64 réponses à ce sujet

[Riven326]

So, the way I have this sorted out is my warden is more of a good guy, Hawke is somewhere in between, and my Inquisitor is going to be intelligent evil. I've read that the Inquisitor doesn't have many opportunities to be truly evil and either falls somewhere in between or is a goody two shoes. Is this true? No spoilers, please.

[Illyria]

If you want to be intelligent evil the best class to pick is mage.

 

Spoiler

It's the only class that allows you to make people Tranquil.  You should have one chance to do this reguardless of what path you take, more if you side with the mages near the start.

 

However, since the Inquisitor is running a huge organisation, you're not given as many evil options as the Warden or Hawke due to the fact that you'd be kicked out of power by your advisors.

[Riven326]

 You can be indifferent at best, but not actively evil. You're running the Inquisition, not some hive of villainy. In the broadest sense, it's a little railroaded. In D&D terms, it might veer from Lawful Good to Lawful Neutral. And barely "neutral". The Inquisition's main purpose is restoring order..and not the evil kind.

 

There isn't anyone more potentially evil than the Warden. If you want an evil character in your "trilogy", you'd be better off doing it there.

Well, I had the impression before the game was released that as the Inquisitor, you would have a certain amount of control over how you shaped the Inquisition and what you used them for beyond just the immediate threat in the main story.

[Deztyn]

You don't have any real evil choices, no sacrificing elves for power or sending your companions off with slavers. I wouldn't even call Illyria's spoiler evil exactly. But if it helps the game does let you be a bit of jerk in some of your personal interactions.

The Warden is absolutely the most evil main character if that's your thing. Hawke second. The inquisitor doesn't even rank. Some complain about that, but with Inquisition's story it really wouldn't fit.

[Sah291]

Yes it's true...

I find the Warden was better suited to becoming an evil or darker character. You are kind of set up that way, what with the drinking darkspawn blood and the promise of going off to die in the deep roads before you become a ghoul, etc. You also get specializations like blood mage and reaver, and can make deals with demons along the way.

Hawke I agree is the most grey/morally ambiguous of the 3. That's why I love purple Hawke, who has the most ambiguous personality tone. A lot of sarcastic Hawke's lines can be taken different ways.

Without spoilers, the Inquisitor doesn't strike me as an anti hero type. Think classic hero archetype.

[Illyria]

I've managed to work out a pretty good worldstate for an evil Inquisitor, but it's more evil due to the state it leaves the world in than because the actions themselves are evil.

 

Spoilers follow:

 

Spoiler

Conscript the mages

Gaspard rules alone

Allow the Wardens to stay

Attack the Sentinals.

Divine Vivienne.

 

This does nothing to actually fix any of the problems in the world and leaves many of them in a worse state than they were when things started.  The mages had a chance to be free, but are now back in the Circle; and Gaspard is free to engage in expansionism with no opposition and none of the elven problems in Orlais have been dealt with.  All four of the choices will gain a Solas Greatly Disapproves meaning that when the Solas DLC/Wolf Hunt/Whatever come out the Inquisitor will find herself facing a powerful elven god who hates every choice she made.

[Riven326]

You don't have any real evil choices, no sacrificing elves for power or sending your companions off with slavers. I wouldn't even call Illyria's spoiler evil exactly. But if it helps the game does let you be a bit of jerk in some of your personal interactions.

The Warden is absolutely the most evil main character if that's your thing. Hawke second. The inquisitor doesn't even rank. Some complain about that, but with Inquisition's story it really wouldn't fit.

I was thinking along the lines of being evil behind the scenes, not so much in your face evil. Pretend to be on the side of the people and a man or woman of righteousness, while simultaneously making deals with Tevinter and other powers in exchange for their support in an inevitable war between the Inquisition and rest of Thedas.

 

The Inquisition could potentially become a militarily power so great that it would change the face of Thedas. Any advisers who went against the Inquisitor's will would be charged with treason and executed. All of this under the premise of the literal belief that the Inquisitor was sent by the Maker himself as a divine intervention in a world that desperately calls out for order.

 

I suppose my own thoughts on what could have been are irrelevant, but there they are. That to me is the Inquisitor.

[thats1evildude]

You can be frequently ruthless and kind of a dick, but never EEEEEEEVIL.

[Dean_the_Young]

I've managed to work out a pretty good worldstate for an evil Inquisitor, but it's more evil due to the state it leaves the world in than because the actions themselves are evil.

 

Spoilers follow:

 

Spoiler

Conscript the mages

Gaspard rules alone

Allow the Wardens to stay

Attack the Sentinals.

Divine Vivienne.

 

This does nothing to actually fix any of the problems in the world and leaves many of them in a worse state than they were when things started.  The mages had a chance to be free, but are now back in the Circle; and Gaspard is free to engage in expansionism with no opposition and none of the elven problems in Orlais have been dealt with.  All four of the choices will gain a Solas Greatly Disapproves meaning that when the Solas DLC/Wolf Hunt/Whatever come out the Inquisitor will find herself facing a powerful elven god who hates every choice she made.

 

You have a strange sense of evil.

[Riven326]

You could think that, but it won't matter anyways. I get the feeling we won't even be revisiting this part of Thedas for a long time. You'll see when you play it. 

 

Inquisition is more about fixing the mistakes of the past. You're probably creating some new mistakes, but for the most part, you're just doing cleanup duty from people more screwed than you.

That just seems like a really poor way of handling the Inquisitor concept. What's the point of giving the player all this power just so you can railroad them into playing the game your way?

[Boost32]

I've managed to work out a pretty good worldstate for an evil Inquisitor, but it's more evil due to the state it leaves the world in than because the actions themselves are evil.

Spoilers follow:

Spoiler

Conscript the mages
Gaspard rules alone
Allow the Wardens to stay
Attack the Sentinals.
Divine Vivienne.

This does nothing to actually fix any of the problems in the world and leaves many of them in a worse state than they were when things started. The mages had a chance to be free, but are now back in the Circle; and Gaspard is free to engage in expansionism with no opposition and none of the elven problems in Orlais have been dealt with. All four of the choices will gain a Solas Greatly Disapproves meaning that when the Solas DLC/Wolf Hunt/Whatever come out the Inquisitor will find herself facing a powerful elven god who hates every choice she made.

None of those are evil, neither Gaspard and Vivienne.
Mages being "free" is evil.

[Riven326]

I agree, it's not the first thing I thought when I first heard of it.

 

Just play it though. You might like it. I just recommend making an evil Warden, if evil is what you want. The Wardens are a bunch of grim bastards anyways.

I've tried to role play an evil warden but it never quite clicked with me. Same thing with Hawke, although I found I had more room to role play there with her being a mage who ends up supporting the templars in the end, due largely in part to some very tragic events in her life regarding blood mages. With the Inquisitor it's perfect. You have an army, you have status, you have political connections, you are practically seen as a divine being by those in your company. It's set up so well that I thought for sure that's where they were going with the concept.

[Boost32]

I've tried to role play an evil warden but it never quite clicked with me. Same thing with Hawke, although I found I had more room to role play there with her being a mage who ends up supporting the templars in the end, due largely in part to some very tragic events in her life regarding blood mages. With the Inquisitor it's perfect. You have an army, you have status, you have political connections, you are practically seen as a divine being by those in your company. It's set up so well that I thought for sure that's where they were going with the concept.

The best you can do is rping a ambitious Inquisitor, doing things to empower yourself.

[Illyria]

None of those are evil, neither Gaspard and Vivienne.
Mages being "free" is evil.

 

I didn't say they were evil.  None of those choices by themselves are bad.  However, that combination of choices is going to leave Thedas in a worse state than it was when the Inquisition started.  No problem has been solved and many have just been made worse.

[Sah291]

I was thinking along the lines of being evil behind the scenes, not so much in your face evil. Pretend to be on the side of the people and a man or woman of righteousness, while simultaneously making deals with Tevinter and other powers in exchange for their support in an inevitable war between the Inquisition and rest of Thedas.

The Inquisition could potentially become a militarily power so great that it would change the face of Thedas. Any advisers who went against the Inquisitor's will would be charged with treason and executed. All of this under the premise of the literal belief that the Inquisitor was sent by the Maker himself as a divine intervention in a world that desperately calls out for order.

I suppose my own thoughts on what could have been are irrelevant, but there they are. That to me is the Inquisitor.

You can play it that way, but it will be largely headcanon. There are indeed ways to tick off most of the companions and earn their disapproval, and the world state can be left in a way that hints that problems will resurface. But your goal is still to take down the villian and restore order, and you accomplish that. So it's not so much that it's impossible to play a less than noble hero...it's just that the story seems to flow better if you play it straight, IMO. Some of the darker choices you can make come off as pragmatic, or at worst "well intentioned extremist".

[Boost32]

I didn't say they were evil.  None of those choices by themselves are bad.  However, that combination of choices is going to leave Thedas in a worse state than it was when the Inquisition started.  No problem has been solved and many have just been made worse.

I disagree with you, but lets leave at that.

[S.W.]

I was kind of disappointed with the lack of evil options too. You're setting up an organisation which is quasi-imperialistic, I'm disappointed there's fewer options to be a ruthless, power-grabbing proxy empire which pretends to be pure and holy. I kind of wanted to play a ruthlessly devout, unstoppable knight templar (the trope, not actually a templar) when I first heard of DA:I.

 

Like, the closest you can get are probably choices in relation to Templars/Mages, which given the way DA2 is set up, aren't implied to be wholly evil. I'm pro-mage, on the whole, but I can see good reasons for keeping the circles as they are - especially if you're RPing someone quite devout - and it's not a choice which makes you come off as a ruthless dick. You also have a choice regarding Orlais' future, and whilst I'd argue some are better than others, it's again, a matter of politics more than ethics (although the two frequently bleed into each other, of course).

 

There are a lot of things I hoped of DA:I which weren't there. Demanding tithes or 'protection fees' (note: this is something gangs frequently do) of the local lords and ladies in exchange for military support and defence against whatever evil faction you require, for instance, would be a start. If war table missions required resources, it may force your hand into cutting corners - for instance, helping refugees requires resources, men, and money most likely, and you may decide not to do that in order to focus on your goal. Essentially, there's a finite amount of things in the world (game would make that clear), and you have to choose whether you'd pursue that side-quest or instead whether you'd have the most effective option when it comes to dealing with the big bad (e.g. you might have heavy losses in the army, or even have to lose one of your companions). I would also have judgement outcomes having bigger options - dependent on choices and which factions you side with, you get more/less money from nobles, and would have to tailor your choices to meet your allies demands. I think the fact that Skyhold is so distant and so in need of repair would come into this - it's tactically placed, but its lack of arable land would mean it's not self-sufficient, and thus money is always an issue.

 

I think that would be a much more interesting game than present, and would also set the Inquisition up into a number of different positions - for instance, is it a temporary organisation which disbands after its sole goal - sealing the breach & defeating Corypheus - is done? Is it closer to a medieval NGO or early model of a charitable organisation? Are you just fantasy mobsters? Are you representing a different faction in the Chantry which may eventually take over it? As it stands, the Inquisition goes in one direction, and that's mostly a good one. I never felt like I was leading or controlling my organisation. It's fine for a diplomatic character, but I'm sad I won't have the option of playing an evil/renegade run of DA:I.

[andy6915]

Sometimes I feel like the Envy demon's idea of how the Inquisition should have been like is what some gamers also wanted to do with the inquisition.

[Sah291]

Sometimes I feel like the Envy demon's idea of how the Inquisition should have been like is what some gamers also wanted to do with the inquisition.

Maybe. I get where they were going with it though. It's a more realistic situation, where the Inquisitor seems to always have good intentions, but can maybe come off as sort of a zealot, or someone who doesn't always think through the long term consequences.

Spoiler

If you manage to upset Varric, he will compare you to Anders. I thought that was interesting.

[andy6915]

Spoiler

If you manage to upset Varric, he will compare you to Anders. I thought that was interesting.

 

Eww! That right there is an instant suicide causing comparison. My inquisitor would be slicing their belly open horizontally within the hour of him saying that.