Asking for the dialogue options to drop hints that your character is actually evil pretty much defeats the concept they're being manipulative and subtle in their bid for power.
It would be nice for your companions to ask you about your motivation when you made a decision and for you to be able to give different answers.
You can conscript and banish entire factions, order to have people poisoned in order to create power vacuum, imprison and execute them and use their remains to scare the living **** out of the would-be followers. Your spymaster will murder and kidnap people if you tell/authorize her to do so. You can take stuff from people and when they ask to have it back you can have your general tell them to talk to the hand.I mean even the choice to actually be worth the name inquisitor would be an improvement, torture, mass executions of rivals, ruling thru fear and fanaticism.
You can conscript and banish entire factions, order to have people poisoned in order to create power vacuum, imprison and execute them and use their remains to scare the living **** out of the would-be followers. Your spymaster will murder and kidnap people if you tell/authorize her to do so. You can take stuff from people and when they ask to have it back you can have your general tell them to talk to the hand.
I don't know, there's plenty of stuff that's usually considered far from nice that you can do. And that's on organization level, never mind the smaller stuff available when dealing with individuals.
Grey, at best. Show don't tell applies as well..because I do not remember any scenes that made any of that matter, no crucified and screaming enemies, no people on the rack, no people terrified of the Inquisitions reputation..
There's a difference between not having "evil" dialogue, and crying over the people lost in the summits explosion. And I still think the option of being something else is nice.
Grey, at best.
But you are not required to cry over people lost in the summit explosion. The emotion choices usually range from nice to "tough ****".There's a difference between not having "evil" dialogue, and crying over the people lost in the summits explosion. And I still think the option of being something else is nice.
You can conscript and banish entire factions, order to have people poisoned in order to create power vacuum, imprison and execute them and use their remains to scare the living **** out of the would-be followers. Your spymaster will murder and kidnap people if you tell/authorize her to do so. You can take stuff from people and when they ask to have it back you can have your general tell them to talk to the hand.
I don't know, there's plenty of stuff that's usually considered far from nice that you can do. And that's on organization level, never mind the smaller stuff available when dealing with individuals.
That's what the evil guys will tell you. The good guys will see it quite different.Grey, at best.
But you are not required to cry over people lost in the summit explosion. The emotion choices usually range from nice to "tough ****".
That's what the evil guys will tell you. The good guys will see it quite different.
If modern western nations do it and no one goes to jail, it's grey. Basically nothing felt anywhere near the scale of Redcliff in DA:O, or desecrating the ashes for power, or having golems mass produced out of kidnapped dust cast, or indeed wearing armour made of human skin in BG2 ;p
You can´t because...well, because you can´t.
Maybe there were women in the development team who feel "uhh duh...bad" about giving players actual freedom to act and roleplay as they want because, you know, acting thinking only in your own benefict or simply being an evil person in a videogame is "uhh duh...evil", which is just another point in the large list of negative points this game has, specially compared to previous Bioware games and how well implemented they had Good, Neutral and Evil actions, choices and consequences.
You are not supposed to. I don't think your army of the faithful, who are fighting against an evil guy, would stand by and let an evil guy lead them.
"I am Andraste´s will incarnated, she saved me from the Fade in order to make her will and believe me, you (whoever opposes you) are wrong about her and The Maker. Now follow me or you, your entire family and even your fuc*ing pet will suffer eternal punishment in the afterlife"
That should be enough for any stupid andrastian of the Inquisition (which is basically 100% of the army and inteligence network and around 80% of companions) to follow you.
You don't have to cry over them at all. That's just one of many options on the reaction wheel.
You can´t because...well, because you can´t.
Maybe there were women in the development team who feel "uhh duh...bad" about giving players actual freedom to act and roleplay as they want because, you know, acting thinking only in your own benefict or simply being an evil person in a videogame is "uhh duh...evil", which is just another point in the large list of negative points this game has, specially compared to previous Bioware games and how well implemented they had Good, Neutral and Evil actions, choices and consequences.
"I am Andraste´s will incarnated, she saved me from the Fade in order to make her will and believe me, you (whoever opposes you) are wrong about her and The Maker. Now follow me or you, your entire family and even your fuc*ing pet will suffer eternal punishment in the afterlife"
That should be enough for any stupid andrastian of the Inquisition (which is basically 100% of the army and inteligence network and around 80% of companions) to follow you.
Companion stuff, mostly. You can make choices which will mess up their lives in various ways and be quite rude* about it too, if that's your fancy.What smaller stuff? I feel like I'm always being diplomatic.
Why blame this on women? You're only taking away from your own argument.
I don´t blame this on women, I just talk about the possibility of the female members of the development team (not "women" as in "every women in the world" or anything like that) screwing just another aspect of the game as they have done with other aspects. It doesn´t matter who did or why they did it, the fact remains that this game has a lot of flaws and having an specific moral code put down your throat is one of them.
If modern western nations do it and no one goes to jail, it's grey. Basically nothing felt anywhere near the scale of Redcliff in DA:O, or desecrating the ashes for power, or having golems mass produced out of kidnapped dust cast, or indeed wearing armour made of human skin in BG2 ;p
I know. Perhaps a poor example. But still... It's hard to paint yourself as a character with less-than-noble intentions, even if the definition of noble may vary. Some of the dialogue would be a bit more neutral, if it was acted differently as well, but I guess that's the way it works.
No, that's having enough power to get away with it. Two different things.If modern western nations do it and no one goes to jail, it's grey.
Companion stuff, mostly. You can make choices which will mess up their lives in various ways and be quite rude* about it too, if that's your fancy.
*) punching people is hardly ever diplomatic, as the most obvious example
I don´t blame this on women, I just talk about the possibility of the female members of the development team (not "women" as in "every women in the world" or anything like that) screwing just another aspect of the game as they have done with other aspects. It doesn´t matter who did or why they did it, the fact remains that this game has a lot of flaws and having an specific moral code put down your throat is one of them.
I don´t blame this on women, I just talk about the possibility of the female members of the development team (not "women" as in "every women in the world" or anything like that) screwing just another aspect of the game as they have done with other aspects. It doesn´t matter who did or why they did it, the fact remains that this game has a lot of flaws and having an specific moral code put down your throat is one of them.
I found playing as someone who wanted to assert the Inquisition as the ultimate power behind Orlais and Ferelden to be able to do quite a lot. But it's all YMMV.
"your mileage may vary", a regular disclaimer on the intrawebsYMMV?
A lot of what you listed is either a war crime or a crime against humanity. There have been world leaders who have been tried for those crimes. The Hague seems a not insubstantial influx. That a make people escape justice IRL is beside the point.
In spoiler, because this may deviate the thread purpose:
Retour en haut