190 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Yes, you get 3 outcomes with some variations and decide who rules, but not multiple paths to get there. The DAO Landsmeet also gives you many outcomes but also different paths with many variations along the line.
 
- Preliminary quests to prepare and make your case, find evidence, talk to the nobles, do favors, rescue the queen and ally with her (or not) and so on.
- You can win the landsmeet with evidence and diplomacy, even gives you a nice bonus ability point.
- You can lose because you don't have evidence or picked wrong answers but it's still possible to complete the quest after the fight and raising some ruckus.
- You can lose on purpose, maybe traded the evidence and took Caladrius's deal, warden walks in and takes a swing at Loghain with no evidence, no queen support, you can even insult ferelden traditions by proposing your dog for the duel. You still complete the quest.Why? Because you are The Warden and not that scrubby looking dude who sells chewed gloves near Lake Calenhad.
 
And please don't tell me Ferelden is some backwater country because it's really not. They already defeated Orlais in the past. Orlais just thinks it's a backwater country. And the ferelden nobles are actually harder to win over because they value actual values like loyalty, honor, defending the nation. They don't care for masks and nonsense.

 
The OP said, and then I said:

Did we play the same Landsmeet quest? Honor? Really? Try using Loghain's selling the elves to Tevinter, let me reiterate that last bit, I want to make sure you get it, TO TEVINTER. So, despite all the hubbub about the mages aligning with Tevinter in Inquisition, aligning with Tevinter shows loyalty to Ferelden, and honor? Their only interest is defending their piece of the pie, and even Eamon isn't innocent of that; he wants Alistair on the throne above all else not because he thinks Alistair would be a good king, but because "Therrin Blood". That's it. Alistair could be Sandhal, and Eamon would be "He must be King"...

 
To which the OP replied: 

Apparently we didn't. The documents proving Loghain's slave trading operations are key evidence for convicting him. The nobles are outraged when they find out. Slavery is not well seen in Fereldan.
 
"Therin blood" - loyalty, Maric's son and all that.

Which then led to some people going on about other things contingent to win the Landsmeet. However, as you can see from these posts that I went back and got for you, that's not the point. The fact is, no matter how you do in the Landsmeet, it ends the same way, you win. You cannot lose the Landsmeet, ever. You may not win the conversation, but the end result is always "You win". 
 

The overall point was people trying to say the Landsmeet had no more freedom than the empress quest, I argue that point with an actual example... And it's off topic? Your logic is broken.

So explain to me how anything other than the evidence in question is relevant again? The above quoted exchange is what led to two pages, or more, of discussion of the Landsmeet. A quest that is, at the end of the day, far more one dimensional in it's outcome than WE/WH. After all, you can, if one re-reads the OP, fail it completely and get a game over screen.

[andy6915]

 So explain to me how anything other than the evidence in question is relevant again? The above quoted exchange is what led to two pages, or more, of discussion of the Landsmeet. A quest that is, at the end of the day, far more one dimensional in it's outcome than WE/WH. After all, you can, if one re-reads the OP, fail it completely and get a game over screen.

 

So your only point is that one gives a gameover and the other gives you an escape route that doesn't give a gameover? So the only real difference is that one makes you do it over again if you mess up? That isn't... Exactly significant.

[andy6915]

But it doesn't. The ball quest results is based on what you find and what you do. The landsmeet quest is based on what you do  and who you side with.

Landsmeet also requires finding things. If you don't find that Bann's brother or that other nobles's tortured son, you're not fully winning the landsmeet without Anora no matter what you do.

[robertthebard]

So your only point is that one gives a gameover and the other gives you an escape route that doesn't give a gameover? So the only real difference is that one makes you do it over again if you mess up? That isn't... Exactly significant.

There is no way to lose the Landsmeet. However, I didn't bring the Landsmeet into this discussion at all, the OP did. I merely pointed out a fallacy he held about the politicians in charge of the Landsmeet, which is my entire point. If, as the OP insists, the evidence of Loghain selling the elves as slaves is so important, to wit:

The documents proving Loghain's slave trading operations are key evidence for convicting him. The nobles are outraged when they find out. Slavery is not well seen in Fereldan

*

then there's no way using that evidence will cost you the Landsmeet, right? This is the central point of the debate that sparked the "How to win the Landsmeet" discussion. I'll give you a little hint: I've gotten every possible outcome there is in Origins, I've played it out every possible way, I don't need any hints on how to win it, and in context here, winning it is irrelevant to the discussion. I realize that this is a seemingly overly complicated piece of information, but the fact is, winning or losing the Landsmeet has nothing whatsoever to do with what that exchange I quoted for you, in this post is talking about.

[andy6915]

There is no way to lose the Landsmeet. However, I didn't bring the Landsmeet into this discussion at all, the OP did. I merely pointed out a fallacy he held about the politicians in charge of the Landsmeet, which is my entire point. If, as the OP insists, the evidence of Loghain selling the elves as slaves is so important, to wit:

*

then there's no way using that evidence will cost you the Landsmeet, right? This is the central point of the debate that sparked the "How to win the Landsmeet" discussion. I'll give you a little hint: I've gotten every possible outcome there is in Origins, I've played it out every possible way, I don't need any hints on how to win it, and in context here, winning it is irrelevant to the discussion. I realize that this is a seemingly overly complicated piece of information, but the fact is, winning or losing the Landsmeet has nothing whatsoever to do with what that exchange I quoted for you, in this post is talking about.

 

I know the slavery evidence is useless, but why did I need to mention that? Everyone else argued that specific point quite well before I even showed up in this thread, there was no need for me to correct that part so long after everyone else already did a good job of doing so.

[leaguer of one]

I know the slavery evidence is useless, but why did I need to mention that? Everyone else argued that specific point quite well before I even showed up in this thread, there was no need for me to correct that part so long after everyone else already did a good job of doing so.

Because that was the entire point of the argument. The entire argument started because some one said the slavery evidence can't be used to win the landsmeet. No one was ever saying you can win with out using  Vaughan or the crow noble.

We were all tell the op that op that you can't win with the slaver evidence when he said you could.

[robertthebard]

I know the slavery evidence is useless, but why did I need to mention that? Everyone else argued that specific point quite well before I even showed up in this thread, there was no need for me to correct that part so long after everyone else already did a good job of doing so.

Welcome to the party, we've been waiting for you to join us. All of the rest of the details don't matter, in context with the conversation we were having, it just got derailed even more off topic than we already were.

[andy6915]

Welcome to the party, we've been waiting for you to join us. All of the rest of the details don't matter, in context with the conversation we were having, it just got derailed even more off topic than we already were.

 

Yeah, and I'm dropping this argument. It's just derailing it more and becoming more and more unproductive with each post, it's better off dropped here. It was probably better dropped sooner, but... Eh.

[correctamundo]

Ooooh.. I'm late to the party? Anyway you don't have to bother to win the Landsmeet. In my first playthrough I thought it was important but it turned out you could just chop off their heads and be done with it. Which is a bit meh really. Even though I like a good fight. In WHWE you have to win the game and get a good fight. Win-win ;-)

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

Wicked Eyes and Wicked Hearts is probably the best quest in the entire series.

 

A quest in which you cannot unlock all the doors?

 

 

I still have PTSD from it.

[In Exile]

And bang. There's the problem."Influence". The Inquisition has influence and power but it's just numbers on the screen.

The game empowers your organization at the war table with power points, influence points, agents, treaties, and alliances and so on. Then it dumbs it down when you're actually out in the field.

In theory you have the power but the choice to use it is never given.

No it doesn't. There's never a portrayal that you have enough power or influence to do what you're asking. What the Inquisition gets is a seat at the table where there are real power players. That's huge.

In the war table you either deal with minor squabbles, threats to the Inquisition, or Corypheus and the Red Templars/Venatori.

[In Exile]

You are telling me the reason you don't like this quest is because you can't bludgeon your way through it?

In fact, I don't like this quest. I think it's the weakest of all the main quests but I can definitively tell that it's actually better than the Landsmeet in terms of alternative paths.

In the Landsmeet it's impossible to lose. You either win the support of the nobles or the games flies in face of all logic and decides to have the fate of Ferelden hinge on a duel despite the fact the nobles have already thrown their support behind Loghain because he won the debate. How does hitting him with a sword change that?
Ferelden's culture is not militant to the point of demency.
So, basically, you don't actually have more than one way of solving the Landsmeet. You either win the support of the nobles by yourself or you mess up at which point the game bails you out.


Meanwhile, in the Winter Palace, you can lose; or you can try to arrest Florianne leading to her revealing herself; or you can allow her to assassinate the Empress and then support Gaspard; or you can even have her surrender when your support amidst the nobility is overwhelming.

Regardless of my personal feelings regarding this quest, it's evident that it actually has many more paths than the Landsmeet and they actually make sense.

It's even dumber that you described. Because win or lose the duel must happen. Loghain will challenge you or not but the point is the person who is the best at murder gets to pick who rules. Which is just a "lolwut?" moment with no foreshadowing and really no justification in Ferelden culture. Hell it's barely justifiable in, like, the fictional military society of something like the battletech universe with the clans.

[Antmarch456]

Hater's gonna hate, Wicked-Eyes was one of my favourite quests in DA.

[Heimerdinger]

It's even dumber that you described. Because win or lose the duel must happen. Loghain will challenge you or not but the point is the person who is the best at murder gets to pick who rules. Which is just a "lolwut?" moment with no foreshadowing and really no justification in Ferelden culture. Hell it's barely justifiable in, like, the fictional military society of something like the battletech universe with the clans.

 

Not dumb. Unless you consider DA a modern society, when in fact it's more of a medieval inspired society. Well, at least Origins was. You bested Ferelden's most respected general in single combat, of course the rest will fall in line. Think Game of Thrones "trial by combat". You won, so you're right. The other guy lost, so he's wrong. And dead.

 

You are telling me the reason you don't like this quest is because you can't bludgeon your way through it?

 

 

You misunderstand. RPG quests give choices: Diplomatic/Direct/Clever/Stealth etc. approaches so the player can pick what's best and in character for the PC. Where are those options here? Where are the choices like at Chateau Haine, enter vault direct or stealth? Can you play any of these PC's without breaking character and immersion?

 

- ruthless dwarf Inquisitor with Carta background. These guys are not known for finesse. Unless you consider "finesse" as putting a dagger through someone's ribs. Not known for tact or patience either. Where is a direct approach base on Inquisition rep check or power point check?

 

- Dalish elf Inquisitor. Basically lives on the road and woods. Would have 0 (zero, nil) knowledge about human high court society. Where is a stealth approach that better fits this character? Have ambassador Montilyet handle the official stuff while PC goes stealth to investigate.

 

 - Qunari mercenary warrior. Lets dance with the Duchess! This huge towering guy who cleaves people in half for money, apparently is a fine connoisseur in the arts of graceful court dances! Must be part of standard Tal-Vashoth mercenary training these days, I mean why wouldn't it be? Dude what? 

 

Human noble Inquisitor from the Free marches fits this quest like a glove, probably because the game was built around that. Other races must've been added to win back some DAO fans, but there isn't much choice to play these chars without any immersion breaking nonsense.

[In Exile]

I don't know what you think mediaeval society was like but there was never a point in Western European history when just beating up the contender for leader - who had overwhelming political support that had nothing to do with his own martial prowess and everything to do with his leadership - led to a regime change. The scene is so stupid from an in-setting level that it's just incomprehensible.

[Heimerdinger]

I don't know what you think mediaeval society was like but there was never a point in Western European history when just beating up the contender for leader - who had overwhelming political support that had nothing to do with his own martial prowess and everything to do with his leadership - led to a regime change. The scene is so stupid from an in-setting level that it's just incomprehensible.

 

Medieval inspired fantasy society. Lord and land, knights, all that shite. I gave Westeros in GoT/ASOIAF as example and their "trial by combat" system. Landsmeet duel is similar but taken a bit further.