395 réponses à ce sujet

[Naugi]

I think there should have been an opportunity for redemption later in the game, rather than being locked into a single very narrow outcome because of a decision made at the start of the game in Haven. What is the point in even being able to tell Leliana not to kill the sister in Valence if it's already too late? Okay if you're really deadset on her becoming a ruthless killer (which she kind of is for the entire game series anyway) then let her kill the sister and her fate is sealed. But why no final chance to save her? Surely only pushing her the wrong way in ALL of the scenarios should see her become hardened?

 

Making a mistake in a conversation of seemingly little consequence at the start and then being powerless to change her fate for the next 200 hours of gameplay is wrong imho. It's the opposite of choices mattering. I told her not to kill the sister, that didn't matter. I know I withdrew the scouts, that apparently didn't matter either.

 

I'm not that worried, because as far as her character in the game goes, hardening fits. She is ruthless throughout and its hard for us to know she isn't supposed to be like that and we should be attempting to change her character all the time. Most of the time it suits the Inquisition down to the ground to have a ruthless assassin around the War Table. All of a sudden we're supposed to see her as the little lost Chantry lamb who plays with kittens and wears nice dresses. Not very Leliana to be honest.

 

Still, would like it to be a little more obvious and a little less down to a single decision when I'm sealing someones fate like this. If you don't know you're doing it, thats not making roleplaying decisions or having the power to steer peoples lives, it's just an unpleasant surprise 200 hours later.

[BlueMew]

Exactly. Like with Alistair, it's very silly to have such a thing hang on a single decision, especially in a game this big.

 

All the times you were merciful in quests, missions and judgements apparently are less important than a single random moment at the very beginning when you're no leader yet :/

[DementedSheep]

It's not about how familiar you are with Leliana. That does not have any bearing. It's all about what type of person you role-play your inquisitor. A compassionate, merciful inquisitor will steer Leliana towards the softer side. Whereas if your inquisitor is as ruthless as Justinia, Leliana will remain in the darker path.

But that is not what happens. Instead it hinges on one action that isn't even particularly ruthless at the start of the game!

The guy is definitely a traitor, had already killed one of your spies and has very dangerous information that if it gets out will endanger many other spies.  If you were that precious about a life it's wonder you can function at all with how many people you end up killing.

You don't even have to tell her to kill him. This happens if you just don't interfere with the spymaster who you don't know well dealing with a situation you know **** all about after having only just stopped being their prisoner and a suspect. It doesn't matter if you were a compassionate and merciful leader, it doesn't matter if you never even order Leliana to do anything that's morally wrong (I used her a lot on the wartable because I tend to prefer to use small teams of scouts rather than sending in the troops or relying on the goodwill of others but not for assassination or blackmail). If you didn't butt in and order her to spare one guy at the start she acts like you've been using her as Justinia did and decides to overrides your orders despite apparently being willing to defer to you when she barely knew you and you weren't even the leader. 

 

I'm all for decision mattering but only when it makes sense. It would have made more sense if it was based on how you lead and how you have used her or just making her this ruthless a part of her personality you can't change.

[earymir]

Anyone who thinks murdering a traitor should fall under a "soft" Leliana doesn't seem to understand the whole point. Leliana's whole life has been trying to figure out the difference between pragmatic violence and religious forgiveness/understanding/nonviolence (ish). Being hardened to killing when you have a real option of a nonviolent approach is quite literally what the dilemma is and why that is an important choice.

[Taleroth]

I have to wonder if the DA team was just testing the waters with this choice. There has been shades of it in previous games, especially in Mass Effect, but I've never thought it was good.

 

I really don't want to make assumptions about where Bioware is going for here, but I've seen trends in discussions of choice before. I might have even expressed  them myself once upon a time. The idea that if you detach the choice from the consequence by enough time, the player has to accept it and can't just go back and undo it. It makes a certain amount of rational sense. But what it does is it hurts the agency of the whole thing. A consequence detached from the choice doesn't feel like it was really the result of that choice. Any consequence that wasn't predictable goes that way. And the more time that passes, the more opportunities you have for the player to excuse why the outcome should be different. "I could have stopped it."

 

There's a lot of punch lost in that. Nobody's going to be wondering "what if I picked a different dialogue choice 30 hours ago."  They're definitely not going to frustrate themselves over decisions made several games ago (which I saw people here hope for with regards to things like Varric's shard).

 

This is why immediate outcomes are usually better.

[Kecaw]

This what is call a bottleneck solution. From the start if you F-up  it goes one way, and that is the whole Leliana incydent whitch IMO is unfair as hell, one wrong choice and the whole thing crumbles despite that the rest of the time i was trying to help her realize that  the "dark" scenario isnt always the good one (the scouts arent just some free bodies you can dump whenever or that killing the sister would't do us anny good, and other choices) .  Im all for  different choices/outcomes/story depending on what i did in the game but this "outcome" is really terrible,  and i get that she dose that for a living but if 9/10 options were the  ones that made her give some form of sympathy but she still hold on to that one thing (whitch at that point in the game you had zero to say, i mean hell it would be like saying to a account how they should do their job when you never did accounting before) and she calls you on that ... then im sorry but that some crappy writing.

[Scerene]

She is just so much happier as a softened Leliana and comes to a better conclusion about herself and the divine. She also realizes that the divine was infact using her, albeit for good "ideals" and purposes. Leliana brought out the darkest version of herself for the sake of Dorothea. and is a better person without her, something that even the divine herself realizes, as the spirit that imprinted her memory replays it to the inq in the fade. "im sorry i failed you", and is confirmed by the message in the box. Softened Leliana is also by far the best divine, she open the chantry to everyone, so everyone can have positions in it, no matter race, and is able to bring people that uprise against her, into the fold through peaceful means, as if "by magic" ^^ Softened Leliana will focus on bringing the kindest qualities out of herself, whereas hardened Leli will do the opposite. Softened Leli is able to admit to herself that the divine wasnt good for her, in spite of the divines lofty ideals.

[Scerene]

Anyone who thinks murdering a traitor should fall under a "soft" Leliana doesn't seem to understand the whole point. Leliana's whole life has been trying to figure out the difference between pragmatic violence and religious forgiveness/understanding/nonviolence (ish). Being hardened to killing when you have a real option of a nonviolent approach is quite literally what the dilemma is and why that is an important choice.

yes but it doesnt have to be completely black and white, the way that bioware tries to present it. Sometimes war does require sacrifice, even though some situations may seemingly be solved through "peaceful" means. The traitorous agent could escape or send info to the enemy while in captivity. Theyve also put the others in danger the whole time and many of the them are dead as a result of his betrayal. That agent is a loose end and getting rid of him might probably be a good idea, after you drill him for info ofc

[Shard of Truth]

It's stupid, no matter how you put it. Let her kill that guy (or say nothing) in the beginning and she won't listen to you for the rest of the game, so essentially only the first negative choice matters, the rest do nothing. Why is there no outcome in-between?

[Gearwar2805]

So like the first time I talked to Leliana I told her to kill the traitor. I later told her we are better then Cory. Then at the Temple I tell her not to kill the girl. But she still kills her and says I told her to be a jerk and goes all dark. Sheesh.

 

That is actually the only meaningful choice of the game. I too questioned my previous decision but I smiled at the thought that I had to respend 100 hours to get to the same spot again. This is actually how choices are supposed to work. As the iron bull said it, the qunari do not make the strongest or the smartest leaders, but rather those who can make the tough decisions and live with it.

 

Leliana's storyline and development was by far the best in the whole game.

[Iakus]

Gee, to people want thier choices to matter or not? 

[robertthebard]

yes but it doesnt have to be completely black and white, the way that bioware tries to present it. Sometimes war does require sacrifice, even though some situations may seemingly be solved through "peaceful" means. The traitorous agent could escape or send info to the enemy while in captivity. Theyve also put the others in danger the whole time and many of the them are dead as a result of his betrayal. That agent is a loose end and getting rid of him might probably be a good idea, after you drill him for info ofc

Except that, that's not what you do, or allow to happen. If you don't stop her, she has him killed, period. There's no mention of interrogation, she has him killed outright. If you stop her, you can point out that this is the perfect time for ideals.

How many "Where's my chance to be 'evil'" threads have we seen? Here's one of those chances, and look, it has a consequence, and now people are unhappy about it. That decision sets the tone for Leliana. Are you going to try to be merciful when you can, or are you just going to be ruthless. This sets that groundwork, and it was fairly obvious to me that that was intended. It wasn't so obvious about Leliana, however, it also wasn't really surprising to me either. That's what choices are about, consequences. Good consequences are called rewards. If you proactively seek to be merciful with the Inquisition, you'll get a softer Leliana, if not, you get the ruthless Leliana. Now, if people are really looking to be "evil", then the latter may indeed be the "reward".

[Korva]

@robertthebard: I agree that people who cry for "evil" choices usually just want to be "evilkool lolol" without actual negative consequences for themselves. A power trip, basically. But I'd very much prefer for distinct character development not to hinge on a single moment. It would feel more realistic if it depended on more variables over the course of the game, with different "weights" attached to different choices in different situations. As it is, it's too easy to metagame yourself a "softened" Leliana while still playing as a selfish tyrant otherwise, and that just makes no sense at all. In order to "soften" her, we should have to walk the walk throughout the game, with her and with others. That would allow the player to slip up once or twice (people aren't perfect) without "ruining" the whole character arc, yet require sufficient dedication to make the Inquisitor a consistently credible influence and leader.

 

For example, my faithful Inquisitor forgave Ser Ruth in Andraste's name, then used Leliana's suggestion in the following war table mission, which results in the ex-Warden requesting residence in a Chantry and hopefully finding some peace there. In a way, that mirrors Leliana's own past with the Lothering chantry. You'd think all that would affect her in some way, but it doesn't. Neither do any of her own more ruthless, callous or flat-out cruel war table suggestions.

[Gunslinger01101]

Poor Bioware.

There is one thread that complains none of your choices have any impact on the ending or characters in the game now this thread complains that your choices have too much impact on a character.

I swear the internet did us no service giving everyone a voice.

Poor you, not being able to see how those two statements can co-exist in truth. I love the Fox-Noise-esque boiling down of viewpoints into diametrically opposed, mutually exclusive stances. It's an art!

[cronshaw]

Players b*itch about not having enough "meaningful" decisions
BioWare gives them one
Players continue to b*itch

[_Aine_]

I think it boils down to people wanting to be able to "be" evil themselves but not wanting people they care about to become evil on their watch  It kind of implies lack of control.  That we couldn't help her stay on the level.  That only "one" choice mattered and the rest of the efforts were wasted time.  The part that originally bothered me about this very situation was the fact that when the major decision affecting situation occurs, we barely KNOW Leliana, and we are in no way in control of the inquisition. We are barely outside of being a prisoner.  Why would we jump in an cause a spymaster to stop doing her own area of expertise, realistically?  THAT is the issue I had with it.  It didn't easily fit inside of the control dynamic for my newly freed and yet still leashed girl despite her thinking that Leliana was acting due to emotion first rather than cold calculation (though truthfully, a traitors death is not necessarily an emotional action, it just was in Leliana's case imo).  

 

I have played it both ways now just to see the difference in the outcome and it was really striking.  I have had to headcanon my first playthrough as "you can't save everyone" and my femInq considers the loss of Leliana one of her saddest outcomes of the game, that she couldn't save her from herself...sharing Justinia's phrase "Sorry, I have failed you too." 

 

Still, outside of making a story make sense with my own take on it -- it would have been nice to have a "redemption" arc written in there somewhere.  Life doesn't always offer chances for redemption of course, but when we legit like a character, it would be nice to be able to offer a character a chance to come out on top in the happiness category.  It isn't that being a deadly cutthroat isn't completely in character for Leliana, it is just that she seems so divinely unhappy with her own end.  

[earymir]

This situation really isn't very different from Saren or the Illusive Man suicide endings.  You have to pick every single choice exactly correct for them to see any kind of reason at the end.  Maybe there was an uproar about that as well, but it's pretty silly.  Things happen and you don't always see it coming.  womp womp life.  

[Wulfram]

This situation really isn't very different from Saren or the Illusive Man suicide endings.  You have to pick every single choice exactly correct for them to see any kind of reason at the end.  Maybe there was an uproar about that as well, but it's pretty silly.  Things happen and you don't always see it coming.  womp womp life.  

 

You just need to keep picking either persuade/coloured option, which most people do anyway, I think.  There's no real need to compromise on your vision for your character, since there are paragon and renegade options available.

 

And the manner of a villain's death isn't really comparable to turning an LI into a crazy evil murderer.

[Dieb]

That was the moment I was through with her.

 

I didn't really care much for her, so in all those "checks", I mostly took the "don't kill innocent people" or whatever came closest to "just don't make a mess". So when at the chantry, I specifically told her not to kill that woman, she does it anyway. And all I get to do is to (Diplomatic) comfort her for killing an unarmed captive or (evil) applaud her for being awesome?

 

She spent the whole game forcing me into this position and then giving me backhanded compliments regarding my sissy leadership style, yet the one time I "lead" her, she violates a direct order.

 

I do not even have a problem with the fact that she does it per se, or the what's become of her. However, the fact that my Inquisitor is forced to think she's a cool professional & suck up to her in every instance was going on my nerves. I would accept her being an evil character if I got to oppose it, but this "Gee, I s'ppose you're right then!" after every time she's being a massive... unpleasantness... really got on my nerves as the game progressed. I would have Malcolm-Reynolds'd her out of my Keep and told her to find herself another Inquisition, however hot-headed, shot-sighted and lacking ye' olde "ruthless calculus" this decision may be.

 

 

(I personally resent executions or vendetta very much, so this is important to me. However hypocritical, given the overall bodycount, but alas.)

[Helmetto]

I actually quite like how the Leliana thing was handled. 

 

For starters, the traitor spy and the chantry sister were one and the same: threats to the inquisition that would've/did get people killed, Leliana trusted them at one point, serve the enemy, etc. That the Chantry sister didn't succeed is irrelevant to Leliana; if she was going to murder a guy over her people, it makes little sense that she wouldn't murder someone that was a threat to her. Consistent morals are consistent, as is their perspectives.

 

That telling her not to murder the sister, and it not stopping her, well. That just goes to show you that some friends don't follow advice. Remember, in that Chantry, you were going in for support, not as her leader, but as a friend.

 

Though that said, I really wish there were, you know, more options in the dialogue wheel. I wish there was a "Oh my god, you IDIOT" option for every idiot ball in the game, or a dialogue choice where my character pulls out a "Don't" sign and smacks people over the head with it. Perhaps an option where my character can be Sassy Gay Friend.

 

Optionssssss.

[TurretSyndrome]

The tie up of the scout choice with the Chantry quest was pretty stupid design. She had perfectly valid reasons for killing the betrayer and it should have no effect on the whimsical killing of the Sister.

 

As I roleplayed, My Qunari Mage was for killing the traitor and my Human dude just stayed out of it. The human was no Inquisitor and had no reason to butt in when she was doing her job.

 

Even if you choose to stop her, the response when the character says "If it's not a job you like, then you shouldn't be doing it", felt so immensely childish and naive. Sorry that we're not all living in that perfect bubble filled with sunflowers and rainbows, kid. We're trying to survive in a ruthless world.

 

I'd also point out that the part where you tell her that it's OK to care for the welfare of her scouts even if you chose to "stay out of it" or support killing the betrayer, is perfectly fine. Punishing an enemy/traitor without mercy while still caring for her friends is the Leliana I know. 

 

So what I'm saying is that while killing the Sister may be part of Leliana's way, it had nothing to do with the choices regarding the treatment of a traitor and her scouts. This should've been an independent choice.

[Spectre Impersonator]

Leliana just sucks.

[Helmetto]

The tie up of the scout choice with the Chantry quest was pretty stupid design. She had perfectly valid reasons for killing the betrayer and it should have no effect on the whimsical killing of the Sister.

 

As I roleplayed, My Qunari Mage was for killing the traitor and my Human dude just stayed out of it. The human was no Inquisitor and had no reason to butt in when she was doing her job.

 

Even if you choose to stop her, the response when the character says "If it's not a job you like, then you shouldn't be doing it", felt so immensely childish and naive. Sorry that we're not all living in that perfect bubble filled with sunflowers and rainbows, kid. We're trying to survive in a ruthless world.

 

I'd also point out that the part where you tell her that it's OK to care for the welfare of her scouts even if you chose to "stay out of it" or support killing the betrayer, is perfectly fine. Punishing an enemy/traitor without mercy while still caring for her friends is the Leliana I know. 

 

So what I'm saying is that while killing the Sister may be part of Leliana's way, it had nothing to do with the choices regarding the treatment of a traitor and her scouts. This should've been an independent choice.

 

For you, maybe. For Leliana, perhaps having a memory where someone stopped her from doing something and give mercy was the key to sparing the sister. "If I would spare a traitor, why wouldn't I have spared the sister?"

 

Like I said, both the traitor and the sister aren't so different.

[Wulfram]

Traitor:  Betrayed, caused death of allies, is still an active threat

Sister:  Did not betray because never part of group, caused no damage, is not a threat because she's got a knife to her throat.

[Helmetto]

Traitor:  Betrayed, caused death of allies, is still an active threat

Sister:  Did not betray because never part of group, caused no damage, is not a threat because she's got a knife to her throat.

 

Leliana was part of the Chantry, Sister pretended to be her friend, was apart of an enemy that threatened her and the Inquisition (Some chantry lady who really, really didn't like them or something), is a threat if allowed to live.