105 réponses à ce sujet

[Poledo]

Are you sure? My first character was a rogue, but she had the arcane perk, and I swore the option to make him tranquil was there...

 

Hmm, that might be... I usually get those three perks early on though.

[BraveVesperia]

I make use of every prisoner except Erimond and that templar lieutenant (from Champions of the Just). They're despicable, and get the axe. For the most part, I prefer them to make reparations, especially ones like the Mayor of Crestwood joining the Wardens, or the Mayor (?) of Sahrnia rebuilding the town.

 

My favourite is the Avvar guy. I couldn't kill that guy, or even run him off. It's a holiday to Tevinter every time.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I never executed anyone in either of my playthrough's. Zero point. There is always a more tactful option than execution in every single case the game presents you with.

[AxholeRose]

I have a hard time deciding whether making Erimond a Tranquil is a wiser choice than executing him, or unnecessary cruelty.

 

Is it the same kind of self-pleasing semi-righteousness to say "You loved being a mage, now I take all the "mage" from you!", or is it really turning him into a productive member of the Inquisition as reparation (and preventing him from causing more harm with his magic)?

 

Being made tranquil, which is only slightly better than our real life counterpart of a lobotomy, is far far worse, as reflected by the immediate backlash after your decision.  It's a cruel fate that strips everything away that makes you, you.  Leaving you a prisoner trapped inside your own body until you eventually die from old age.

[Dieb]

I never executed anyone in either of my playthrough's. Zero point. There is always a more tactful option than execution in every single case the game presents you with.

 

Were those personal or pragmatical decisions?

 

 

Being made tranquil, which is only slightly better than our real life counterpart of a lobotomy, is far far worse, as reflected by the immediate backlash after your decision.  It's a cruel fate that strips everything away that makes you, you.  Leaving you a prisoner trapped inside your own body until you eventually die from old age.

 

I defeats the purpose of being a punishment, yes - there is no learning, no chance for change. For the same reason I do not consider death penalty a legitimate form of punishment. It's a safety measure for the rest of society only at best.

 

So my question was rather, does Erimond's particular brand of ***hole justify going past punishment and directly to "preemptive measures" to protect others?

[ManchesterUnitedFan1]

Were those personal or pragmatical decisions?

 

 

 

I defeats the purpose of being a punishment, yes - there is no learning, no chance for change. For the same reason I do not consider death penalty a legitimate form of punishment. It's a safety measure for the rest of society only at best.

 

So my question was rather, does Erimond's particular brand of ***hole justify going past punishment and directly to "preemptive measures" to protect others?

 

To be fair though after inquisition we know how to cure tranquility, so it could turn into a time-based punishment.

[Fearsome1]

I prefer to keep real world opinions free from what I do in these games. I do think that it is interesting to see what others "read" into the mindset of their characters in games.

 

I mean, everywhere you go on quests puts you into conflict with hundreds ("thousands") of other characters of many races, plus a variety of beasts most of which you proceed to slaughter before moving along to complete your mission. I'm not aware of any "wound" or "knock out" button options being available for those who prefer not to kill others?

 

After the fact, taking the time to ponder the ramifications of a few measly executions in the wake of such massive bloodletting seems sort of trivial.

[Dieb]

Oh, we're all full of sh*t. And I'm also aware that those scenes mostly give you cardboard cut-out bad guys to impose your power on from the Comfy Chair ©, because it's awesome stuff that leaders do.

 

But first of all, killing someone in combat, even attacking others who are armed first, is something way different than having someone killed who is no threat and unarmed. It isn't practically, but practicality is not what this discussion is about - quite the opposite in fact.

 

And most importantly, I just love semi-psychological debates like these and the context of our favourite game(s) takes the gloom out of it a little.

[Hildegard]

Execution means losing a choice, so I do not usually go that way. However, I used the Tranquil choice because I detest everything tranquility stands for. And Sera, as always, had my full support in crushing the face of the smug bastard, who, we had the misfortune to meet, on one of her missions.

[GoneGrimdark]

Livius is the only one I've killed so far. He was a horrible man, and didn't feel bad at all for what he did. I felt justified in executing him, and didn't get any option I liked better. Everyone else I gave a chance- usually forcing them to work for the Inquisition in shackles or doing hard labor (Florianne got to do farmwork).

[Fiery Phoenix]

Were those personal or pragmatical decisions?

Mostly the latter. Either way, neither of my (current) Inquisitors believe in the death penalty as a solution/punishment.

[In Exile]

I don't believe in execution. If you want to punish someone, then torture is the way to go. If you believe they can be redeemed, execution has no purpose.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

A living being can make amends, reconciliate, reimburse, improve and teach - a dead one can only scare. And only the ones easily scared. As soon as a bad guy is caught and unarmed, killing them is never necessary. It never yields anything than another body and a guilty conscience. They can always be more useful, even or especially to those they had harmed, being alive than to just make another body. Naturally, I did not execute anyone in DA:I, and was very pleased with the fact BioWare always gave me the option to have my captives serve a purpose or make up for what they have done in some smaller or bigger way.

I disagree with the underlined. Having someone executed can yield positive reactions. For example, it can give the family of the victim a piece of mind that the person who harmed their family member will never hurt anyone ever again. 

[Dieb]

I disagree with the underlined. Having someone executed can yield positive reactions. For example, it can give the family of the victim a piece of mind that the person who harmed their family member will never hurt anyone ever again. 

 

That's where it get's interesting. I for one do not believe that having harm inflicted upon you, entitles you to demand full compensation. And eye for an eye is not justice, it's math.

 

This is not how I believe any legal system should work - and bear in mind this is (loosely) what judging someone officially means. If it were that simple, why not have the harmed party carry out the execution on the open street at their leisure? It'd all for their benefit and relief after all. (I'm being an ass here mind you)

 

The uncomfortable side of such a system is, that there simply are certain values and rights we must reserve, especially for the guilty party, however inhuman they may appear to us. It is this what seperates "us" from "them". I believe this is simply part of the package we bought by deciding to have a civilized legal system, rather than just slaying people where they're caught. It's uncomfortable to retain integrity.

[Giantdeathrobot]

I have a hard time playing someone who doesn't like killing in most RPGs for the simple reason that you need to kill loads of people to meet your goals in all but a few (Planescape: Torment and F:NV are all those i remember). It seems weird for my Inquisitor to massacre his way through Alexius or Erimond's minions (some of which look like slave soldiers) and then get squeamish when it comes to killing them. Ditto for the Floriannes or Denams of this world. If death is not too good for their underlings, it ain't too good for them.

 

Now, if my character has other reasons to spare them, he will. But I won't play a character that slaughters minions and spares overlords out of principle, that's just a silly reasoning.

 

Then again, I do not impose my own moral compass to my characters in any game. It's, for one thing, completely incompatible with being a soldier, and especially a combatant in a fantasy setting.

[Aaleel]

I've never seen the option to make Erimond tranquil, do you need to be a mage, or need to have the arcane inquisition perk to get it?

[Hurbster]

Well, some of them simply cannot be redeemed. Captain Denam for instance. First playthrough I tried. Didn't end well. Second playthrough I found his quarters and well lets say it was curtains for him. Simply finding that changed the judgement dialogue dramatically.

[Farangbaa]

Vehemently oppose death penalty, so most of my characters didn't execute anyone.

[Farangbaa]

I have a hard time playing someone who doesn't like killing in most RPGs for the simple reason that you need to kill loads of people to meet your goals in all but a few (Planescape: Torment and F:NV are all those i remember). It seems weird for my Inquisitor to massacre his way through Alexius or Erimond's minions (some of which look like slave soldiers) and then get squeamish when it comes to killing them. Ditto for the Floriannes or Denams of this world. If death is not too good for their underlings, it ain't too good for them.

It's extremely easy to claim self defense though, as pretty much everyone and their mom attacks you.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

I do have my inquisitor go for death penalties for most of the judgements IIRC. Thedas is not our world with it's sense of justice, so punishing those who commit grave crimes with death is what I imagine would happen.

[Tatar Foras]

I usually keeping everyone alive so that the inquisition can use them, except for Erimond...I usually execute that guy or make him tranquil

[FeliciaM]

In the case of the Mayor of Crestwood, or the noble lady from Sahrnia... I give them the benefit of the doubt. I like giving him to the Grey Wardens (available after Adamant) because he was willing to do whatever it took to protect the rest of his people in a crappy situation. Same with the noble lady, I make her use her ill gotten gains to rebuild the village. Alexius gets to help with magical research... Breach, or no Breach, theory or no theory. He still knew about time magic. That's useful.

 

Other people are simply to useful to let go... like Servis... he becomes a smuggler. And Florianne, I could make her an agent... but she's better off as a court jester. Because the joke was on her in the end. Even though I felt like an ass after doing it... so I reloaded, and made her do common work for the common...

 

But Erimond... I'd prefer to make him Tranquil, because that seems to strike a nerve with him with his 'oh, I don't care what you do! Kill me!' But it doesn't matter in the end... because he won't care. Tranquil can't feel emotion. Easier just to kill him.

[Broganisity]

My characters are separate from myself and may agree or disagree accordingly. Playing as myself over and over in a video game is stupidly boring.

That being said, remember that justice is equal parts for the victims, society in general, and the accused. Making sure each receives proper justice is difficult, and sometimes you have to sacrifice justice for one of the parts to ensure justice for the other two. With this in mind I do not shy away from the death penalty if it can firmly secure justice for everyone else, especially if the crime committed is as heinous as the person who commits it.

[Hurbster]

Absolutely, if I projected my own morals on games like this and didn't roleplay at all each playthrough would be identical and quite dull.

[bree101angel]

I've finished three playthroughs so far, and I'm on my 4th but she's not yet gotten to any Judgements yet. I tried to approach each judgement through the minds of my characters, and each character brings their own personal experience into it. Most of the time they tried to find a way to help someone 'redeem' themselves so long as they showed remorse. Two of my characters executed Erimond because it was the only way to guarantee he would not cause more harm to innocent people. The chance of him using blood magic to escape and cause even more misery was just too high for them. 

 

My Levellan mage though made him Tranquil. He scoffed in her face, and basically told her nothing she could do to him would punish him for the horrible acts he committed. Everything about him just insulted her, especially his use of blood magic to sacrifice and control the very people who had saved the world over and over again. Here she was an elf and a mage trying to prove that not all mages were bad (saving the world is just a bonus) when he comes along to spit on everything she was trying to accomplish so she basically slapped him in the face with his punishment. There was an intense satisfaction in the way it scared the **** out of him. Though honestly, in my head it was a future that she made him shake in his boots for a night before she went into his jail cell and offered him a chance to redeem himself or 'off with his head'. It would have been cool to have that as an option in the game