2858 réponses à ce sujet

[Ghost Gal]

Eh, I disagree. I never felt like Hawke was "stepping all over whatever that companion believes in" by disagreeing with them, but to each their own. The devs said they never meant for rivalry to be viewed as the "bad" path, and that's enough for me even if the F/R system doesn't always work mechanically.

 

Except that Hawke can and does sh*t all over their dreams and actively sabotage their goals, and there's nothing they can do about it.

 

"Oh, you believe strongly in freeing mages? I'm going to turn them into the Templars right in front of you, and there's nothing you can do." "Oh, you desperately want to restore this mirror and help your people? I'm going to withhold this relic of your people, dampening your efforts to repair it, and there's nothing you can do." "Oh, you hate mages and slavery because of your traumatic past? I'm going to help dangerous mages right in front of you, tell you to 'get over' your traumatic past, and hire a slave right in front of you because I can."

 

Not to mention rivalry can happen by constantly insulting and belittling them, and somehow they never get tired of getting treated like dirt enough to leave.

 

To me, "rivalry" is nothing but emotional abuse that has no consequence. You can literally treat your companions however you want and they never get mad enough to leave, even when the things you say or do should be a deal-breaker. There should have been an instance where turning runaway mages to the Templars was a deal-breaker for Anders, and he shuts down all attempts to romance. Hawke refusing to hand over the Aluin'Holm should have been a deal-breaker for Merrill, and she should have dumped you on the spot. Keeping Orana as a slave should have been a deal-breaker for Fenris, and he should have shut down all potential for romance from then on.

 

If the devs meant for the rivalry not to be the "bad path," they did a terrible job. The "Rival" path is just Hawke being a jerk to them, and/or being a terrible friend who shows no respect or trust for his friends' deepest held beliefs, desires, and goals, and actively sabotages their life's work and/or hurts groups of people they care deeply about (Anders = mages, Merrill = elves and mages, Fenris = victims of magical abuse and former slaves) with a sort of "You can't stop me" attitude.

 

That's one of things I dislike most about her. She seems to have the same conservative politics as Vivienne - everyone should stay in their place so I can keep my cosy place at the top.

 

I agree. 

 

Like I said, Sera herself reveals that she likes the status quo as it is because it lets her do whatever she wants. "Saving the world should earn more sovereigns than this. We need things back to normal so I can go play!" "Helps me, helps people, helps you. In that order." The devs have even said that she considers the world her "playground." She likes keeping nobles at the top and common folk at the bottom because it allows her to weave between them as much as she wants, and pick on the nobles as much as she wants because she uses how they treat the common folk as an excuse. As long as the nobles are at the top and allowed to hurt common folk, she can use it as moral license to prank, rob, and murder them as much as she wants.

 

If she actually tried to change the status quo so that a less abusive ruling class was in power and the common folk had more rights, they wouldn't need Red Jennies anymore, and thus she could no longer use Red Jennies to get her kicks by playing pranks on, stealing from, screwing around with, and sticking arrows in nobles with complete moral impunity, since she no longer has the "they're abusing common folk" as a moral justification.

 

I don't think Sera is "wise" for refusing to try to change the status quo, I think it's just the selfish criminal in her enjoying things the way they are because they allow her to do whatever she wants.

[Pasquale1234]

That's one of things I dislike most about her. She seems to have the same conservative politics as Vivienne - everyone should stay in their place so I can keep my cosy place at the top.

Solas: I do not understand you, Sera. You have no end goal for your organization.
Sera: Nobles get rattled, and people get payback. I play in the middle.
Solas: Why not go all the way? You see injustice, and you have organized a group to fight it. Don't you want to replace it with something better?
Sera: What, just lop off the top? What's that do, except make a new top to frig it all up?
Solas: I...forgive me. You are right. You are fine as you are.
Sera: You hurt my head sometimes, Solas.
Solas: Yes, I have been known to do that.

That sounds more like resignation to me. She doesn't seem to believe that a new upper echelon would be any better than the one it replaced.

[Pasquale1234]

There is no chunk of blame that can belong to Merrill, as can be discerned by the fact that nothing that Merrill did ever hurt anyone. If it was dangerous, well, that just means that Merrill's precautions were sufficient, and everyone else was a paranoid, potentially murderous asshat.

Right.

So Merrill can go careening the wrong way down a one-way street to reach her destination, leaving a 6-car pileup in her wake. So long as she escapes unscathed, she bears no blame for what happened to the other motorists.

[Tidus]

Pasquale1234,As far as replacing the upper echelon fat cats with new fat cats I have to agree with Sera since that doesn't always improve things in fact things can get worst.

[In Exile]

Merril's precautions were sadistic. They turned on having her friend or lover (!!) execute her if she became a meat puppet for a demon. That's not a back-up plan. Her precautions were also useless, since she didn't plan for any situation where the demon would try to simply take advantage of her actions. Her mistake is pride - that she's the end goal, with no alternative - for audacity. She's obviously not as stupid as Marethari, but she's not blameless.

[Dean_the_Young]

Right.

So Merrill can go careening the wrong way down a one-way street to reach her destination, leaving a 6-car pileup in her wake. So long as she escapes unscathed, she bears no blame for what happened to the other motorists.

 

Do recall that Xil has on multiple occasions demending gambling a sound strategy for gaining money, so long as you win, with the winning being proof of your wisdom and intelligence of the decision.

 

Though if you lose, you're worthless, like Gamlen.

[ModernAcademic]

People have mentioned the Game in the last pages. Do you know what scares me most about the Game? It's that even the people you believe are not playing the Game are in fact playing to win.
 
Like Gaspard, for example. After three gameplays, I finally realized what Briala meant when she accused him of not being the righteous person he claimed to be. She tells the Inquisitor they're blind for not seeing he's just another player of the Game.
 
Then I had a brainstorm and Gaspard's actions rushed one past another in an intense flashback and I realized he was using me - and MY Inquisition - to strenghten his position in the Great Game. He needed me at the Winter Palace to convince the aristocracy that the Inquisition supported his coup d'État. 
 

 

 

HOWEVER, because I know how Celene manoeuvered the Council of Heralds to steal from him his right to the throne - since Gaspard was next in the line of succession to the Orlesian emperor -, I don't fall for the antics that Celene is "the rightful ruler of Orlais" and that Gaspard is an "evil warmonger, trying to steal the throne", as some players do.
 
The throne is his. Always was. She stole it from him. And no matter how much of an expansionist Gaspard is, Celene is hardly a virtuous ruler just because she is more of a diplomat than he is. Players talk to her when arriving at the Winter Palace and are so enchanted by her courteous manners that they forget she's calculist and a backstabber. She's just as dangerous as Gaspard. She just plays the Game using different weapons. 
 
The right thing to do would be for her to have negotiated with her cousin for a position in court priorto his nomination, not to have moved behind his back. In Masked empire, he even offered to marry her, ensuring both ruled side by side. Celene, of course, declined the offfer.

 

This is one of the reasons why I never consider letting Celene have the throne to herself anymore. I'm not supporting a rightful ruler. I'm supporting a usurper to the throne. Someone whose modus operandi is to act behind people's back to get what she wants. And when she gets it, she glances at you with a placid smile, ready for Round 2, as she was when she lured Gaspard into a trap in the Winter Palace. IMO, to have such an unreliable ally, someone who's known for being treacherous weakens my authority as the Inquisitor. I'd rather deal with the warmonger any day. At least I know I'm supporting someone who's acting within the boundaries of the law and whose moves are more predictable than the alternative.
 
 
 
It's true that placing Gaspard on the throne might mean war between Orlais and Ferelden in the future, but seeing the events on the Exalted Council two years later, it doesn't really matter which cousin sits on the throne. Celene is also prone to try and control the Inquisition through political influence. At least with Gaspard you can either control him by keeping Briala with a knife pressed on his neck at all times or threaten to have the Inquisition support Ferelden should Gaspard display any expansionist intentions.

[Melbella]

If it was so clear-cut that Gaspard was the one and only rightful heir, the matter would never have gone the Council of Heralds to decide in the first place. There was a dispute, and they settled it. You can blame Celene for using whatever methods to win them over, but then shouldn't you also blame them for buying into it? If it's OK for Gaspard to play the Game, why isn't it OK for the others?

[The Elder King]

That's a tough one. There's fault and then there's responsibility, and I think several parties had their hands on the idiot ball here.Merrill had plenty of warning - from Marethari and her clan's behaviors toward her - yet she persisted. There were no apparent lines she wouldn't cross in her pursuit to rebuild the eluvian. She clearly knew that what she was doing was dangerous, thus she asked Hawke & friends for backup - thus endangering them, and the world at large if they failed.Marethari's actions were a direct result of Merrill's... so I'd say that a pretty big chunk of blame for what can happen there belongs to Merrill.

I agree that Merrill's plan was risky as well, and I don't agree with her plan on going to the demon for help. Howewer, she did have a backup, and she did warn Marethari of what we was doing. The Keeper had the time to prepare her clan for the worst.
Marethari instead did nothing to prepare her clan for what happened. Her job is to guide and protect her clan, and she decided to let go for a single person, without even a warning. Without even considering that the clan would obviously turns on Merrill the moment they discovered what happened. Not to mention she gambled on the same thing Merrill did, Hawke.

Other then all that, Marethari could've prevented all this by stopping Merrill and Hawke for coming near the dalish camp, so not vivi g them the access of the demon's location. There were a lot of things she could've done that were far better then her plan.

Merril's plan wasn't exactly bright, in my opinion, and it was risky, and it threatened other people, but she wasn't responsible for what happened to Marethari and the clan, because Marethari had options besides giving herself to the demon, and if she warned the clan they might've not go after Merril.

[Xilizhra]

Right.

So Merrill can go careening the wrong way down a one-way street to reach her destination, leaving a 6-car pileup in her wake. So long as she escapes unscathed, she bears no blame for what happened to the other motorists.

Analogy Court finds you guilty and demands that you pay a $5000 fine. It was Marethari's choice to get herself possessed, as it is later her clan's choice to launch an insane suicide attack on the Champion of Kirkwall if she commits the terrible crime of telling them the truth.

 

 

Merril's precautions were sadistic. They turned on having her friend or lover (!!) execute her if she became a meat puppet for a demon. That's not a back-up plan. Her precautions were also useless, since she didn't plan for any situation where the demon would try to simply take advantage of her actions. Her mistake is pride - that she's the end goal, with no alternative - for audacity. She's obviously not as stupid as Marethari, but she's not blameless.

What are you talking about? It worked out perfectly; the Marethari abomination was killed, and Hawke can even wiggle her out of her clan's misguided wrath. Marethari had already been possessed by the beginning of Act 3, so nothing she could have done would have altered that outcome anyway.

[Barquiel]

HOWEVER, because I know how Celene manoeuvered the Council of Heralds to steal from him his right to the throne - since Gaspard was next in the line of succession to the Orlesian emperor -, I don't fall for the antics that Celene is "the rightful ruler of Orlais" and that Gaspard is an "evil warmonger, trying to steal the throne", as some players do.
 
The throne is his. Always was. She stole it from him. And no matter how much of an expansionist Gaspard is, Celene is hardly a virtuous ruler just because she is more of a diplomat than he is. Players talk to her when arriving at the Winter Palace and are so enchanted by her courteous manners that they forget she's calculist and a backstabber. She's just as dangerous as Gaspard. She just plays the Game using different weapons.

Celene didn't steal the throne, she won it using the same methods Gaspard was trying to use. She just was better at convincing the Council of Heralds (which is supposed to decide in situations like this) that her claim was better. Also even if that were not the case - as a non-human inquisitor, I have no reason to give a **** about the birthright of some racist human noble who thinks the solution to everything is war.

[Pasquale1234]

It was Marethari's choice to get herself possessed, as it is later her clan's choice to launch an insane suicide attack on the Champion of Kirkwall if she commits the terrible crime of telling them the truth.

Merrill's stubborn refusal to cooperate with her Keeper created the conditions that led those other parties to make those choices.

I agree that Merrill's plan was risky as well, and I don't agree with her plan on going to the demon for help. Howewer, she did have a backup, and she did warn Marethari of what we was doing. The Keeper had the time to prepare her clan for the worst. Marethari instead did nothing to prepare her clan for what happened. Her job is to guide and protect her clan, and she decided to let go for a single person, without even a warning.

Marethari *probably* should have simply exiled Merrill, and not allowed her access to the camp, the Arulin'Holm, etc. She had apparently warned her people about Merrill's activities, which resulted in Pol's death.
 

Other then all that, Marethari could've prevented all this by stopping Merrill and Hawke for coming near the dalish camp, so not vivi g them the access of the demon's location. There were a lot of things she could've done that were far better then her plan.

Yep.
 

Merril's plan wasn't exactly bright, in my opinion, and it was risky, and it threatened other people, but she wasn't responsible for what happened to Marethari and the clan, because Marethari had options besides giving herself to the demon, and if she warned the clan they might've not go after Merril.

I still think there were a lot of hands on the idiot ball, and multiple parties bear blame.

[Pasquale1234]

It's true that placing Gaspard on the throne might mean war between Orlais and Ferelden in the future,

This alone is enough to convince my Inquisitors to keep Gaspard from the throne. I generally play my Inquisitors as people whose primary interest in Orlesian politics is to restore peace and stability. Replacing a sitting Empress would further de-stabilize the region, if only until the new crown-bearer had finished installing themselves.

Generally, my Inquisitor's knowledge about how Celene came to be Empress is usually pretty limited. I suppose I could headcanon Quizzie conversing with Leliana and Josephine for their insights about how it all came about - but I don't know how much the Inquisitor should actually care about any of that.

[Xilizhra]

Merrill's stubborn refusal to cooperate with her Keeper created the conditions that led those other parties to make those choices.

Uh, no. Those conditions were "there is a demon imprisoned on Sundermount," which Merrill wasn't responsible for. Given that the eluvian was well away from the camp, none of the Dalish could possibly have any cause to continue to fear Merrill... except that Marethari was deliberately whipping said fear up as part of some mind game or other. Nothing Merrill was doing was, or could reasonably be interpreted to be, endangering the clan.

[Kabraxal]

Celene didn't steal the throne, she won it using the same methods Gaspard was trying to use. She just was better at convincing the Council of Heralds (which is supposed to decide in situations like this) that her claim was better. Also even if that were not the case - as a non-human inquisitor, I have no reason to give a **** about the birthright of some racist human noble who thinks the solution to everything is war.

 

Celene really isn't any better... she so quickly resorts to burning the alienage only to protect her "image" and repeatedly shows she has no regard for actual life with the ease she orders the deaths of innocents to placate her needs in the Game.  Celene is as evil and reprehensible as Gaspard without the strange sense of honour that Gaspard actually shows. 

 

I used to think Celene was someone that played the Game only because she had to and was not a terrible person... The Masked Empire completely ended that delusion.

[Barquiel]

Celene really isn't any better... she so quickly resorts to burning the alienage only to protect her "image" and repeatedly shows she has no regard for actual life with the ease she orders the deaths of innocents to placate her needs in the Game.  Celene is as evil and reprehensible as Gaspard without the strange sense of honour that Gaspard actually shows. 
 
I used to think Celene was someone that played the Game only because she had to and was not a terrible person... The Masked Empire completely ended that delusion.

As I see it, there are two major differences between Celene and Gaspard. Despite her questionable tactics, Celene is a better leader in terms of peace (the last thing Thedas needs is yet another war) and progression (she does push forward several important reforms). And she is using violence as a last resort to solve problems rather than the first.

Compare her to Gaspard. Gaspard's first appearance in the novel is him trying to anger Teagan to cause a war with Ferelden; he forces Celene to deal with the elven rebellion when she tried to settle things peacefully; he wanted to burn down an entire city in order to find Celene...even though it was obvious she was no longer there; he started a civil war (killing thousands of Orlesians) and put Orlais in more danger than ever in an effort to seize power for himself. And his "chevalier honor" apparently can always be warped enough to justify his actions. So yes, I think Celene is better...and it is pretty impossible for me to think of Gaspard as anything other than a villain.

[Kabraxal]

As I see it, there are two major differences between Celene and Gaspard. Despite her questionable tactics, Celene is a better leader in terms of peace (the last thing Thedas needs is yet another war) and progression (she does push forward several important reforms). And she is using violence as a last resort to solve problems rather than the first.

Compare her to Gaspard. Gaspard's first appearance in the novel is him trying to anger Teagan to cause a war with Ferelden; he forces Celene to deal with the elven rebellion when she tried to settle things peacefully; he wanted to burn down an entire city in order to find Celene...even though it was obvious she was no longer there; he started a civil war (killing thousands of Orlesians) and put Orlais in more danger than ever in an effort to seize power for himself. And his "chevalier honor" apparently can always be warped enough to justify his actions. So yes, I think Celene is better...and it is pretty impossible for me to think of Gaspard as anything other than a villain.

 

I think both are villains.  I'm not arguing Gaspard over Celene... but for neither.  And Celene's "progressive nature" is simply her need to impress Brialla.  Without Brialla, Celene wouldn't care one bit about the elves or their plight.  Everything she sees in the world is a tool to use.  Even Brialla is the same thing, just with some emotional baggage on Celene's end.

 

Honestly, if I had to choose between Gaspard or Celene, with no Brialla as the puppet master... it would be Gaspard every time.  His motives and drive are clear.  He wants to expand Orlais as Drakkon did.  Celene's is ambiguous.  She says she wants to better Orlais, but that is such a nebulous concept that it is never truly outlined what that means.  And through that, she uses it to justify outright murder at her mercurial whims.  A war monger that simply wants to create an empire is a far better evil on the throne than a clear psychopath who has no moral compass and no actual code to follow.  Someone will create another play to "slight" her honour and she'll storm off to burn another of her cities in spite while claiming it is for the common good.

 

I'd rather them both be executed for their crimes and a sensible leader placed on the throne, but between just those two, Gaspard is a far better choice for the throne than Celene in every possible way. 

[Pasquale1234]

Honestly, if I had to choose between Gaspard or Celene, with no Brialla as the puppet master... it would be Gaspard every time.  His motives and drive are clear.  He wants to expand Orlais as Drakkon did.

That Orlesian expansion would benefit... who exactly?

[Barquiel]

I think both are villains.  I'm not arguing Gaspard over Celene... but for neither.  And Celene's "progressive nature" is simply her need to impress Brialla.  Without Brialla, Celene wouldn't care one bit about the elves or their plight.  Everything she sees in the world is a tool to use.  Even Brialla is the same thing, just with some emotional baggage on Celene's end.
 
Honestly, if I had to choose between Gaspard or Celene, with no Brialla as the puppet master... it would be Gaspard every time.  His motives and drive are clear.  He wants to expand Orlais as Drakkon did.  Celene's is ambiguous.  She says she wants to better Orlais, but that is such a nebulous concept that it is never truly outlined what that means.  And through that, she uses it to justify outright murder at her mercurial whims.  A war monger that simply wants to create an empire is a far better evil on the throne than a clear psychopath who has no moral compass and no actual code to follow.  Someone will create another play to "slight" her honour and she'll storm off to burn another of her cities in spite while claiming it is for the common good.
 
I'd rather them both be executed for their crimes and a sensible leader placed on the throne, but between just those two, Gaspard is a far better choice for the throne than Celene in every possible way.

Celene's sins amount to being willing to do unscrupulous or questionable things when backed against a wall and all her other plans have failed. The worst thing she does in the novel is obviously ending the elven rebellion, an uprising which was killing innocent humans...and had Gaspard not tried to paint her as beholden to elves (which he admits he didn't even think was true.) the uprising would probably have ended with the assassination. And even then she tries to minimize bloodshed and suffering.

"After that, Celene’s greatest concern was troops losing discipline and turning the night’s work into a celebration. The elves lived in these slums, Celene knew, and with nowhere to turn, they would be vicious if given the chance. She rode along, protected but present, and snapped orders to the men when they seemed inclined to rush into a building for easy looting. They marched through the elven slums with military precision, and when they rode back out, the section claimed by the rebels was burning behind them."

That's not the behaviour of a psychopath. Celene also has already proven herself a capable leader ruling orlais for years, we know what she wants.

"Regardless of how she came to the throne, Celene quickly proved that it was exactly where she belonged. The mad Florian's rule had brought the empire to the brink of collapse. Celene was its savior. Orlais has never been quite so peaceful or prosperous as it is now. The empress highly values education and learning and is an ardent patron of the arts. The aristocracy—in order to impress her—has followed suit, leading to a rebirth of Orlesian culture."

The empire's culture and education seem to be thriving under her rule. And maybe she's helping the elves for the wrong reasons, but I think that is still better than nothing.

 

On the other hand we know absolutely nothing about how Gaspard would rule day to day apart from "kill everyone who doesn't agree" and "war". What exactly would Gaspard have done to bring Orlais back from the brink of collapse as war wouldn't have worked? Take away Gaspard's "honor" and you have a guy who is willing to attack defenseless targets, lie about his enemies, use tactics he publically abhors and benefit from other cheating on his behalf as long as he can say he didn't know about it beforehand. Oh yeah, he's also a classist, a racist and while we don't have evidence of him murdering civilians or raping people, we have no reason to believe he wouldn't do either of those things based on what we know about Chevaliers.

[Kabraxal]

That Orlesian expansion would benefit... who exactly?

 

I'm not advocating his goal, but saying that it is clearly defined and much easier to confront or deal because of that.  With Celene, her goal is so ill defined and her emotional and mental centre so screwed up, that she can and does twist that goal to justify murder.  Gaspard is the evil that is blunt and obvious.  Celene is an evil that is unpredictable.  She orders the assassination of a noble for her lover's sake, not any sense of justice. She then betrays that lover and burns parts of her cities because of a personal slight.  She kills innocent servants that trust her so she can keep power.  She assassinated the previous emperor for that power.  She claims it is all for the greater good of Orlais, but her actions are those of an emotionally and mentally unstable psychopath that is guided merely by whims.  Sadly, she is a well trained and well practiced psychopath that can navigate the political minefield with deft ease.

 

Would you rather have to deal with the sane war mongerer or the lunatic that will order your death at any point because it suits her whim?  Easy choice between those two... though I'd prefer to throw them both off of the cliff. Sadly, the political situation doesn't allow for that.  But at least the one person that does have access to much of this information gives you decent advice... let Celene die and shackle the war mongerer with a shadow empress.  Should have listened to Leliana from the start.  Took the book to kick me from the delusion that Celene was anything but an unstable psychopath willing to throw innocents into the fire to stoke her own warped views. 

 

EDIT: I'd edit in the Barquiel's post, but the browser I'm on doesn't like to cooperate... but much of it is covered in come fashing above.  Celene is rarely actually "up against the wall" with little other recourse.  She just chooses flashy shows of power to woo the court and those in "know" of the game.  instead of being an actual strong, stable leader that can stand up to the pressures of the game, she succumbs to the game repeatedly instead of actually owning it.

[Pasquale1234]

I'm not advocating his goal, but saying that it is clearly defined and much easier to confront or deal because of that.
<snip>
Would you rather have to deal with the sane war mongerer or the lunatic that will order your death at any point because it suits her whim? Easy choice between those two...

I think you're missing the point.

Why would anyone who is not an Orlesian Imperialist support Gaspard?

The Inquisitor is *supposed* to be trying to restore peace and stability - at least that's my interpretation of the role. Putting a warmonger on the throne is anathema to that goal.

A typical outsider (like my Inquisitor) is mostly going to see that Orlais has enjoyed years of peace and prosperity under Empress Celene. Behind-the-scenes Orlesian political antics and The Game are probably going to continue apace regardless of who occupies the throne.
 

With Celene, her goal is so ill defined and her emotional and mental centre so screwed up, that she can and does twist that goal to justify murder.

Since when does war not involve mass murder?

Regardless of anyone's claims about who should be the rightful ruler, Celene is the ruler. Any attempt to unseat her will result in bloodshed, and a variety of other collateral damage.

[Beerfish]

I'm fine with both Gaspard and Celene, they both have different motivations, both are believable, ruthless and their are pluses and minuses to each.

 

The two people who's heads I'd lop off almost instantly would be Briala and Michel.  Both traitors of the worst sort.

[thesuperdarkone2]

I'm not advocating his goal, but saying that it is clearly defined and much easier to confront or deal because of that.  With Celene, her goal is so ill defined and her emotional and mental centre so screwed up, that she can and does twist that goal to justify murder.  Gaspard is the evil that is blunt and obvious.  Celene is an evil that is unpredictable.  She orders the assassination of a noble for her lover's sake, not any sense of justice. She then betrays that lover and burns parts of her cities because of a personal slight.  She kills innocent servants that trust her so she can keep power.  She assassinated the previous emperor for that power.  She claims it is all for the greater good of Orlais, but her actions are those of an emotionally and mentally unstable psychopath that is guided merely by whims.  Sadly, she is a well trained and well practiced psychopath that can navigate the political minefield with deft ease.

 

Would you rather have to deal with the sane war mongerer or the lunatic that will order your death at any point because it suits her whim?  Easy choice between those two... though I'd prefer to throw them both off of the cliff. Sadly, the political situation doesn't allow for that.  But at least the one person that does have access to much of this information gives you decent advice... let Celene die and shackle the war mongerer with a shadow empress.  Should have listened to Leliana from the start.  Took the book to kick me from the delusion that Celene was anything but an unstable psychopath willing to throw innocents into the fire to stoke her own warped views. 

 

EDIT: I'd edit in the Barquiel's post, but the browser I'm on doesn't like to cooperate... but much of it is covered in come fashing above.  Celene is rarely actually "up against the wall" with little other recourse.  She just chooses flashy shows of power to woo the court and those in "know" of the game.  instead of being an actual strong, stable leader that can stand up to the pressures of the game, she succumbs to the game repeatedly instead of actually owning it.

Did you forget how the endings say Briala isn't overthrown because the nobles fear the Inquisition. Guess what, in Trespasser, the Inquisition is pretty much gone as a threat, so the nobles are free to try and overthrow Briala. Then guess what, Gaspard will not only remove any benefits elves have gained but he'll also make elves suffer as revenge for being blackmailed.

 

 

Also, here's some quotes from Gaspard showing what a "nice" person he is:

Gaspard was silent beside her for a moment. Then he burst out laughing. “Maker’s breath, Celene!” He slapped his leg. “You’ve never lacked for courage, I’ll give you that. Were you a man, you’d be leading the armies yourself.”
“Is that why you must plot against me, Gaspard?” she asked, looking over. “Because I’m not a man?”
He actually seemed to think about it. “No,” he finally said, “the real problem is that you aren’t me.” – pg. 36

 

Gaspard is also very racist. After finding out Celene was close with Briala, he actually commissioned two different scholars to write papers on why elves are more akin to rabbits than people, and therefore should be treated like animals rather than people.

“Several of the professors have been asked to write papers about the elves. One will be saying that their large ears mark them as similar to rabbits, which means that they are simple prey animals, relying upon base instinct for survival and not to be trusted. Another will claim that anyone fornicating with an elf is insulting the Maker, as one who lies with animals.” – Pg. 66

 

When he confronts Briala about her work for improving the lives of the elves, he has this to say:

“Don’t be modest, girl. Noble Orlesian sons and daughters came back from Celene’s university talking about improving the alienages, and the professors write that they’re being asked to teach elves now as well. The taxes always seemed to slide around the poorer merchants. Maker’s breath, how many times did I ask for leave to mount an expedition to drive out the Dalish only to get sent off to hunt for darkspawn instead?”

“Three.” Briala smiled thinly. – Pg. 91

 

“You thought they were right to be angry at Mainserai, so instead of raising an army and stomping out the rebels, you wrung your hands and sent a few extra patrols and hoped that everything would eventually quiet down. You taught the elves to fight, just like a bad horseman teaches his charger to buck and bite.” He shook his head. “You taught them to attack the guards, when you allowed it to go unpunished. You taught them to dream of a life outside the slums where they belonged. And if Celene hadn’t slapped shackles on her lover and burned those slums, you would have taught every damned knife-ear in Orlais to stand up against us.” – pg. 93

 

Why does Gaspard want the throne?

Mostly, because he wants to invade Ferelden again. No, seriously. He considers Celene weak in trying to create friendship between the two countries. Gaspard fought for Orlais’ first occupation of Ferelden, and still considers them enemies

 

“There are many like us, men who are willing to save Orlais from the woman who would give it to our enemies with a kiss and a wave.” – pg. 30

 

“A good war unites the empire. Maybe we can let those idiots in the Chantry and the Circle kill people outside our borders instead of inside them.” – pg. 37

[congokong]

If it was so clear-cut that Gaspard was the one and only rightful heir, the matter would never have gone the Council of Heralds to decide in the first place. There was a dispute, and they settled it. You can blame Celene for using whatever methods to win them over, but then shouldn't you also blame them for buying into it? If it's OK for Gaspard to play the Game, why isn't it OK for the others?

I cannot give an opinion on who is the rightful heir based on bloodline because every time Gaspard goes over his family tree at the Winter Palace, I fall asleep.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

People always seem to talk about Celene burning Halamshiral without mentioning the context. Halamshiral was in open rebellion. It's not like she burned a city of elves minding their own business because she felt personally insulted by a play. Crushing a rebellion is exactly what any ruler of Orlais would have been expected to do. And she didn't decide to go kill some elves because an insulting play made her angry. It was the play that made her realize how bad perception of her had become and how precarious her political position was. Hence, she realized that her earlier plan to placate Orlais and its nobles by placating the rebels was not going to work.

 

Now, certainly you can argue the elves had a right to rebel, and that it was morally wrong of her to put it down. But my point is that particular incident in no way reflects more poorly on her than it does Gaspard.