needs an ace in the hole against whatever is coming(maybe flemmeth in his mind after talking to morrigan).
of course I killed him. Anders used to say: "Don't negotiate with demons"
Demons and Darkspawn are seperate entities.
I let him live because he asked nicely. What can I say, I'm a stickler for good manners.
In my "canon" playthrough, I opted to gut him like a trout.
However, he lives in other playthroughs of mine. I'll be interested to see what changes, if anything.
Retour en haut