488 réponses à ce sujet

[Leeloo Multipass]

Did you not read the OP? Because I want the option to play an evil character. The thread isn't about if she deserves punishment. It's about how she's a ****** for threatening the Inquisitor right after her screw-up, and the game forcing me to eat it without a word. More accurately, I hate the whole situation involving her rather than her specifically. It's just another reminder of limited role-playing.

 

This was the breaking point for me. I didn't care for her from the start but when she threw a threat at my Inquisitor after SHE made a stupid decision and broke Varric's trust...I've never wanted to punch someone so badly. I wished so much for the quicktime renegade option that Khalisah al-Jilani had.

[Xilizhra]

I'm curious as to what makers her a bad person.

I didn't say she was a bad person. I said she wasn't a good one. Again, I think she's lawful neutral.

[congokong]

Leliana was the Left Hand. She doesn't have to be in your party to keep tabs on you with her extensive network of intelligence. You keep mentioning DA:O but that was a more personal story than Inquisition is. You may find something she did totally inadvertently without knowing the consequences as worthy of death, but given that it was Corypheus impersonating someone else it's easy to see that the situation is more nuanced than that.

 

Also, I'm not a "bleeding heart". I'm a pragmatist.

There's nothing to indicate "The Inquisitor can't be evil because Leliana wouldn't like it and would therefore kill the Inquisitor." That's your head-canon to defend your argument, while the truth is the developers didn't want to give more options because it's easier for them to box in your choices.

 

What Calpernia did is monstrous. Choosing to let her go after all that fits the "bleeding heart" summation.

[Xilizhra]

There's nothing to indicate "The Inquisitor can't be evil because Leliana wouldn't like it and would therefore kill the Inquisitor." That's your head-canon to defend your argument, while the truth is the developers didn't want to give more options because it's easier for them to box in your choices.

 

What Calpernia did is monstrous. Choosing to let her go after all that fits the "bleeding heart" summation.

I never see Calpernia, but if I did, I wouldn't quibble about the allies I might acquire against Corypheus.

[congokong]

I never see Calpernia, but if I did, I wouldn't quibble about the allies I might acquire against Corypheus.

Besides your post being in complete opposition to any semblance of justice...

 

Solas: "An enemy can attack but only an ally can betray you. Betrayal is always worse."

 

That's why I don't recruit Sten, Zevran, Loghain, and certainly don't spare Calpernia.

[Xilizhra]

Besides your post being in complete opposition to any semblance of justice...

 

Solas: "An enemy can attack but only an ally can betray you. Betrayal is always worse."

 

That's why I don't recruit Sten, Zevran, Loghain, and certainly don't spare Calpernia.

If Calpernia loses, I don't have to worry about her anymore; if Calpernia wins, I don't have to worry about Corypheus anymore. Either way, I win.

 

Then again, I rather like Calpernia. But tragically can never see her, because of stupid Champions of the Just.

[congokong]

If Calpernia loses, I don't have to worry about her anymore; if Calpernia wins, I don't have to worry about Corypheus anymore. Either way, I win.

 

Then again, I rather like Calpernia. But tragically can never see her, because of stupid Champions of the Just.

And if Calpernia betrays you?

[Xilizhra]

And if Calpernia betrays you?

She has no real way to do so. She's not inside Skyhold or anything.

[congokong]

She has no real way to do so. She's not inside Skyhold or anything.

Doesn't necessarily have to betray you in such a direct fashion.

[In Exile]

Those crimes being what, exactly? Having associated with the one who blew up the Chantry, which I'm reasonably sure isn't a crime in and of itself? Not to mention that I don't consider religious law enforcement to be legitimate anyway. And I definitely know that being unhelpful to your kidnapper isn't a crime, not that it warrants attacking someone in your custody either way.

I'm just going to point out that being suspected as an accessory is a crime. Not sure if Thedas would have it but IRL that would be the charge Varric would face.

[dragonflight288]

And if Calpernia betrays you?

 

She's never an ally or a friend.

 

But you can point out that someone who has been helping her is using her and intends to betray her, so she wants to investigate herself. 

 

There is no deal or bargain struck and no alliance. Thus she is incapable of betraying you. 

 

That doesn't mean she won't attack you in the future if your interests conflict with hers, but it's easier to approach her since you know where she stands. 

[Ynqve]

I'm just going to point out that being suspected as an accessory is a crime. Not sure if Thedas would have it but IRL that would be the charge Varric would face.

 

I never got the impression that he was suspected as an accessory. He was brought in because he had information about Hawke. As far as I can remember, I don't think Cassandra ever bring up any charges against him. 

[congokong]

She's never an ally or a friend.

 

But you can point out that someone who has been helping her is using her and intends to betray her, so she wants to investigate herself. 

 

There is no deal or bargain struck and no alliance. Thus she is incapable of betraying you. 

 

That doesn't mean she won't attack you in the future if your interests conflict with hers, but it's easier to approach her since you know where she stands. 

Sounds like you're arguing semantics regarding technical "betrayal." The point is you're letting her go under the presumption she'll go after Corypheus, not go after the Inquisitor again, help Tevinter, and/or stop killing people. If she goes against these assumptions it's a betrayal. And knowing what she is and what's she's done, the blood of any innocent she hurts in the future (and she almost certainly will considering what she's been willing to do already) would also be on the Inquisitor's hands. A metaphor would be being implicated for the damage a rabid dog you freed does.

[dragonflight288]

Sounds like you're arguing semantics regarding technical "betrayal." The point is you're letting her go under the presumption she'll go after Corypheus, not go after the Inquisitor again, help Tevinter, and/or stop killing people. If she goes against these assumptions it's a betrayal. And knowing what she is and what's she's done, the blood of any innocent she hurts in the future (and she almost certainly will considering what she's been willing to do already) would also be on the Inquisitor's hands. A metaphor would be being implicated for the damage a rabid dog you freed does.

 

I was arguing semantics for a technical betrayal, but that is genuinely what I see as a betrayal. Her actions are her own, and do not reflect on the Inquisitor. Any blood on her hands will not fall on the Inquisitor's hands because she is responsible for her own actions. 

 

And if she turns out to be useful, even if she isn't an ally, then all the better. 

[ModernAcademic]

So we should kill anyone who isn't "of trust"? Because we're certain betrayal will only come from the hands of outsiders?

 

What if your greatest ally turns against you because you killed their best friend, who happened to be on the other side of war because, say, you defended the templars and the guy was a mage? Where did the trust go?

[ModernAcademic]

If you just kill him because "now he's become the enemy", you're not doing justice.

 

People are not so easily classified into friend/enemy. Circumstances shape people more than rigid notions of morality.

[congokong]

I was arguing semantics for a technical betrayal, but that is genuinely what I see as a betrayal. Her actions are her own, and do not reflect on the Inquisitor. Any blood on her hands will not fall on the Inquisitor's hands because she is responsible for her own actions. 

 

And if she turns out to be useful, even if she isn't an ally, then all the better. 

So you're just ignoring what I said; including my metaphor now? If you know what she is/what she's done, and yet let her go, blame gets placed on you as well for her future negative actions.

 

The idea of sparing/making deals with criminals if a personal benefit can be reached is a common practice in modern judicial systems, yet it is a form of corruption. It's essentially bribery. You're sparing people like Calpernia because they're useful while people guilty of lesser crimes are given harsher punishments because they can't offer anything to you. In such situations justice is used as leverage rather than being utilized purely on a moral principle.

[Sifr]

So, I replayed that mission in my latest playthrough and actually, this time around I didn't find the line that bad?

 

It comes right after her rather heated argument with Varric, so the threat seemed more like she was taking her frustration out on the Inquisitor rather than Varric? It's actually understandable that she'd prefer to vent at a complete stranger and take out her anger on them, rather than say something harsh to Varric and risk burning any bridges with him? Despite their playful flirting, it's clear that deep down, neither wants to admit that their pseudo-relationship is deeply strained and that they're unhappy with the situation they've been forced into against their will?

 

Varric even alludes to this right after in Skyhold, that he's pretends things are okay rather than dealing with them? While he says this in relation to how his life has been disrupted post-Kirkwall, the clear subtext and Bianca's chastisement about how he prefers to tell stories of what he "should have done", is that she's probably just as desperate to run off into the sunset with him as he is, but they're simply too afraid to pluck up the nerve to ask?

 

I dunno if that was the way it was meant, the line is still a tad weird, but it does fit better if you take it as Bianca simply being frustrated about their argument and taking it out on the nearest person in range, which is a rather normal thing that most of us have probably done one time or another?

[Dark Helmet]

Laura Bailey dwarf annoys me.

 

More than Laura Bailey Jedi did but less than Laura Bailey Vampire.

[Augustei]

So you're just ignoring what I said; including my metaphor now? If you know what she is/what she's done, and yet let her go, blame gets placed on you as well for her future negative actions.

 

The idea of sparing/making deals with criminals if a personal benefit can be reached is a common practice in modern judicial systems, yet it is a form of corruption. It's essentially bribery. You're sparing people like Calpernia because they're useful while people guilty of lesser crimes are given harsher punishments because they can't offer anything to you. In such situations justice is used as leverage rather than being utilized purely on a moral principle.

Your real name doesn't happen to be Bruce Wayne by any chance?

[Br3admax]

Laura Bailey dwarf annoys me.

 

More than Laura Bailey Jedi did but less than Laura Bailey Vampire.

Which Laura Bailey dwarf? You need to specify. 

[Dark Helmet]

Which Laura Bailey dwarf? You need to specify. 

 

...The Laura Bailey dwarf that this thread is about...

[Sifr]

...The Laura Bailey dwarf that this thread is about...

 

That's okay then, because the Laura Bailey dwarf known as Dagna is adorable.

 

[Qun00]

Bianca is pretty much a clusterfuck of things gone wrong. She's got Mary Sue traits, is responsible for handing Corypheus the red lyrium and gets away with it because she's just too darn awesome to be judged, she's rude no matter what you do and she fails to live up to the hype that they've been building around the character since DA2. Add the Varric relationship drama and you've pretty much got a character who's begging to be disliked.

So no, OP. You're not alone.

That's... a very detailed criticism for a character with so little screentime.

[Ynqve]

That's... a very detailed criticism for a character with so little screentime.

 

Yes, but she used her moment in the sun to **** on as many things as possible. She turned my Inquisitor into an awestruck moron, went against all dwarven lore by being considered for paragon status, ruined my favorite character by making him look pathetic and had an annoying personality.

 

Well done Bianca! At least you made an impression.