(...)
As much as I enjoy deviating from the default heroistic do-gooder, the game world (NPC's, events etc.) always seems to assume that the Inquisitor still IS the heroistic do-gooder.
(...)
I want the gameworld to react to what kind of character my Inquisitor is.
One does not simply question decisions of the Herald of Andraste 
No, I'm almost serious here. In fact, most decisions you make can be made for various reasons. But the people around you have little choice but to either abandon hope or assume that what you're doing is - in the end - a thoughtful decision with Inquisition as priority (even if they don't really agree with particular decision). And you do have results. It might be a flaw in and of itself - other than in some war table missions it's pretty much impossible for you to suffer a defeat (due to bad decision-making) and need to deal with the consequences... but that's hardly unique in video games. You can lose, but you can't really suffer a defeat and keep going. So, you may be obnoxious as much as you want, but in the end people see that your decisions are - indeed - moving the whole machine forward. Perhaps they assume your attitude is just blowing off steam?
And frankly, many decisions you make can be results of being less than perfect. Helping all those people along the way? Why of course, we are the force of good and order and we need good PR, that's what we do. Ignoring them all? Well, we have priorities. Siding with mages or Templars - well, it's about what's best, obviously, not something along the lines "damn, that stupid elf looked at me wrong, now I go help templars". And I played an elven mage that pretty much spent half the time in one ruins or another. He was relatively responsible and actually made decisions keeping the end goal in mind, but Creators, was his priorities when it comes to small stuff skewed. Oh, look, elven ruins, THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING USEFUL FOR INQUISITION THERE, PACK UP GUYS.
The problem is that if you want PC to be unsuitable for leadership, the game would need to incorporate a very risky concept of defeat through incompetence. Since, basically, whatever your character says, however unreflective he is making decisions without any thinking, it only starts to matter when you start getting your butts kicked because of those mistakes. And this element is simply not present, because when you blunder big time, it generally means a game over. Think about it, you're given a chance of playing a character that has absolutely no patience for politics, who just can't adjust, who speaks always exactly what is on his mind, is rude and direct... You CAN do it. But the result is game over at Halamshiral. So if you manage to beat the game, this means that your character really IS capable of compromising and playing along if necessarily. Your quizzy might not be a master of the Game, sure, but he/she is good enough to get results when faced with Orlesian royal court. And this is a goddamn impressive feat.
Basically, you're winning, your leadership might be hard to bear, but it is effective. You get the job done. And you're surrounded by people who might hate you, but can appreciate the fact that job is getting done.
Retour en haut
