63 réponses à ce sujet

[Washout]

Were are the immoral options.
Where are the brothels.
Where are the harem options.
Were are the missions of random violence.

The inquisitor is a person with alot of influence and there is no backstory, other then the one we bring.
Where are the edicts making it illegal to speak out against the inquisition.

Where are the taxes.
Right now, all we got is the god inquisition with a few naughty options.

Killing is not evil in this game. the player is a mass murdere the instant he leaves Haven.

Could be cool to see both extreems, lawfull good and chaotic evil. Forgive the DAD refference
 

[DAO MAdhatter]

Were are the immoral options.
Where are the brothels.
Where are the harem options.
Were are the missions of random violence.

The inquisitor is a person with alot of influence and there is no backstory, other then the one we bring.
Where are the edicts making it illegal to speak out against the inquisition.
Where are the taxes.
Right now, all we got is the god inquisition with a few naughty options.
Killing is not evil in this game. the player is a mass murdere the instant he leaves Haven.

Could be cool to see both extreems, lawfull good and chaotic evil. Forgive the DAD refference

It wouldn't fit. Your character is not evil & can not be evil. If they tried to be evil your party would just up & kill you. They have access to your army to you know.

[Panda]

I don't think Bioware has given much change for us ever be down-right evil, since it would be hard to implement in the story where our character is hero of the day always in the end. I think Bioware could have add some more evil choices in the game though, like murder knife was missing.

[Rawgrim]

You get 2 options. Reluctant goodguy, or regular goodguy. Means the Inquisitor is nothing short of an average NPC.

[Baalthazar]

It wouldn't fit. Your character is not evil & can not be evil. If they tried to be evil your party would just up & kill you. They have access to your army to you know.

 

They could have written the story in such a way that it would have fit.  They chose not to.

[turuzzusapatuttu]

Were are the immoral options.
Where are the brothels.
Where are the harem options.
Were are the missions of random violence.

The inquisitor is a person with alot of influence and there is no backstory, other then the one we bring.
Where are the edicts making it illegal to speak out against the inquisition.

Where are the taxes.
Right now, all we got is the god inquisition with a few naughty options.

Killing is not evil in this game. the player is a mass murdere the instant he leaves Haven.

Could be cool to see both extreems, lawfull good and chaotic evil. Forgive the DAD refference
 

 

[Sylvius the Mad]

You get 2 options. Reluctant goodguy, or regular goodguy. Means the Inquisitor is nothing short of an average NPC.

I completely disagree. You can't actively undermine the mission, but you can be indifferent to it, or do it for entirely unheroic reasons.

This is where DAI surpasses DA2 - Hawke, quest by quest, was assumed to be doing things for jeroic reasons. Any choice made, Hawke's stated justification was that it was the right thing to do. The Inquisitor doesn't do that (largely by not tying quest options to dialogue).

If Hawke turns the Magister's son over to the angry mob, it is for justice. If Hawke returns the son to the Magister, it is in the hope of redemption. If Hawke makes a deal with slavers, it is reluctantly.

DAI wins by offering neutral response options, thereby not forcing justifications on the Herald.

[TheOgre]

It wouldn't fit. Your character is not evil & can not be evil. If they tried to be evil your party would just up & kill you. They have access to your army to you know.

 

Lawful evil -- it should exist however especially for an inquisitor! Abusing your authority to force cooperation of others (I.e, using Blackwall's treaties to force kingdoms to dedicate troops to your cause).

 

Chaotic evil? could work, the best scoundrels are the ones that can do things and absolutely get away with it; at least for awhile until they have dirt on you..

 

I don't think we're a chantry of sorts. Remember that while one is obligated to thwart an apocalypse, we are hardly supposed to play the chantry's hero.

[TheOgre]

I completely disagree. You can't actively undermine the mission, but you can be indifferent to it, or do it for entirely unheroic reasons.

This is where DAI surpasses DA2 - Hawke, quest by quest, was assumed to be doing things for jeroic reasons. Any choice made, Hawke's stated justification was that it was the right thing to do. The Inquisitor doesn't do that (largely by not tying quest options to dialogue).

If Hawke turns the Magister's son over to the angry mob, it is for justice. If Hawke returns the son to the Magister, it is in the hope of redemption. If Hawke makes a deal with slavers, it is reluctantly.

DAI wins by offering neutral response options, thereby not forcing justifications on the Herald.

 

Hahaha, what!? heroic reasons for turning turning over the magister's son to the mob? You can completely interpret that as justice, but I can justify that as mob mentality, one of the worst evils this world has. 

[Innsmouth Dweller]

@Sylvius the Mad

i prefer headcanon expressions than events myself. it was much easier when protagonist was silent. choices are limited to few quest key points (one per main plot quest?). most of the plot is restricted by emotion wheel and gives no plot choice whatsoever. thus the overwhelming feeling of inquisitor's irrelevance, magnified by complete lack of choice (even emotional wheel is gone) in side quests.

 

i do envy people who don't like to RP vastly different characters or are able to ignore the narrative to fit their headcanon, they'd probably call Doom an RPG, imagining every single playthrough without even playing the game.

[TheOgre]

Were are the immoral options.
Where are the brothels.
Where are the harem options.
Were are the missions of random violence.

The inquisitor is a person with alot of influence and there is no backstory, other then the one we bring.
Where are the edicts making it illegal to speak out against the inquisition.

Where are the taxes.
Right now, all we got is the god inquisition with a few naughty options.

Killing is not evil in this game. the player is a mass murdere the instant he leaves Haven.

Could be cool to see both extreems, lawfull good and chaotic evil. Forgive the DAD refference
 

 

Question -- Well edited this part because I reread your OP. Some good suggestions but here are the rest of the examples to the first two.. DA2 had some good examples of a funny, yet pg-13 brothel..

 

You want the teacher that punishes you for being tardy? You are assigned additional homework

 

A private session with a chantry nun? You are given a lecture instead about morality

 

And you paid for those! Yet that wouldn't work here in DA:I as it's been done already in DA2

 

Random violence -- I can get behind that one.. More options for murdering npc's whether in grand execution or in the private quarters; EXCEPT they did do that I will credit Bioware for that with the judgment quests and leliana's quest, Maybe more would be in order for me -- But you asked, and this is my attempt to explain where they are.

 

I do want more however... I want more morally questionable quests! Good examples in my opinion are higher taxes, and punishing those for speaking ill of the inquisition. It seems that does happen a bit if Leliana becomes Divine.

[jds1bio]

What is the point of being evil in these games?  If the Inquisitor wanted to be evil in this game, then he/she should have asked the Elder One point blank if he could join up.  And like others said, once he/she was found to be evil, the inquisitor would have been chained immobile just to make use or the mark, or killed.

 

Now being a renegade, or being ruthless - that's something else.  You can be kind of ruthless in this game, but there's nothing ruthless about having someone beat up for mob justice, or handing someone over to a slave master, as was the case in previous games.  That's being evil just for the sake of having options.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Hahaha, what!? heroic reasons for turning turning over the magister's son to the mob? You can completely interpret that as justice, but I can justify that as mob mentality, one of the worst evils this world has.

I got the impression the game was trying to push me in that direction. I resisted; I wanted to return him to his father because that's what I'd agreed to do - his supposed crimes were irrelevant.

But the game assumed a motive. That's my complaint.

[Sylvius the Mad]

@Sylvius the Mad
i prefer headcanon expressions than events myself. it was much easier when protagonist was silent.

Agreed.

choices are limited to few quest key points (one per main plot quest?). most of the plot is restricted by emotion wheel and gives no plot choice whatsoever. thus the overwhelming feeling of inquisitor's irrelevance, magnified by complete lack of choice (even emotional wheel is gone) in side quests.

I completely disagree. First, I have disabled the wheel icons, so I see the dialogue options merely as options.

Second, I don't metagame, so I can't tell whether a different dialogue option leads to a different result. I also don't particularly care - what matters is the expression, not the consequence.

i do envy people who don't like to RP vastly different characters or are able to ignore the narrative to fit their headcanon, they'd probably call Doom an RPG, imagining every single playthrough without even playing the game.

I play vastly different characters, but I don't ignore any in-game content. I work around it, and that's what I enjoy.

DAO was better at letting me play different characters, but DAI is better at letting me work around the narrative.

DA2 could have been even better at that, given the unreliable narrator, but sadly the game didn't realise its potential.

[Terodil]

I agree; it's a shame for BW storytelling that there is no way to run an 'evil' inquisition.

 

The argument that others would resist holds merit -- but only at first glance. Do you remember KoTOR 2, how the Exile could sway companions towards Light or Dark? Most of the companions have a more or less dark side to them already anyway, all it would take is a nudge here, a temptation there, a compliment over there and maybe even the occasional blackmail/threat. Cassandra could easily be pushed towards fully embracing her 'thug' side; Leliana is already half-way to a 'make-the-streets-run-red' policy anyway; etc. And if one or two companions *really* can't be persuaded to go with an 'evil' Inquisitor (e.g., Solas or Dorian?), you could have to kill them KoTOR-Rakatan Temple-style (well, probably not Solas because plot armor. The main point still stands). I would LOVE that freedom of choice.

 

I agree, the reason why you can't be evil is not because it's impossible to tell such a story -- BW has already proven that they can do it; it's because BW was too lazy / time-constrained / wearing the EA slave collar / simply didn't care for this Dragon Age iteration. We did end up with a thoroughly mediocre DA:I after all, so exceptional opportunities for choice would have stuck out like a sore thumb...

[In Exile]

You get 2 options. Reluctant goodguy, or regular goodguy. Means the Inquisitor is nothing short of an average NPC.

 

That's not true at all. Both in terms of tones - since there's an incredible amount of actual personal variance in views, etc. If you think RPing is a about a good and evil choice, then every game reduces to (1) heroic path and (sometimes) (2) psycho-murder that breaks the plot and NPCs stories. So while you don't get "unstable psycho that breaks NPC character arcs", this is a step in the right direction. Murder-psycho doesn't really work with most RPGs. 

[Terodil]

That's not true at all. Both in terms of tones - since there's an incredible amount of actual personal variance in views, etc. If you think RPing is a about a good and evil choice, then every game reduces to (1) heroic path and (sometimes) (2) psycho-murder that breaks the plot and NPCs stories. So while you don't get "unstable psycho that breaks NPC character arcs", this is a step in the right direction. Murder-psycho doesn't really work with most RPGs.

Nah, it IS true. You are a good Inquisitor, want to or not, the only choice you have is if you wear a blue shirt or a red one.

Also, strawman alert. Seriously. Evil =/= psycho-murderer. Look up 'lawful evil' if you get the chance, and compare with dark-side Revan.

[AntiChri5]

What is the very first thing that the Inquisitor experiences in game?

 

Locked up in a dungeon, interrogated. A mob eager for their blood and their only protection a woman who seems twenty minutes away from beating them to death herself.

 

The Inquisitor gets a chance to pitch in and avoid their impending doom, and in the process pulls off something that makes that mob go from baying for their blood to near worship. Wake up from a little nap with servants near fainting from the honour of being in their presence. All of a sudden the Inquisitor has a valuable, relatively high ranking position in a new organisation.

 

In other words, the game opens with an abject lesson on the importance of presenting yourself as the good guy.

 

An Inquisitor who makes any obviously evil decisions or remarks from here on in is a retard who deserves to die.

[In Exile]

Nah, it IS true. You are a good Inquisitor, want to or not, the only choice you have is if you wear a blue shirt or a red one.

Also, strawman alert. Seriously. Evil =/= psycho-murderer. Look up 'lawful evil' if you get the chance, and compare with dark-side Revan.

 

You can't play proper Lawful Evil in a RPG. Ever. Because Lawful Evil means being an agent in a way that's impossible in the game. More importantly, people aren't asking for Lawful Evil choices. DA:O never had Lawful evil choices. It had insane psycho murder choices that should immediately backfire but don't, and "neutral" choices, in the sense that you had a utilitarian option that was not pure 100% good and the pure 100% good option that always paid off. 

[Captain Wiseass]

Why do video game players asking for evil options always sound like the guy in a tabletop game who annoys the rest of the players by trying to shiv townspeople?

[TheOgre]

Why do video game players asking for evil options always sound like the guy in a tabletop game who annoys the rest of the players by trying to shiv townspeople?

Nice username!

Because it's fun to have that options! Forcing your group time lose precious reputation for a brief moment of psychotic fun.

And to answer the poster above you.. Murder psycho killing options makes it sound so trivial and biased. I killed an npc because he was determined to go to the chantry with knowledge of where andrastes ashes were. My character, a Mage, feared the chantry having any more power at all over the people.

I don't consider that psycho irrational murder.

[Washout]

Why do video game players asking for evil options always sound like the guy in a tabletop game who annoys the rest of the players by trying to shiv townspeople?

In this instant the Evil option is real.
One person is given alot of power through faith.
Through history alot of people have died in the name of a God.

So where is the risk that the Inquisitor starts acting like the spanish inquisition

[DarkKnightHolmes]

I agree, OP. I miss killing random merchants and making one-liners at the same time. It's a choice-based game, let me have my fun.

[Terodil]

<1.> You can't play proper Lawful Evil in a RPG. Ever. Because Lawful Evil means being an agent in a way that's impossible in the game.

<2.> More importantly, people aren't asking for Lawful Evil choices.

<1.> You can. Even if your agency is somewhat limited by the authors' script.

<2.> I am.

[TheOgre]

<1.> You can. Even if your agency is somewhat limited by the authors' script.

<2.> I am.

Same here. Lawful evil can be incredibly entertaining.