710 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

I can't disagree with you.  I am not overly fond of Teagan's cameo in this DLC.  Surely Bioware could have come up with someone other than him since he does seem totally out of character.

 

I'm not sure we're on the same page - I'm saying Tegan is a dick, so his cameo isn't out of character? The problem is that there's no one left in Ferelden who isn't an idiot and who could de facto fit the role. They could use Ferelden noble #213, but then who cares? Although frankly they did that with Orlais so who knows. 

[DDJ]

I'm not sure we're on the same page - I'm saying Tegan is a dick, so his cameo isn't out of character? The problem is that there's no one left in Ferelden who isn't an idiot and who could de facto fit the role. They could use Ferelden noble #213, but then who cares? Although frankly they did that with Orlais so who knows. 

 

I think we are only from slightly different angles.  Yes, perhaps that can be his new sobriquet - T the D.  I actually think BW used him only because he is recognizable from previous games although his plastic surgery was a definite failure.  You could be right about not being out of character.  What bothered me most was the fact that he is only mouthing Alastair's words.

[Zero]

In fact Teagan has valid reasons to be upset. The Inquisition is (storywise) one of the most powerful armies of Thedas... camping at Ferelden borders without official sanction from the Fereldan government. And the Orlesians wanted that army to be part of the Orlesian army. Obviously Ferelden's monarchy had to be distrustful of the Inquisition. Many of these people (including Teagan) lived during the Orlesian occupation. And in world states were people put Gaspard as emperor, there are even in-universe reasons to fear a second occupation. With Celene as empress, thou... maybe they became a bit "Loghainized".

 

Whether if their fears were baseless or not, Teagan was doing what any self-respecting ambassador would have to do: protecting the interest of his country. 

[Ghost Gal]

Whether if their fears were baseless or not, Teagan was doing what any self-respecting ambassador would have to do: protecting the interest of his country. 

 

He didn't have to be such a hostile, abrasive, rude, demanding ******* about it.

 

If anything, what he was doing was the opposite of what any self-respecting ambassador would do; p!ss off the other countries while representing his own. Make his country look bad. Make his country seem demanding, paranoid, and unreasonable. Ambassadors should, ideally, be diplomatic and make other countries want to provide for their country's interests. Treating dignitaries of other countries with rudeness and disdain just makes them less likely to comply with his country's interests since they hate him personally, and thus hate everything he represents. It can also lead people to think, "If this is the best Ferelden has to represent them as an ambassador, then they're not a country I want to associate with."

 

"Catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," and all that.

[Melbella]

I simply fast-forward/ESC-button-mash through all of his dialogue now. Makes him much more pleasant.

[BloodKaiden]

Finished Trespasser personally today for the first time. I don't hate Teagan, then again I was never one to actually like him as a npc during the events of DAO though. He made valid points when it came to the Inquisition and Orlais was just out to get the organization under their thumb for Celene's sake. I ended up disbanding for my canon play so I could focus on Solas without Qunari and elven spies in the ranks. Then again, when **** hits the fan no one better go running to the Inquisitor.

[TheKomandorShepard]

He didn't have to be such a hostile, abrasive, rude, demanding ******* about it.

 

If anything, what he was doing was the opposite of what any self-respecting ambassador would do; p!ss off the other countries while representing his own. Make his country look bad. Make his country seem demanding, paranoid, and unreasonable. Ambassadors should, ideally, be diplomatic and make other countries want to provide for their country's interests. Treating dignitaries of other countries with rudeness and disdain just makes them less likely to comply with his country's interests since they hate him personally, and thus hate everything he represents. It can also lead people to think, "If this is the best Ferelden has to represent them as an ambassador, then they're not a country I want to associate with."

 

"Catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," and all that.

 

Since when trying to remove threat to his country and it's authorities is paranoid and unreasonable?Considering what Inquistion did and still does would be more than enough to start a war it was common sense.Taking aggressive position with Iquistion was justified as Ferelden wanted it gone and above.Inquistion also isn't a country and is in position of accused, it was a trial not a party.So pretty much cuddling Inquistion after what it did and does would rather make Ferelden look like doormats. 

[DDJ]

He didn't have to be such a hostile, abrasive, rude, demanding ******* about it.

 

If anything, what he was doing was the opposite of what any self-respecting ambassador would do; p!ss off the other countries while representing his own. Make his country look bad. Make his country seem demanding, paranoid, and unreasonable. Ambassadors should, ideally, be diplomatic and make other countries want to provide for their country's interests. Treating dignitaries of other countries with rudeness and disdain just makes them less likely to comply with his country's interests since they hate him personally, and thus hate everything he represents. It can also lead people to think, "If this is the best Ferelden has to represent them as an ambassador, then they're not a country I want to associate with."

 

"Catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," and all that.

 

Since when trying to remove threat to his country and it's authorities is paranoid and unreasonable?Considering what Inquistion did and still does would be more than enough to start a war it was common sense.Taking aggressive position with Iquistion was justified as Ferelden wanted it gone and above.Inquistion also isn't a country and is in position of accused, it was a trial not a party.So pretty much cuddling Inquistion after what it did and does would rather make Ferelden look like doormats. 

 

I understand what both of you are saying and I agree to a point.  The Inquisition is a powerful force headed by the Herald of Andraste.  The Inquisitor sealed the breach, destroyed C (hopefully - I am never sure if anyone truly dies in these games) and so on.  In Orlais they were readily aided by the army and historically they have been at odds with Ferelden.  When you consider what Ferelden did - ie. nothing or little - to aid the Inquisition, there surely was a feeling of chagrin and shame for not doing more.  Heck, they did not even attempt to do more from what I could tell.  All of the heavy lifting was done by the Inquisition, and to make matters worse the monarch(s) of Ferelden gave the mages sanctuary thus drawing a lot of the violence to that country.  I suspect that what they really fear is that a combined Inquisition / Orlais force will conquer the country or that the Inquisition itself will conquer it.  When you think about this, the Herald of Andraste poses a threat to Orlais, Ferelden and the Chantry itself no matter who is Divine.  The Inquisition is not the real problem.  The Herald of Andraste is.  The Herald is almost a religious figure, a cult figure, and many will follow her because of that.  She rose from the dead at Haven (not really) and people saw that.  The word spread everywhere, and now you have an uncontrolled Herald threatening everything they are trying to preserve.  My best guess is that in time the powers who be will want to have the Herald put out of the way.  So while I understand and agree with many points you make, I also think the main point was to isolate the Herald so she can be put out of the way without fanfare.  It is one thing to kill a cult leader surrounded by an army of faithful.  It is quite another to have them quietly assassinated and make the murder look like natural causes.

[Gervaise]

Whilst I do feel that Teagan comes across badly as portrayed and the nobles of Ferelden have a lot to answer for when it comes to the protection of their people, I will concede that I can see why they would be nervous of the Inquisition considering the amount of involvement it has had with Orlais.   By the time of the Exalted Council it is officially recognised by the Chantry via the new Divine and Orlais are pushing for it to be placed under her authority.   Whilst the current Divine may seem kindly disposed towards Ferelden, it only takes a bit of poison or a knife and they are looking for a new one.  

 

There have always been very strong links between Orlais and the Chantry dating back to Drakon and during the occupation of Ferelden the Chantry seemed to initially be backing the Orlesians.     So I suppose it is understandable why Ferelden wants it gone altogether, but not being able to say as much in open council, which is why he chose the historic example of Sophie Dryden, ignoring the more recent co-operation between the monarch and the Wardens.

 

I wonder if it was the fact that the reforms might not outlast the current Divine that makes Leliana recommend to you that you disband, even when she is Divine.   She is clearly confident that she doesn't need the Inquisition to push forward her radical reforms and knows full well what happened with the last Inquisition when it was folded into the Chantry.    It went from an independent organisation that served all equally, whether noble or commoner, to the religious military arm of Drakon's crusade to spread his vision of Andrastrism.    No doubt Leliana fears it could simply become the puppet of Orlais if she were out of the way.   Hence the recommendation to disband.  

[Squinterific]

Whoo ees dis man?? Has to be an impersonator, i'm sure of it. He looked and sounded nothing like Teagan.

[TheKomandorShepard]

I understand what both of you are saying and I agree to a point.  The Inquisition is a powerful force headed by the Herald of Andraste.  The Inquisitor sealed the breach, destroyed C (hopefully - I am never sure if anyone truly dies in these games) and so on.  In Orlais they were readily aided by the army and historically they have been at odds with Ferelden.  When you consider what Ferelden did - ie. nothing or little - to aid the Inquisition, there surely was a feeling of chagrin and shame for not doing more.  Heck, they did not even attempt to do more from what I could tell.  All of the heavy lifting was done by the Inquisition, and to make matters worse the monarch(s) of Ferelden gave the mages sanctuary thus drawing a lot of the violence to that country.  I suspect that what they really fear is that a combined Inquisition / Orlais force will conquer the country or that the Inquisition itself will conquer it.  When you think about this, the Herald of Andraste poses a threat to Orlais, Ferelden and the Chantry itself no matter who is Divine.  The Inquisition is not the real problem.  The Herald of Andraste is.  The Herald is almost a religious figure, a cult figure, and many will follow her because of that.  She rose from the dead at Haven (not really) and people saw that.  The word spread everywhere, and now you have an uncontrolled Herald threatening everything they are trying to preserve.  My best guess is that in time the powers who be will want to have the Herald put out of the way.  So while I understand and agree with many points you make, I also think the main point was to isolate the Herald so she can be put out of the way without fanfare.  It is one thing to kill a cult leader surrounded by an army of faithful.  It is quite another to have them quietly assassinated and make the murder look like natural causes.

We don't know what Ferelden did during crisis because we have no insight into that, aside from various war table missions where you can ask nobles for help we know in fact they were trying to solve problem in Redcliff you just came first.Needless to say that Ferelden is recovering from blight (and other disasters).As for mages yes that was stupid thing to do and OOC for Anora. Inquistion is threat on it's own even without Herald it still could be used by ambitious leader for own end and there is threat it would be annexed by Orlais. 

 

 

Whilst I do feel that Teagan comes across badly as portrayed and the nobles of Ferelden have a lot to answer for when it comes to the protection of their people, I will concede that I can see why they would be nervous of the Inquisition considering the amount of involvement it has had with Orlais.   By the time of the Exalted Council it is officially recognised by the Chantry via the new Divine and Orlais are pushing for it to be placed under her authority.   Whilst the current Divine may seem kindly disposed towards Ferelden, it only takes a bit of poison or a knife and they are looking for a new one.  

 

There have always been very strong links between Orlais and the Chantry dating back to Drakon and during the occupation of Ferelden the Chantry seemed to initially be backing the Orlesians.     So I suppose it is understandable why Ferelden wants it gone altogether, but not being able to say as much in open council, which is why he chose the historic example of Sophie Dryden, ignoring the more recent co-operation between the monarch and the Wardens.

 

I wonder if it was the fact that the reforms might not outlast the current Divine that makes Leliana recommend to you that you disband, even when she is Divine.   She is clearly confident that she doesn't need the Inquisition to push forward her radical reforms and knows full well what happened with the last Inquisition when it was folded into the Chantry.    It went from an independent organisation that served all equally, whether noble or commoner, to the religious military arm of Drakon's crusade to spread his vision of Andrastrism.    No doubt Leliana fears it could simply become the puppet of Orlais if she were out of the way.   Hence the recommendation to disband.  

Actually they don't if you didn't get a cue form Daa caring for own subjects is optional, you can burn Amaranthine to the ground and slaughter peasants and you will be fine.That aside Ferelden had at least 1 tyrant king in past.Plus, if you want to play into giving "justice" to Ferelden people his brining up Sophia is more than valid.

If something Divine is disposed toward Inquistion not Orlais nor Ferelden, Divine was trying to delay council as much as possible in favor of Inquistion only reinforcing that Inquistion is dangerous.

 

Current co-operation is hardly relevant, wardens can turn on Ferelden once again as they did that in the past, not to mention they once again recently demonstrated they aren't exactly trustworthy.Plus, your desire for nobles to answer for not protecting their people validates using Sophia as an example. 

[Gervaise]

I don't know why the inaction on the part of the nobles in protecting their people is a validation for Teagan using Sophie to criticise the Inquisition.   As I understand the history, Sophie lost the throne to her cousin Arland and joined the Grey Wardens.   Then Banns, who presumably must have voted Arland in at a Landsmeet, regretted their decision because he proved to be a tyrant.   Instead of having the guts to simply remove him themselves, they approached Sophie and asked her to intercede, persuading her to head up their coup.   She gets killed and the Grey Wardens get banished from Ferelden.   Seems to me that the people most responsible here were the Banns, people like Teagan, who voted in a tyrant and then wanted him gone, presumably because they were suffering under his rule.

 

Whilst World of Thedas suggests that Fereldens are largely expected to take care of themselves, with regard to law enforcement, it also says that nobles must earn the respect of the common people.   In another source book it states that "The primary purpose of the nobility of Ferelden is the fight for their people against all threats - human, darkspawn or otherwise."   It is basically their job.   Outside of their Keeps they do not own land, the freeholders do.   They give their patronage to nobility in the form of tithes and if they feel their bann or arl is not coming up to scratch with regard to their protection, they can change allegiance.   This is done on an annual basis.  

 

This is why it seemed strange to me that the nobility weren't making  more of an effort to protect their freeholders, most of whom had actually been displaced by the events at the beginning of the game.   One war table mission actually had a noble complaining about the refuges on his land and asking us to remove them.   Cullen, the Ferelden native, suggested we help the refugees instead.   So you see from that point of view the Inquisition were perfectly entitled to hold Caer Bronach, since it had been captured by bandits with no local noble attempting to reclaim it, the citizens of Crestwood would have been overrun by undead if we hadn't helped and the bandits were severely impacting on trade.   The correct response to Teagan under Ferelden traditions would be to suggest that the freeholders in Crestwood decide who they wanted holding Caer Bronach.   Since we had been doing the duty that should have fallen to Teagan, or whoever else was responsible for the Keep, the freeholders would likely have opted for keeping the Inquisition.  

 

Of course, by taking the Aggressive Disband option I was allowed to point out this fact to Teagan "It wasn't a carefully worded agreement that saved the people of Ferelden".   That gave me a degree of satisfaction as I walked out on them all (I like to think I was actually giving them the two fingered salute as I waved my hand in the hair) but I do feel sorry for the people of Ferelden.   They were the ones who suffered at the hands of the darkspawn, not the lilly livered nobles (remember how it was left to the Chantry and Templars to help the people of Lothering after they were abandoned by their local lord).   They were the ones trying to rebuild and whose efforts were being destroyed by the events in DAI.    I dare say that next time the s**t hits the fan, no one will be shifting themselves to help the freeholders either.   No point in looking to my ex-Inquisitor either; he's got bigger fish to fry ("Now if you'll excuse me I have to save the world, again.)

[Mike3207]

He's a Guerrin. I despise and loathe all the Guerrins, even if he is not as bad as Eamon.

[TheKomandorShepard]

I don't know why the inaction on the part of the nobles in protecting their people is a validation for Teagan using Sophie to criticise the Inquisition.   As I understand the history, Sophie lost the throne to her cousin Arland and joined the Grey Wardens.   Then Banns, who presumably must have voted Arland in at a Landsmeet, regretted their decision because he proved to be a tyrant.   Instead of having the guts to simply remove him themselves, they approached Sophie and asked her to intercede, persuading her to head up their coup.   She gets killed and the Grey Wardens get banished from Ferelden.   Seems to me that the people most responsible here were the Banns, people like Teagan, who voted in a tyrant and then wanted him gone, presumably because they were suffering under his rule.

 

Whilst World of Thedas suggests that Fereldens are largely expected to take care of themselves, with regard to law enforcement, it also says that nobles must earn the respect of the common people.   In another source book it states that "The primary purpose of the nobility of Ferelden is the fight for their people against all threats - human, darkspawn or otherwise."   It is basically their job.   Outside of their Keeps they do not own land, the freeholders do.   They give their patronage to nobility in the form of tithes and if they feel their bann or arl is not coming up to scratch with regard to their protection, they can change allegiance.   This is done on an annual basis.  

 

This is why it seemed strange to me that the nobility weren't making  more of an effort to protect their freeholders, most of whom had actually been displaced by the events at the beginning of the game.   One war table mission actually had a noble complaining about the refuges on his land and asking us to remove them.   Cullen, the Ferelden native, suggested we help the refugees instead.   So you see from that point of view the Inquisition were perfectly entitled to hold Caer Bronach, since it had been captured by bandits with no local noble attempting to reclaim it, the citizens of Crestwood would have been overrun by undead if we hadn't helped and the bandits were severely impacting on trade.   The correct response to Teagan under Ferelden traditions would be to suggest that the freeholders in Crestwood decide who they wanted holding Caer Bronach.   Since we had been doing the duty that should have fallen to Teagan, or whoever else was responsible for the Keep, the freeholders would likely have opted for keeping the Inquisition.  

 

Of course, by taking the Aggressive Disband option I was allowed to point out this fact to Teagan "It wasn't a carefully worded agreement that saved the people of Ferelden".   That gave me a degree of satisfaction as I walked out on them all (I like to think I was actually giving them the two fingered salute as I waved my hand in the hair) but I do feel sorry for the people of Ferelden.   They were the ones who suffered at the hands of the darkspawn, not the lilly livered nobles (remember how it was left to the Chantry and Templars to help the people of Lothering after they were abandoned by their local lord).   They were the ones trying to rebuild and whose efforts were being destroyed by the events in DAI.    I dare say that next time the s**t hits the fan, no one will be shifting themselves to help the freeholders either.   No point in looking to my ex-Inquisitor either; he's got bigger fish to fry ("Now if you'll excuse me I have to save the world, again.)

 

Eee, what? I said that it was validation of that Inquistion is taking same course of action that Sophia did and therfore is dangerous to Ferelden.She thought King was a tyrant and didn't took good care of his people so she decided to overthrow him, assuming that was Inquistion reasoning for seizing Ferelden land Teagan example was valid.The main difference here is that instead internal factors trying to use wardens to seize Ferelden we have external factor (Inquistion) potentially using wardens to seize Ferelden.

 

As far evidence shows opinion of common folks matters little (of course if you will ****** people off enough they will start to rebel) Arland, Howe that was mostly hated (as you can tell by how other nobles talk to him and angry mob) in Denerim and WC that can refuse to feed peasants and kill them, refuse to protect people and then potentially burn Amaranthine and yet maintain position of Arl.I think you mean that that Bann have to please landowner what isn't also necessarily true as landowner unlikely would be able to stop Bann form dealing with him on way or another.Not to mention extremely unlikely it can be done by foreign organisation or individual, as it was shown be also decided by monarch for an example giving title Arl/Teyrn.By your logic Ferelden should be fine with Orlais seizing land because owner wanted it.

 

Well if those were refugees he hardly has to take responsibility for them, as in first place those weren't people under his protectorate, also those were at least according to him elves and apostates, while we can debate about his responsibility for elves apostates were hardly under his protectorate.

 

We also visited like 2 populated areas, one where King/Queen was in the way to solve problem.We don't know what happened in other regions and whether nobles did their job or not.Also as i said you aren't Ferelden noble and Monarch didn't approve so essentially you seized Ferelden land. 

[ModernAcademic]

He didn't have to be such a hostile, abrasive, rude, demanding ******* about it.

 

If anything, what he was doing was the opposite of what any self-respecting ambassador would do; p!ss off the other countries while representing his own. Make his country look bad. Make his country seem demanding, paranoid, and unreasonable. Ambassadors should, ideally, be diplomatic and make other countries want to provide for their country's interests. Treating dignitaries of other countries with rudeness and disdain just makes them less likely to comply with his country's interests since they hate him personally, and thus hate everything he represents. It can also lead people to think, "If this is the best Ferelden has to represent them as an ambassador, then they're not a country I want to associate with."

 

"Catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," and all that.

 

He was abrasive because the Inquisitor isn't the Warden. Teagan never met the Inquisitor, never fought beside them, never got the chance to know what kind of leader they are, if they are reliable, if they know Ferelden was dominated by Orlais for decades and were crushed under the empire's heel, asf.

 

The problem here is that players expect Teagan to be friendly toward you because he was nice to their Warden. Again, this is not the Warden he's interacting with. The Inquisitor is a total stranger who just happens to have played a large role in Orlesian politics. They are the hand behind the Orlesian throne. They were invited by the Grand Duke to attend a ball hosted by the Empress herself. Even more so if they sought the help from the Orlesian aristocracy to go to Therinfal Redoubt.

 

Such an influential leader can tip the balance in favor of Orlais. And with Teagan aware that Orlais seeks to influence the Inquisition, which by now is THE LARGEST MILITARY POWER IN SOUTHERN THEDAS, plus the fact OUR TROOPS ARE STILL IN FERELDEN TERRITORY AFTER TWO YEARS (nobody knows why, what with Corypheus dead), he has every reason to see the Inquisition as a potential threat.

 

It's as that old saying goes: try to see the situation through his eyes. People aren't obliged to be nice to you, especially not Fereldans. They've always been abrasive to strangers they mistrust. Just remember Loghain's reaction to a Warden he suspected of being in league with Orlais.

[Zero]

He was abrasive because the Inquisitor isn't the Warden. Teagan never met the Inquisitor, never fought beside them, never got the chance to know what kind of leader they are, if they are reliable, if they know Ferelden was dominated by Orlais for decades and were crushed under the empire's heel, asf.

 

The problem here is that players expect Teagan to be friendly toward you because he was nice to their Warden. Again, this is not the Warden he's interacting with. The Inquisitor is a total stranger who just happens to have played a large role in Orlesian politics. They are the hand behind the Orlesian throne. They were invited by the Grand Duke to attend a ball hosted by the Empress herself. Even more so if they sought the help from the Orlesian aristocracy to go to Therinfal Redoubt.

 

Such an influential leader can tip the balance in favor of Orlais. And with Teagan aware that Orlais seeks to influence the Inquisition, which by now is THE LARGEST MILITARY POWER IN SOUTHERN THEDAS, plus the fact OUR TROOPS ARE STILL IN FERELDEN TERRITORY AFTER TWO YEARS (nobody knows why, what with Corypheus dead), he has every reason to see the Inquisition as a potential threat.

 

It's as that old saying goes: try to see the situation through his eyes. People aren't obliged to be nice to you, especially not Fereldans. They've always been abrasive to strangers they mistrust. Just remember Loghain's reaction to a Warden he suspected of being in league with Orlais.

 

 

And while Teagan was friendly with Hawke, that's because Hawke was a Fereldan doing good publicity to Ferelden in the Free Marches, instead of a random guy who seems to be in league with Orlais.

[In Exile]

He didn't have to be such a hostile, abrasive, rude, demanding ******* about it.

 

If anything, what he was doing was the opposite of what any self-respecting ambassador would do; p!ss off the other countries while representing his own. Make his country look bad. Make his country seem demanding, paranoid, and unreasonable. Ambassadors should, ideally, be diplomatic and make other countries want to provide for their country's interests. Treating dignitaries of other countries with rudeness and disdain just makes them less likely to comply with his country's interests since they hate him personally, and thus hate everything he represents. It can also lead people to think, "If this is the best Ferelden has to represent them as an ambassador, then they're not a country I want to associate with."

 

"Catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," and all that.

 

But this is Teagan. This is exactly what he does with Loghain. He was demanding, paranoid and unreasonable. He treated Loghain rudely and with disdain. Recall, he had nothing to go on re: Loghain's treason at that point. Loghain did make a power grab - but that doesn't mean he's guilty of regicide, and Teagan basically accuses him of it with no proof or support. 

[TheRevanchist]

The choice is idiotic, and horrible writing personified at least as far as Tegan goes. If you keep the Wardens, they ****** and moan about your harboring them. If you banished them, they ****** and moan because "Who'll save us from the Blight now huh!?!?!" It's insanity, the same person cannot possibly hold both of those opinions at the same time. 

 

However this is literally how Tegan always has been. You all just didn't realize it because you agreed with him the first time. 

[In Exile]

The choice is idiotic, and horrible writing personified at least as far as Tegan goes. If you keep the Wardens, they ****** and moan about your harboring them. If you banished them, they ****** and moan because "Who'll save us from the Blight now huh!?!?!" It's insanity, the same person cannot possibly hold both of those opinions at the same time. 

 

However this is literally how Tegan always has been. You all just didn't realize it because you agreed with him the first time. 

 

But they're not honestly held opinions. They're political attacks, for the sake of the kabuki theatre that is the Exalted Council. I actually think it's pretty on-point: the hacks don't care what you do, they just think the Inquisition has too much power. Orlais wants it controlled, Ferelden wants it gone. Everything else is just justification for the political plan. 

[fdrty]

The problem here is that players expect Teagan to be friendly toward you because he was nice to their Warden. Again, this is not the Warden he's interacting with. The Inquisitor is a total stranger who just happens to have played a large role in Orlesian politics. They are the hand behind the Orlesian throne. They were invited by the Grand Duke to attend a ball hosted by the Empress herself. Even more so if they sought the help from the Orlesian aristocracy to go to Therinfal Redoubt.

 

I think it's a little deeper than that. His aggression is, itself, a diplomatic tool, just as Cyril's politeness is. Any diplomat worth their salt is going to be in full control of their emotions, and if Fereldan thinks the Inquisition is a threat, it will send it's best.

 

The inquisition is just as much of a threat to Orlais as it is to Fereldan. It's already shown a willingness to interfere in Orlesian politics at the highest level. If Orlais wants to invade Fereldan again, the Inquisition won't stand aside and let them.

 

One of the reasons I would never choose the Orlesians is because you can't trust them - not to wield the Inquisition's power fairly, or to not betray them. That''s how the game is played: politeness and kindness in public, backstabbing and murder in private. Fereldan nobles (a few non-withstanding) have one crucial quality Orlesian nobles, with all their pleasantries and preening, can't match: honesty.

 

Obviously, Teagan knows he can't out-charm Cyril. But he doesn't need to. His harshness is there to contrast Cyril's politeness, and he makes Cyril look disingenuous by comparison. I expect Teagan would be the same even if he'd met the Inquisitor before - his primary goal is not to disband the Inquisition but to prevent the worst case scenario - an Orlesian invasion backed by a puppet Inquisition (bet you wish you'd kept Loghain around now, huh?).

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

I expect Teagan would be the same even if he'd met the Inquisitor before - his primary goal is not to disband the Inquisition but to prevent the worst case scenario - an Orlesian invasion backed by a puppet Inquisition (bet you wish you'd kept Loghain around now, huh?).

I wonder how Teagan would feel about an Inquisitor who left Loghain in the Fade to (if Loghain is lucky) die?

[ModernAcademic]

I think it's a little deeper than that. His aggression is, itself, a diplomatic tool, just as Cyril's politeness is. Any diplomat worth their salt is going to be in full control of their emotions, and if Fereldan thinks the Inquisition is a threat, it will send it's best.

 

The inquisition is just as much of a threat to Orlais as it is to Fereldan. It's already shown a willingness to interfere in Orlesian politics at the highest level. If Orlais wants to invade Fereldan again, the Inquisition won't stand aside and let them.

 

One of the reasons I would never choose the Orlesians is because you can't trust them - not to wield the Inquisition's power fairly, or to not betray them. That''s how the game is played: politeness and kindness in public, backstabbing and murder in private. Fereldan nobles (a few non-withstanding) have one crucial quality Orlesian nobles, with all their pleasantries and preening, can't match: honesty.

 

Obviously, Teagan knows he can't out-charm Cyril. But he doesn't need to. His harshness is there to contrast Cyril's politeness, and he makes Cyril look disingenuous by comparison. I expect Teagan would be the same even if he'd met the Inquisitor before - his primary goal is not to disband the Inquisition but to prevent the worst case scenario - an Orlesian invasion backed by a puppet Inquisition (bet you wish you'd kept Loghain around now, huh?).

 

I have to say, I like your interpretation of Teagan's diplomacy. Lots of players think he's coming in strong at the Inquisitor for no reason other than lacking diplomatic skills, but it's actually all part of a straightforward approach that's normal of Fereldan politicians. Like you said, he knows pretty damn well what he's doing. And an equally non-corrupt, straightforward Inquisitor would appreciate it.

 

Whenever relations with others become "foggy", Fereldans resort to putting their cards on the table and demanding honesty in return. To them, it's the best way to clear the air and get to know who they're dealing with from the other side.

 

In short, as you put it, he's demonstrating to the Inquisitor he comes with an open heart, ready to have an earnest conversation, unlike Orlais, who's all about making deals that are mutually benefitial with little to no regard to the law. And that kind of attitude from Cyril is what typically paves the way to corruption.

 

It's a trait we see very clearly in the Landsmeet. Fereldans have great respect for law and tradition and very little patience with people who hide their wrongs behind compliments, generous bribes and grand speeches. 

[Dai Grepher]

But this is Teagan. This is exactly what he does with Loghain. He was demanding, paranoid and unreasonable. He treated Loghain rudely and with disdain. Recall, he had nothing to go on re: Loghain's treason at that point. Loghain did make a power grab - but that doesn't mean he's guilty of regicide, and Teagan basically accuses him of it with no proof or support.

Loghain was the general in charge of the battle plan. Loghain was demanding blind obedience to himself. The Cousland massacre coincided with the death of the king. He also may have allied with Howe by this time.

It's like you haven't played any of the Dragon Age games in your entire life.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Loghain was the general in charge of the battle plan. Loghain was demanding blind obedience to himself. The Cousland massacre coincided with the death of the king. He also may have allied with Howe by this time.

It's like you haven't played any of the Dragon Age games in your entire life.

None of that is actual proof of Loghain doing wrong, though. Battle plans can fail despite the one who made them desiring otherwise, people who are under stress can get a bit aggressive, and coincidences can happen.

[In Exile]

Loghain was the general in charge of the battle plan. Loghain was demanding blind obedience to himself. The Cousland massacre coincided with the death of the king. He also may have allied with Howe by this time.

It's like you haven't played any of the Dragon Age games in your entire life.

 

That's not how evidence works, or how politics work. The point isn't about whether Teagan has good reasons to be suspicious. The point is that he has an angry episode based on nothing more than his suspicions and conviction, on the basis of his highly cynical view of an esteemed hero. That's exactly what he does with the Inquisition - it just that he happens to be wrong about the facts.