It's either a bug or you didn't notice the pyramid. It's always there, it's our default set of options. It is on the Orlesian side of the map though, while Leliana's don't-ask-option is in Ferelden. So if you went directly to the map of Ferelden, you could have missed the pyramid.
hmm.. maybe!
i think it depends on the PC and how you roll the character. I didn't like it because it felt at odds with how I played that particular PC. A hand touch or some other simple gesture would have been preffered.
In regard to the topic of corruption, perhaps it wasn't prudent for the writers have him bring it up, but some other inquisition member. Technically, bringing him back is a move that can tarnish the reputation of the inquisition, so the issue of corruption is relevant.
The more I think about it the whole judgement dialogue feels entirely messy and not fleshed out well at all.
Well I played my Adaar as someone who took the role of Inquisitor seriously. She had to work twice as hard as anyone else to be seen as more than a qunari beast and for A. Rainer to accuse her of being corrupt in the first place and cause her already unstable position to wobble then B. Make it worse by bringing up their relationship pretty much during her judgement of him made her see red.
I'm pretty sure she'd set him on fire if she had the option after that.
It really wasn't and it looks even worse how he decides after your judgement to bring up your relationship.
It's hilarious when you think about it. He makes the stupid decision to insult you, then you give him the chance to break away from his old life full of stupid decisions and how does he celebrate? By making a stupid decision that totally ruins her professionalism xD
I know it's consensual, but come on dude! Wait five minutes until you're out of your shackles and in private. Is that so hard?
that is terrible.
I'm not sure why he couldn't wait to bring up their relationship when they were alone. Especially after my girl did the whole "I never loved you." thing come on now.
The only way to get him not to say it is to conscript him 
and conscription is pretty stupid too. Wish you could conscript him without the whole "keep pretending to be Blackwall" derp.
I think the problem stems from the fact the game doesn't allow your PC to be angry with him at that point, if you've chosen to continue the romance. The kiss isn't all on Blackwall's side. It's a mutual kiss.
They both step forward. On a Trevelyan & Adaar, they cup his face first, reaching out first. Since the inquisitor is on the steps, it would be easy to step back and not have the kiss happen if she were still mad. However, she leans to him and they mutually share a kiss.
It would've been nice if the game allowed for an option there, to step back (still continuing the romance) or to lean forward and kiss him. That it doesn't isn't something that can really be laid at Blackwall's feet.
Yes if there would have been an option to not kiss him then the whole situation would have been different and much better because I think that the whole romance would have needed another scene where they talk about the whole situation.
I'm not sure why he couldn't wait to bring up their relationship when they were alone. Especially after my girl did the whole "I never loved you." thing come on now.
The only way to get him not to say it is to conscript him
I wish there was a way to stay in the relationship without the kiss scene. It's too bad you have to pick between your professionalism and dumping him. Would have been nice to stay in character for that scene.
Oh well, at least it's entertaining xD
Yes if there would have been an option to not kiss him then the whole situation would have been different and much better because I think that the whole romance would have needed another scene where they talk about the whole situation.
I love him and his romance, but I really really really wish they had broken the judgment and make-up scene into two separate scenes. Everyone that kept him, romance or not, really should've had a second cutscene after the judgment. The first time I played, I kept waiting for it to happen, it felt like missing content.
I wish there was a way to stay in the relationship without the kiss scene. It's too bad you have to pick between your professionalism and dumping him. Would have been nice to stay in character for that scene.
Oh well, at least it's entertaining xD
Yeah I choose characterization first. XD I'll almost always choose my PC staying IC over anything. But as far as my PC was concerned that comment was the last straw. He had already made me look like a fool once she'd been damned if it happened again.
I wish I could find it entertaining I was too buys staring at the screen in disgust. Felt like something I'd expect to see on trash tv.
Yeah I choose characterization first. XD I'll almost always choose my PC staying IC over anything. But as far as my PC was concerned that comment was the last straw. He had already made me look like a fool once she'd been damned if it happened again.
I wish I could find it entertaining I was too buys staring at the screen in disgust. Felt like something I'd expect to see on trash tv.
Wondering if you had a jester outfit in his size? 
Wondering if you had a jester outfit in his size?
But that'd just make her look petty. Better to have him do community service 
But that'd just make her look petty. Better to have him do community service
But, but Florianne needs an assistant!!!
But, but Florianne needs an assistant!!!
Nah. Florianne's working for the Inquisition I think.
I was tempted to just have my PC stab her on the dance floor (The gasps are amusing) but ultimately it was more fitting for her to simply watch her be dragged off. My girl doesn't waste resources).
I played my Adaar as serious but naive, she was more incredulous than angry about what he said. I'm a soft touch irl so my first PCs usually have a shade of that in their personalities.Well I played my Adaar as someone who took the role of Inquisitor seriously. She had to work twice as hard as anyone else to be seen as more than a qunari beast and for A. Rainer to accuse her of being corrupt in the first place and cause her already unstable position to wobble then B. Make it worse by bringing up their relationship pretty much during her judgement of him made her see red.
I'm pretty sure she'd set him on fire if she had the option after that.
It really wasn't and it looks even worse how he decides after your judgement to bring up your relationship.
I'm not sure why he couldn't wait to bring up their relationship when they were alone. Especially after my girl did the whole "I never loved you." thing come on now.
The only way to get him not to say it is to conscript him
Nah. Florianne's working for the Inquisition I think.
I was tempted to just have my PC stab her on the dance floor (The gasps are amusing) but ultimately it was more fitting for her to simply watch her be dragged off. My girl doesn't waste resources).
Florianne is my court jester. So awesome.
Stab her on the dance floor saying " I hear you're making a killing. Me too" * murder knife*Nah. Florianne's working for the Inquisition I think.
I was tempted to just have my PC stab her on the dance floor (The gasps are amusing) but ultimately it was more fitting for her to simply watch her be dragged off. My girl doesn't waste resources).
I played my Adaar as serious but naive, she was more incredulous than angry about what he said. I'm a soft touch irl so my first PCs usually have a shade of that in their personalities.
I've seen people rail against him for taking another's identity, but then say it's okay because it serves the inquisitions purposes in this instance? Yeah, conscription would be okay without the layering of hypocrisy on top (fine if you're playing a hypocritical jerk quisitor I guess?). Lol.
Yeah mine was serious and took her role as the Inquisitor seriously (had her get all the dialogue perks imaging her studying with Josie/Leliana/Cullen well into the night). She didn't want to appear lesser or easily manipulated.
Yeah it's just so stupid. My girl may have been a hypocrite in other matters but not in that.
Stab her on the dance floor saying " I hear you're making a killing. Me too" * murder knife*
If only.
I might've done it if I could've demanded someone clean that mess up before turning to Celene all like "we need to talk" that'd been epic.
I was tempted to just have my PC stab her on the dance floor (The gasps are amusing)
Like in Dishonored, yeay!
Assuming that I just don't like the character is simplistic, petty and dismissive. Shall I assume by your passive aggressive bolding, italics and underlining that you romanced him, got overly attached and, as such, are unable to have a discussion about who he is and what he did without getting emotional about it?
I had no problem with Blackwall. He was just...there, for the most part. After the reveal, I have opinions about his character that aren't favorable. That doesn't mean I think that he's totally without a conscience. It's partly that conscience and disgust with himself that led to him giving up his charade, imo, not his respect for my Inquisitor. If anything he came off as resentful of my Inquisitor during the scene about the dog, not inspired. I'll end this by saying that following what your conscience dictates can still be a selfish act. It doesn't matter if another is saved in the process. If he was disgusted with himself and decided to give up his lie because he couldn't live with it anymore, it's still about him rather than Mornay.
Also, I don't believe people change so much as they adapt. And plenty of murderers can claim that they've changed and some can even prove it with good deeds. Does that mean they have? Perhaps, but I'm not one to give them the benefit of the doubt. But there will always be someone who will give them that benefit, I realize, as evidenced by the fact that even Charles Manson has a woman convinced that he's a good guy.
If I choose to use some bolding, italics, and/or underling for emphasis or employ a certain amount of sarcasm/snarkiness, then too bad? I think the entire body of my posts on the matter generally show that I'm usually more on the side of objective truth - no matter how bad it is - which is why I so often point out the severity of Rainier's cirmes and have never, ever shied away from the fact that he was a terrible person six years in the past. Therefore, I have to laugh at the implication that I'm using italics, bolding, and/or underling in a passive-aggressive manner because I'm overly attached to the character due to the romance. Hey, I'm openly and overtly sarcastic about things in general (when I am being full-on sarcastic).
What I also am is someone who is tired of repeating the same crap over and over again, so yes, I will emphasize certain statements if I feel like it so that I - hopefully - won't have to say whatever I just said again anytime soon (woops, bold italics - call the passive-aggressiveness police on me!). Now I pointed out the earlier post where I responded to someone else about the issues of the non-romanced Inquisitor and why - even in a non-romanced state - what he does is selfless. I maintain that giving up his own life to save another man's life is the exact opposite of selfishness.
You stated that everything he did was selfish while ignoring (or missing) that post. If it makes you happy, then I'll rephrase things - how about we go with you're "meh" about the character (instead of disliking him) yet seem to feel strongly enough about the topic to continue claiming that he was behaving selfishly despite evidence that shows that the opposite is true. By the way, if you're going to bring something like Charles Manson and some attention-seeking nutjob into a situation that isn't even remotely similar, then I guess that you're the one who's not interested in having a serious discussion about things.
And I actually hope that you were being sarcastic about that Charles Manson thing because if you actually seriously believe that, then...hahaha! Per earlier posts in here discussing the issue of whether or not someone has really changed and/or is capable of change - I'll repeat what I said (as tedious as this is) about there being a clear and recognizable difference between someone who committed a terrible crime and is a one-time offender versus a person who is a narcissistic sociopath (of the serial-killing variety). Most normal people should be able to recognize that difference and judge a person accordingly. The one-time offender can change - the sociopath will never change.
Dorian is understanding of Blackwall wanting to atone and apologizes for remarking in an earlier conversation about Grey Wardens being murderers. Blackwall, for his part, respects Dorian for leaving his decadent, pampered life in Tevinter for principle. And in a later conversation he suggests that Blackwall lighten up the self-hating since he thinks Blackwall is a good man. It's kind of the inversion of Blackwall's and Cassandra's relationship. They start as bickering rivals and end as respectful friends.
Looks like I missed a lot! Thank you. I only got some of the more antagonistic banters and two relatively neutral ones, and no reaction from either one to the other's personal mission.
On the contrary, I like Varric. He's a bud, but he's right up there with Garrus in terms of his "clearly the writers love me so you must, too" presentation.
Ahh. I have to agree, then, though I never could get into ME so I can't compare the characters.
I'm glad you cite this scene rather than the barn ones, and understandable for many reasons not just PDA (the barn scenes are completely optional btw and if that breaks it for you I'm side eyeing your intense love for Miranda and the very non optional and public way you have to go about progressing that romance) at least in the barn you'd have to get a ladder to play voyeur. (Or be a pervy horsemaster)It will probably be the throne room scene that breaks it rather than the barn, anyway.
Assuming that I just don't like the character is simplistic, petty and dismissive. Shall I assume by your passive aggressive bolding, italics and underlining that you romanced him, got overly attached and, as such, are unable to have a discussion about who he is and what he did without getting emotional about it?
I had no problem with Blackwall. He was just...there, for the most part. After the reveal, I have opinions about his character that aren't favorable. That doesn't mean I think that he's totally without a conscience. It's partly that conscience and disgust with himself that led to him giving up his charade, imo, not his respect for my Inquisitor. If anything he came off as resentful of my Inquisitor during the scene about the dog, not inspired. I'll end this by saying that following what your conscience dictates can still be a selfish act. It doesn't matter if another is saved in the process. If he was disgusted with himself and decided to give up his lie because he couldn't live with it anymore, it's still about him rather than Mornay.
Also, I don't believe people change so much as they adapt. And plenty of murderers can claim that they've changed and some can even prove it with good deeds. Does that mean they have? Perhaps, but I'm not one to give them the benefit of the doubt. But there will always be someone who will give them that benefit, I realize, as evidenced by the fact that even Charles Manson has a woman convinced that he's a good guy.
I'm glad you cite this scene rather than the barn ones, and understandable for many reasons not just PDA (the barn scenes are completely optional btw and if that breaks it for you I'm side eyeing your intense love for Miranda and the very non optional and public way you have to go about progressing that romance) at least in the barn you'd have to get a ladder to play voyeur. (Or be a pervy horsemaster)
Poor Ken, Gabby and Tali (and possibly Jacob too.)
I always got the impression Miranda's scene was her staking her claim. (Poor Tali and Jack probably heard them too).
I always got the impression Miranda's scene was her staking her claim. (Poor Tali and Jack probably heard them too).
Jack was probably watching
Jack was probably watching
Like a ceiling cat?
Like a ceiling cat?
I mean sure
If I choose to use some bolding, italics, and/or underling for emphasis or employ a certain amount of sarcasm/snarkiness, then too bad? I think the entire body of my posts on the matter generally show that I'm usually more on the side of objective truth - no matter how bad it is - which is why I so often point out the severity of Rainier's cirmes and have never, ever shied away from the fact that he was a terrible person six years in the past. Therefore, I have to laugh at the implication that I'm using italics, bolding, and/or underling in a passive-aggressive manner because I'm overly attached to the character due to the romance. Hey, I'm openly and overtly sarcastic about things in general (when I am being full-on sarcastic).
What I also am is someone who is tired of repeating the same crap over and over again, so yes, I will emphasize certain statements if I feel like it so that I - hopefully - won't have to say whatever I just said again anytime soon (woops, bold italics - call the passive-aggressiveness police on me!). Now I pointed out the earlier post where I responded to someone else about the issues of the non-romanced Inquisitor and why - even in a non-romanced state - what he does is selfless. I maintain that giving up his own life to save another man's life is the exact opposite of selfishness.
You stated that everything he did was selfish while ignoring (or missing) that post. If it makes you happy, then I'll rephrase things - how about we go with you're "meh" about the character (instead of disliking him) yet seem to feel strongly enough about the topic to continue claiming that he was behaving selfishly despite evidence that shows that the opposite is true. By the way, if you're going to bring something like Charles Manson and some attention-seeking nutjob into a situation that isn't even remotely similar, then I guess that you're the one who's not interested in having a serious discussion about things.
And I actually hope that you were being sarcastic about that Charles Manson thing because if you actually seriously believe that, then...hahaha! Per earlier posts in here discussing the issue of whether or not someone has really changed and/or is capable of change - I'll repeat what I said (as tedious as this is) about there being a clear and recognizable difference between someone who committed a terrible crime and is a one-time offender versus a person who is a narcissistic sociopath (of the serial-killing variety). Most normal people should be able to recognize that difference and judge a person accordingly. The one-time offender can change - the sociopath will never change.
Again with the bold text. I can't take you seriously now. When people resort to writing in bold and/or caps like they're Kanye West in the midst of a twitter rant, I know it's time to bow out. If you're tired of repeating yourself, perhaps you should step away from the computer, take a breath, and realize we're having a discussion about a fictional character and there's nothing to be worked up about. My opinion is just that, an opinion, as is yours.
There really is no point in engaging in this discussion with you when you're clearly far more invested in this character than I and can't work out a means to discuss him (eta: with people who don't view him favorably) without hysterics and sarcasm.
Ahhh, isn't it lovely when people are able to have a discussion without resorting to personal insults.
"Kanye West in the midst of a Twitter rant" - ouch!
Retour en haut