14 réponses à ce sujet

[Jakov_XIV]

Hello everyone,

I'm before my first playthrough of DAI. For the first run I want to play the human male Inquisitor, who is a devout, faithful andrastian, strict about his faith and principles he follows. He will side with templars, romance Cassandra and bring back an old order to chaotic Thedas.

So my question is: which class will fill the above role the best (storywise)? At first I thought that warrior of the noble house Trevelyan, which has connections to the Chantry, will be the best, but then I thought that the circle mage, who actually liked living in the circle and who is a knight enchanter, might be a more interesting choice? At least being a mage who sides with templars and closes all the mages back in the circles sounds quite interesting, as it's an "out of the line" role.

 

Also, I read on this forum that being a human gives you (storywise) some interesting political options, which are unavailable to other classes. Does that stick only to human non-mage, or to every human class? In the description of the races it's stated that both human mage and non-mage classes have noble origin...

I will be very grateful for your help.

 

PS. Please avoid spoilers

[Bayonet Hipshot]

The solution to your conundrum is simple: Mage-Warrior Hybrid.

 

If you want to be a mage-warrior hybrid, this is what you have to do.

 

1) Pick the mage class. Human mage is from the Circle which means it ties into the mage-templar war really well. Yes, the human does come with some special negotiation dialogue options with Josephine but I will let you find out what that is for yourself.

 

2) Specialize as a Knight Enchanter. Be a support oriented / defense oriented Knight Enchanter. By this I mean pick spells that allow you to negate damage and support the entire party. Kinetic GTR has a video about playing support Knight Enchanters that you might want to look into - https://www.youtube....h?v=2uDZwhJjrAs

 

3) Get the fade touched enchantments to allow you to wear heavy armor regardless of class. Then use that for your character.

 

4) If you are playing a male Inquisitor, romance Cassandra and if you are playing a female Inquisitor, romance Cullen. Both characters have ties to the Chantry which would suit your character well.

 

Here are a few other suggestions that I are spoilery but is very useful for the kind of playthrough you have in mind.

 

Spoiler

1) Either conscript the mages or ally with the Templars. From your description of the Inquisitor you want, I would say an alliance with the Templar is better than conscripting the mages.

 

2) Be an Inquisitor that embraces their role as Herald of Andraste and embraces faithfulness.

 

3) Either choose Cassandra or Vivienne to become the next Divine. I would personally endorse Cassandra.

 

4) Make Iron Bull into a Tal-Vashoth. The Chantry is not very fond of the Qun and you should work to make Iron Bull leave it.

 

5) Make Cole into a human. It feels like something a more Andrastian or Chantry oriented person would do.

 

Cheers and have a good time playing.

[PapaCharlie9]

Also, I read on this forum that being a human gives you (storywise) some interesting political options, which are unavailable to other classes. Does that stick only to human non-mage, or to every human class? In the description of the races it's stated that both human mage and non-mage classes have noble origin...

I will be very grateful for your help.
 
PS. Please avoid spoilers

Any human, regardless of class, though don't set your expectations too high. The impact to the story is minimal, given that the game designers didn't want to penalize chosing non-human too much at all.

You could do Knight-Enchanter as @Habits Honeypot suggested. It fits in your role-playing goals, sort of. Without spoiling anything, there are RP/story penalties for being a mage, even a KE, though.

More to the point, I played a human female mage in my first PT, and ended up regretting it with respect to RP/story. Being a devout Andrastian and a mage is a problematic character to play in the DAI story. Not impossible, by any means, but you may end up facing some choices that seem to go against at least one of your RP goals, no matter which choice you make. Mine was not devout, pretty much the opposite, but even that was tough. I usually save/reload and try all the minor choices before making a decision and I found many cases where the best story choice/outcome was the worst RP choice wrt to my RP goals.

For the record, in terms of combat and fun factor, I loved playing a mage. It's just RP that was regrettable.

I haven't completed a human warrior PT yet, so I can't advise you on whether warrior is better/worse than mage. Could be worse, for all I know. I have a hunch the RP and story fit is better for a Champion specialization warrior, but it's just a hunch.

Best advice I can give is don't set hard and fast RP goals for your first PT. Save that for the second PT, when you have a better sense of where the narrative will go, even for the story branches you choose not to take, since they are heavily implied.

(I generally don't advise cross-posting, but you ought to ask this question in Story, Campaign & Characters forum as well. Here, we can help you min/max your KE build, but there you might get better RP advice. )

[Jakov_XIV]

Thanks guys for the great info! I appreciate you avoided spoilers as much as possible and gave me so much information at the same time.

@PapaCharlie9, your post got me really interested. I'm surprised playing as a mage is RP/story penalized in any way, as it was very rewarding in DAII. I understand that - as you stated - only "being a devout Andrastian and a mage is a problematic character to play in the DAI story", otherwise playing a mage is not RP/story penalized in any way, am I getting this right?

Also, just to make it clear, I have one more question to @PapaCharlie9: is the penalization, which you wrote about, similar to DAII, when you chose to side with the templars while playing a mage? I mean, it was possible and (with a lot of imagination) to some extent explainable, but it always felt just so akward and wrong, to the point of feeling that the game is broken if you were a blood mage. It just wasn't explained enough, why a mage would want to kill all the mages in Kirkwall, and at the same time why all the NPCs don't give a damn that you are also a mage and also should be executed. Clearly it was a poor game design and poor storytelling (in that one mater, of course). Is it the same with the devout Andrastian human Inquisitor? Or rather you had in mind something completely else? Like the the moral choices in that role are hader? I am aware that it may be hard to explain without spoiling the story, but please do your best to make your thought a bit more clear to me

[berelinde]

I've run a male human warrior several times (all devout Andrastians), and it's one of my favorite characters to play. If you're looking for a RP challenge, i.e. one where it is actually difficult to stay in character because the game pushes you toward a certain play style and philosophy, this isn't the race/class for you. It could not be easier to play as a devout human warrior. I found it far more challenging to play as anything other than as a devout Andrastian, in fact. Even if you're a Dalish elf, everyone assumes that you know all there is to know about Andraste (and nothing at all about being Dalish, which is annoying).

 

You can play as an Andrastian human mage just as easily. No one treats you like an apostate, nor does anyone believe you support free mages by default. No one bats an eye if you ally with the templars, nor is it even a role-playing stretch. If you ally with the templars, most of the NPCs in the game simply assume that you're a loyalist mage and they let you get on with it. You don't have to do anything like the mental gymnastics you had to do to justify a pro-templar mage Hawke in DA2. Theh game does allow you to lie to NPCs to a certain extent, too. For example, some of my pro-freedom mages lied to Vivienne extensively about their plans for the Circle. This is actually a plus, in my book. I hate it when NPCs are omniscient.

[PapaCharlie9]

Thanks guys for the great info! I appreciate you avoided spoilers as much as possible and gave me so much information at the same time.

@PapaCharlie9, your post got me really interested. I'm surprised playing as a mage is RP/story penalized in any way, as it was very rewarding in DAII. I understand that - as you stated - only "being a devout Andrastian and a mage is a problematic character to play in the DAI story", otherwise playing a mage is not RP/story penalized in any way, am I getting this right?

Also, just to make it clear, I have one more question to @PapaCharlie9: is the penalization, which you wrote about, similar to DAII, when you chose to side with the templars while playing a mage? I mean, it was possible and (with a lot of imagination) to some extent explainable, but it always felt just so akward and wrong, to the point of feeling that the game is broken if you were a blood mage. It just wasn't explained enough, why a mage would want to kill all the mages in Kirkwall, and at the same time why all the NPCs don't give a damn that you are also a mage and also should be executed. Clearly it was a poor game design and poor storytelling (in that one mater, of course). Is it the same with the devout Andrastian human Inquisitor? Or rather you had in mind something completely else? Like the the moral choices in that role are hader? I am aware that it may be hard to explain without spoiling the story, but please do your best to make your thought a bit more clear to me

I never played DA2 so can't advise you on that, but I suspect @berelinde has nailed it, since I agree with everything else in @berelinde's post. It never occurred to me that lying was an RP option! That's a neat way to get around some of the problems with choices.

Again, without spoiling too much, mages are penalized, regardless of race. Maybe "penalized" is too strong a word (although you are literally penalized in one quest -- NO SPOILERS THOUGH). If lying is within your RP character defintion, it's really just a matter of how much you need to lie to achieve certain RP and story goals. If you rule out lying, then we are back to being forced into a narrative that is either wrong for your RP goals or wrong for the story, at certain points, particularly around Vivienne as @berelinde mentioned.

If your human mage devote Andrastian also happens to be a racist and thinks elves are rabbit-eared good-for-nothings, Qunari a brain-washed facists, Tevinters are crazy blood mages, dwarves are sly, double-dealing cheats (well, okay, that one might be justified ...), anything that comes out of the Fade must be evil, and romance should only happen between a (human) man and a (human) woman ... I couldn't imagine a more challenging character to play. Actually, that's a pretty good back story for a Jerkquisitor playthrough ...

[Jakov_XIV]

Thank you very much guys, I guess it's something like this (I'm making up as I go):

I'm a devout Andrastian mage, and Solas is a pro-free-mages. If I consistently tell him that I want all the mages back in the circles, he will disapprove strongly and eventually leave my party (which is a story outcome I don't want). I can lie to him about my plans for the circles and avoid him leaving the party, but it will contradict my RP goals, as a devout Andrastian is disgusted with lying. While being a devout Andrastian non-mage, Solas would still disapprove, but not so strongly and won't leave my party (as he knows that you can't expect from a non-mage person to fully understand a mage, so he will tolerate my views). That kind of mechanism would surely leave me regretting choosing a mage class :-P

Eh, I think that for the first PT I will stick to a warrior and leave mage for a second PT.

Let me bother you guys with some more qestions, as your advices are priceless: does reaver specialization stick with devout human Andrastian? I mean, are there serious and numerous NPCs reactions to specializations? Should I expect someone to tell me "OMFG bro, you are herald of Andraste and seemed so faithful, yet you became a dragon-blood-drinking-crazy-close-to-a-blood-mage-killing-machine-monster??? WTF is wrong with you???!!!"

Champion seems too boring for me and I prefer DPSing over tanking. Templar seems like an ideal choice - interesting gameplay (that eldritch combo seems fun) and correct with story and set RP, however, I fancy the "high risk - high reward with high DPS" playstyle, and additionaly those animations of dragon attacks look really nice. What do you guys think?

[CorniliuS]

Frankly I never understood this notion, asking about game, how to play it, which characters to pick, best dialog choices. Just play the damn game and you will found out, this is suppose to be fun to discover everything by yourself.

[nightscrawl]

Let me bother you guys with some more qestions, as your advices are priceless: does reaver specialization stick with devout human Andrastian? I mean, are there serious and numerous NPCs reactions to specializations? Should I expect someone to tell me "OMFG bro, you are herald of Andraste and seemed so faithful, yet you became a dragon-blood-drinking-crazy-close-to-a-blood-mage-killing-machine-monster??? WTF is wrong with you???!!!"

Champion seems too boring for me and I prefer DPSing over tanking. Templar seems like an ideal choice - interesting gameplay (that eldritch combo seems fun) and correct with story and set RP, however, I fancy the "high risk - high reward with high DPS" playstyle, and additionaly those animations of dragon attacks look really nice. What do you guys think?

There is hardly any reaction, sadly. Some of the followers/advisors have a reaction if you choose a specific spec, but they don't all have a reaction to everything, and for the most part it's only a single line or short conversation.

I think from a roleplay standpoint reaver might be an odd choice for what you're going for because there are undertones of blood magic, even if it's not "magic" in the strictest sense. Alternatively, you could just look at the reaver as analogous to its real-world counterpart berserker and ignore the blood aspect of it.

 

If you're going to romance Cassandra and have her as a templar spec tank then going with a reaver damage spec might be a nice compliment.

[Hermes_tri]

Templars are addicted to lyrium though

Actually some or may be even all of the specs have some unique dialogue options. I know Champion, Templar and Rift Mage do for example.

Gameplay wise I find Templar a bit dull. Reaver is much more fun, but I mainly play mages so don't take my word for it

By the way my first PT was a Human Rift mage, who was somewhat devoted at the beginning, then he started to doubt the Makers existence and him being chosen one - he was a Mage after all. But by the end of the game he truly believed he was the Herald of Andraste!

My current Qunari Necro doesn't give a damn about all that though

[PapaCharlie9]

I'm a devout Andrastian mage, and Solas is a pro-free-mages. If I consistently tell him that I want all the mages back in the circles, he will disapprove strongly and eventually leave my party (which is a story outcome I don't want). I can lie to him about my plans for the circles and avoid him leaving the party, but it will contradict my RP goals, as a devout Andrastian is disgusted with lying. While being a devout Andrastian non-mage, Solas would still disapprove, but not so strongly and won't leave my party (as he knows that you can't expect from a non-mage person to fully understand a mage, so he will tolerate my views). That kind of mechanism would surely leave me regretting choosing a mage class :-P

FWIW, the way I dealt with this issue is to simply never talk to Solas. He still disapproves of some decisions, even when he's left behind, but if you never talk to him, the disapproval check that causes him to leave can never happen (I think).

Eh, I think that for the first PT I will stick to a warrior and leave mage for a second PT.

Let me bother you guys with some more qestions, as your advices are priceless: does reaver specialization stick with devout human Andrastian? I mean, are there serious and numerous NPCs reactions to specializations? Should I expect someone to tell me "OMFG bro, you are herald of Andraste and seemed so faithful, yet you became a dragon-blood-drinking-crazy-close-to-a-blood-mage-killing-machine-monster??? WTF is wrong with you???!!!"

My opinion is, no, devotion to Andraste is antithetical to Reaver specialization. I mean, consider DAO canon. You have to defile the Sacred Urn of (Andraste's) Ashes to get Reaver skills! I think that's pretty clear cut.

But, as noted already, there is very little reaction to your specialization choices, whatever you choose. You'll get more comments on who you romance than your dragon-blood-drinking-life-force-sucking rampages.

Champion seems too boring for me and I prefer DPSing over tanking. Templar seems like an ideal choice - interesting gameplay (that eldritch combo seems fun) and correct with story and set RP, however, I fancy the "high risk - high reward with high DPS" playstyle, and additionaly those animations of dragon attacks look really nice. What do you guys think?

It's hard to say. I thought 2H warrior would be boring, but I'm doing a 2H Champion Qunari playthrough now and it's really fun. I hate to agree with the sarcastic post above, but it's true, you won't know until you try it.

Champion is the safest choice RP/story wise. If you go Templar, you put yourself in the middle of the mage/templar conflict and have to navigate your way through that mess, though I can't say for sure since I haven't played Templar as IQ.

The good thing is you don't have to worry too much about missing out on something, whatever you decide. You get all the classes and specializations in your party, so you can try them all out if you want. I played as Solas for most of one playthrough because I just really liked Rift Mage. My IQ (DW Tempest rogue) was relegated to sneak attacking on automatic, until he leveled up enough to make Tempest playable.

[Jakov_XIV]

@CorniliuS, the reason I started this topic is the lack of time for multiple playthroughs. The game is design to get most out of it during many PTs, but I most probably will end up with only one PT finished, so I want to enjoy that one PT as much as possible. Please note that I don't ask about "best" dialogue options, choices, etc. I'm only asking for some details on game mechanics, which will help me create and the kind of character that would be most alpealing to me.

Anyway, thanks again for the valuable info. I tried the multiplayer the other day and unlocked reaver and arcane warrior. Playing both classes was a blast, but I can't tell which one was more fun for me. It doesn't help me picking the class for SP, obviously Though for now AW seems to me as a bit weaker class. I have a problem with a low damage output with SB, and so with creating barrier, but I guess that the problem lies with a poor equipment (the staff does only about 75 of dmg). The reaver on the other hand is a powerhouse and wrecks tons of dmg, and the attack speed is awesome.

I think that reaver on a devout Andrastian could be somehow explained, with a bit of effort. It's out of debate that reaver is antiethical to Andrastianism - even fhough it's not blood magic and doesn't receive in Thedas such prejudice as blood magic does, it is a product of a dark ritual that changes the person (whether the change is for better or for worse is a matter of personal opinion). However, if your IQ accepts the principle "ends justify the means" (I know, it doesn't actually combine well with Andrastian faith, but let's assume for a second that they do not contradict each other), then Andrastian IQ could be kind of a tragic figure, one that makes a sin of undergoing a dark ritual and using dark fighting techniques, but only for the greater good - to fulfill the role of Herald of Andraste. Stopping the world from falling apart is a huge task (to say the least) and fulfilling it needs some superhuman powers. Reaver specialisation is that kind of power. So such IQ will become reaver, but will only use this power to fulfill his role as a chosen one and at the same time he will be aware that he made a great sin. To me it looks like a huge sacrfice - to commit a sin in order to save millions of people. And sacrifce is an important element of the Andrastian faith (just like in Christian faith). What do you guys think about it? Is this kind of reasoning acceptable to you or it's just a pile of crap and BS?

Anyway, both classes are so badass. It's really hard to say which one is cooler. After all, it's like choosing beetwen a jedi and a dragon jinchuuriki

[nightscrawl]

What do you guys think about it? Is this kind of reasoning acceptable to you or it's just a pile of crap and BS?

This may not be what you want to hear, since you did ask for an opinion, but I firmly believe that if it sounds good and right to YOU that you should go with it. I might make an exception to this line of thought if someone had a blatant contradiction to the lore, or some indisputable fact presented in the game(s), but even then it's your own game, so have whatever RP that you like in it.

[OrionAnderson]

If you're planning to romance Cassandra, I'd probably go with human mage over human warrior, for gameplay. If you were planning on running,a templar, then having 2 templars is extremely redundant. (Not all specs are redundant; double rift mage and double artificer are crazy awesome; double templar and double reaver are really bad though) The other advantage of playing an Andrastian mage is that it's easier to avoid relying on heretics like Solas and Dorian. 

 

Andrastian Human Mage roleplaying is easy. You're explicitly a Circle mage, not an apostate, so you can be best buds with Vivian and the Templars. I wouldn't worry about Solas leaving. First, I'm not sure how that's a story problem. Second, it's really unusual. There's lots of ways even an Andrastian can get approval from him. Just listen to all his stories, basically. Say nice things about spirits -- You can a hard line on the dangers of apostates without necessarily hating spirits. Remember that Wynne was a spirit healer and that Cassandra's relatives call spirits all the time. For RP, any of the specs can work. K-E is what it is. Even though Dorian is a Necromancer, it's not a Tevinter thing. The majority of necromancers are actually circle mages from Nevarra. As mentioned, Cassandra is related to many of them. Rift Mage plays most naturally as an apostate/apostate-friendly irreligious mage who taps whatever power they can -- but if your Inquisitor believes their mark is a gift from Andraste, it makes sense to learn how to use it to the fullest.

 

If you for the Andrastian warrior, any spec is justifiable. Reavers get their power from dragon blood -- any dragon blood. In DAO you had to defile andraste's temple to become a reaver, but only because your teachers demanded it. Reavers aren't inherently opposed to the Chantry, and in fact many of Cassandra's relatives are reavers. However, if you are romancing Cassandra you should avoid reaver unless you want to inject some tension and tragedy to the relationship; Cassandra's relatives who went reaver eventually became insane mutants, so I'm sure she wouldn't want you to go for it. Templar is an interesting case. In the abstract it's a naturally roleplaying move for an Andrastian to become a Templar, but the Inquisitor is not actually initiated into the order. Instead of becoming a proper templar you get a renegade ex-templar to show you how to use black market lyrium. If you're willing to headcanon that away, it would work. Champion is a neutral safe choice although the flavor text about seeking glory might be at odds with an especially humble religious perspective. 

[Jakov_XIV]

Thank you all very much for the advice. I will go with the Andrastian knight enchanter and see how that works out