430 réponses à ce sujet

[Abyss108]

@Smudjygirl  I'm sorry I just don't see it that way.  With regard to his goal being 'the restoration of the elven people' that is not known to be his motivation unless you play the DLC.  His goal is to reclaim his orb in the main story quest line.  The way they developed his character through the DLC was disappointing to say the least.

 

The story within this games suffers when there was so much rich information from which they had to draw.  I think he needed Cory to power the orb because he was too weak upon waking.  He has a guilt trip the size of a dwarf planet and making him an antagonist, regardless of when this angle was decided upon, was an easy way out.  Again, my opinion.  I can understand your feelings however, I just think that choosing the 'easy' option with regard to story telling was very disappointing here considering that so many were still reeling from the DA:2 debacle.

 

I suppose this is at the core of why I don't want the Inquisitors story to continue on if a DA4 is created.  I felt this story was weak and I didn't really care much about it, but I do care about the companions, so deciding to make one of them, the Elf (who everyone hates), the main antagonist is easy or lazy decision making and I didn't like it.  I don't feel connected to this story or my main Inquisitor at all, despite numerous playthroughs, I can't find myself actually caring about them because the story is disconnected.

 

I like Solas' character and find it immensely disappointing that they would take that level of wisdom about a people we know little about and just make it the antagonist.  Like many others though, I understand why you accept this position, because it's written plain as day.  Just as it was obvious from the very beginning (to me) that Solas was not what he claimed to be and knew more than he claimed to know.  I think that good twists and antagonists were considered in the first one best.  Alistair is rightfully next in line for the throne, he wants nothing to do with it.  You can actually recruit the assassin hired to kill you, etc.  Unlike Arl Howe (who was just an a$%), Logain did what he did in a genuine attempt to help the people by freeing them from an immature King.  These complex characters led to a more complex story generally and I appreciated it.

 

I suppose that DAI was also suffering from a desire by fans to see particular things and Bioware delivered that.  Leliana, despite the possibility that she was left behind in DAO, her canon is that she survives and is around for DA:2.  Morrigan, who apparently decided to come out of hiding with her 'old god' son to work in an Imperial Court (that won't put him at any risk)?  I just think that things became sloppy after DAO with regard to storytelling.  Development time for DAO was 6 years.  DA2 was 1 year and DAI was I think 3 years, and it does show.

 

I'm glad you're happy with it, honestly, but I really disliked this direction and never considered Solas an antagonist, just an easy out.

 

I'm curious about how you don't like Solas as an antagonist (who is doing what he believes is right in an attempt to help his people), but do like Loghain because he did the same thing?

 

I don't think everyone hates him either. Judging by the polls in this forum, he's one of the most popular romances. He's certainly my favourite character.

 

And it's not like the game forces you think he's a mustache twirling villain. You can tell him you are going to change his mind instead of saying you want to kill him, and the devs have said they want to support characters that made this choice. (No guarantee you will succeed of course, but it's presented as a very valid option to still see him as a friend/lover).

[MiyuEmi]

@Smudjygirl  Sorry I have to keep doing this but my MS Explorer at work won't allow me to quote!

 

I suppose I see Solas differently.  He was the wise smart a%$ who challenged other members of your group, particularly Dorian, Iron Bull and Blackwall.  Individuals who were either being dishonest about who they were or who were coming from rigid and questionable background and were accustomed to controlling others.  Whether or not they planned it from the beginning, I suppose I see it was lazy because it's something that seems 'obvious' to those in the world of Thedas.  Let's blame the elves, they're all bad, kind of thing.  I mean, the Dalish are attacked by people and if they live in cities, they're crammed into filthy poverty striken areas with little hope of advancement.  The only place they were treated more like equals was if they ended up in the circles.  Just like 'let's blame the mages' as so much of the structure of DA:2 seemed to be built around making mages seems as violent and irresponsible and dangerous as possible. 

 

I would just far have preferred seeing them actually challenge the beliefs of the people of Thedas (us players) rather than giving in to those beliefs and making them canon.  Yes, you're right, elves are bad and so are mages.

 

I suppose I'm just far more of a cheer for the underdog kind of girl.  I would have liked to see them flesh out the story in a way I didn't expect, rather than having them just decide that because this was the easiest direction to go in, it would be what players wanted.  I want more meat to my story.  Now, I'm not comparing these two wildly different games, but more storytelling like DAO and all of the Witcher games would be appreciated by me.  Challenge me Bioware, surprise me.  As an 'older gamer' I suppose I'm interested in something far more complex.

[MiyuEmi]

@Abyss108  I didn't like Logain's character at all but he had motivation to benefit his people which I didn't expect because the minute you encounter him you can tell he's a pr&ck.  I didn't say he was right, but I feel his character twist was better.  Was I surprised Solas was Fen'Harel?  No.  He had way too much information about he world, the fade, ancient artefacts and wore a wolf jaw around his neck and the paintings in his room were obvious nods, so I questioned him from the get-go. 

 

I don't see Solas as an antagonist because I just see and have seen him as an easy out.  The minute I finished the main game I guess I knew where they were going to take it and I really want to be challenged and surprised.  As I said in my post just above this, I saw him as a smart a%$ who challenged people in your party.  He was a wealth of knowledge and I constantly had him in my party.  He could be tricked (convo between Blackwall, Sera and Solas), could act out and wasn't elusive in his like or dislike of things regardless of company.

 

He is my favourite character in the game.  It's disappointing that his story will end, potentially, in DA4 with you having to destroy him.  The last of the ancient elves and you're going to destroy him?  I like my elves!

 

I suppose we'll just have to wait and see but regardless I'm sure I'll continue the DA story, but I'm allowed to be disappointed when they take characters I enjoy and put them into roles that I don't associate them with.

[Smudjygirl]

@Smudjygirl  Sorry I have to keep doing this but my MS Explorer at work won't allow me to quote!

 

I suppose I see Solas differently.  He was the wise smart a%$ who challenged other members of your group, particularly Dorian, Iron Bull and Blackwall.  Individuals who were either being dishonest about who they were or who were coming from rigid and questionable background and were accustomed to controlling others.  Whether or not they planned it from the beginning, I suppose I see it was lazy because it's something that seems 'obvious' to those in the world of Thedas.  Let's blame the elves, they're all bad, kind of thing.  I mean, the Dalish are attacked by people and if they live in cities, they're crammed into filthy poverty striken areas with little hope of advancement.  The only place they were treated more like equals was if they ended up in the circles.  Just like 'let's blame the mages' as so much of the structure of DA:2 seemed to be built around making mages seems as violent and irresponsible and dangerous as possible. 

 

I would just far have preferred seeing them actually challenge the beliefs of the people of Thedas (us players) rather than giving in to those beliefs and making them canon.  Yes, you're right, elves are bad and so are mages.

 

I suppose I'm just far more of a cheer for the underdog kind of girl.  I would have liked to see them flesh out the story in a way I didn't expect, rather than having them just decide that because this was the easiest direction to go in, it would be what players wanted.  I want more meat to my story.  Now, I'm not comparing these two wildly different games, but more storytelling like DAO and all of the Witcher games would be appreciated by me.  Challenge me Bioware, surprise me.  As an 'older gamer' I suppose I'm interested in something far more complex.

 

No worries, i'm quite interested in your point of view.

 

They've sort of always done that though. In Origins it was "evil human lord", in 2 it was "Evil Mages/Templars" and in Inquisition it was "Evil Tevinter Magisters"/incompetent Chantry. In fact it is almost impossible to do a story without some sort of twist that people saw coming. What i am interested in potentially seeing in the next game (if Solas is the big bad) is a more having to come to terms with fighting against someone you know, and potentially loved, and maybe coming to terms with the fact he can't be redeemed. That kind of story is so rare yet so satisfying i would hate to see this opportunity missed. Otherwise we get another game exactly like Origins, 2 and Inquisition. I think so much more could be done with a story that has an already established connection and conflict with a protagonist and an antagonist.

 

I can agree with the fact Inquisition's stroytelling was far weaker that Origins and even 2, but i think Trespasser was a step back into the impending doom and unexpected plots twists that people expect in these games.

[Sah291]

@Smudjygirl  Sorry I have to keep doing this but my MS Explorer at work won't allow me to quote!

 

I suppose I see Solas differently.  He was the wise smart a%$ who challenged other members of your group, particularly Dorian, Iron Bull and Blackwall.  Individuals who were either being dishonest about who they were or who were coming from rigid and questionable background and were accustomed to controlling others.  Whether or not they planned it from the beginning, I suppose I see it was lazy because it's something that seems 'obvious' to those in the world of Thedas.  Let's blame the elves, they're all bad, kind of thing.  I mean, the Dalish are attacked by people and if they live in cities, they're crammed into filthy poverty striken areas with little hope of advancement.  The only place they were treated more like equals was if they ended up in the circles.  Just like 'let's blame the mages' as so much of the structure of DA:2 seemed to be built around making mages seems as violent and irresponsible and dangerous as possible. 

 

I would just far have preferred seeing them actually challenge the beliefs of the people of Thedas (us players) rather than giving in to those beliefs and making them canon.  Yes, you're right, elves are bad and so are mages.

 

I suppose I'm just far more of a cheer for the underdog kind of girl.  I would have liked to see them flesh out the story in a way I didn't expect, rather than having them just decide that because this was the easiest direction to go in, it would be what players wanted.  I want more meat to my story.  Now, I'm not comparing these two wildly different games, but more storytelling like DAO and all of the Witcher games would be appreciated by me.  Challenge me Bioware, surprise me.  As an 'older gamer' I suppose I'm interested in something far more complex.

 

These are all really good points, I have to agree you, on some level it was difficult for me to watch Solas become the villain, because it sorta discredits a lot of his points of view, doesn't it? This was done also, in DA2, with Anders. It sort of discredits points that character made about the values of freedom, etc.. Yes, see he was crazy all along folks, so lets go back to circles, etc. I get what you mean. On the other hand, I get why they did it. I don't feel like it was lazy writing on Weekes' part, though, since he seems to have really enjoyed writing that character. I also wouldn't be surprised if things aren't how they seem on the surface.

[Abyss108]

@Abyss108  I didn't like Logain's character at all but he had motivation to benefit his people which I didn't expect because the minute you encounter him you can tell he's a pr&ck.  I didn't say he was right, but I feel his character twist was better.  Was I surprised Solas was Fen'Harel?  No.  He had way too much information about he world, the fade, ancient artefacts and wore a wolf jaw around his neck and the paintings in his room were obvious nods, so I questioned him from the get-go. 

 

I don't see Solas as an antagonist because I just see and have seen him as an easy out.  The minute I finished the main game I guess I knew where they were going to take it and I really want to be challenged and surprised.  As I said in my post just above this, I saw him as a smart a%$ who challenged people in your party.  He was a wealth of knowledge and I constantly had him in my party.  He could be tricked (convo between Blackwall, Sera and Solas), could act out and wasn't elusive in his like or dislike of things regardless of company.

 

He is my favourite character in the game.  It's disappointing that his story will end, potentially, in DA4 with you having to destroy him.  The last of the ancient elves and you're going to destroy him?  I like my elves!

 

I suppose we'll just have to wait and see but regardless I'm sure I'll continue the DA story, but I'm allowed to be disappointed when they take characters I enjoy and put them into roles that I don't associate them with.

 

Yeah, I definitely understand where you are coming from.

 

For me, Solas is Loghain done right. Loghain was supposed to be doing what he thought was right, but I always found it completely unsympathetic. He wasn't complex or gray to me, he was just an idiot doing terrible things and hiding behind paranoia about the evils of Orlais. Solas, on the other hand, I 100% get why he thinks he has to do what he's doing. I think he's wrong for doing it, but I understand it. I might do the same in his situation. 

 

I'm definitely going to be disappointed if the only option in DA4 is to kill him, but I don't think it will be. I think Weekes gave us the choice for a reason. I don't think any ending is going to be butterflies and rainbows, but I do think there will be multiple options for this.

 

If you follow Weekess twitter or interviews, it's obvious he cares about Solas a lot. So I don't think he's going to write a game in which Solas gets dismissed as simply being "evil".

[nightscrawl]

hey guys a quick question u recommend to restart the game to play trespasser or just play the DLC?

Just go for it. After playing it you can decide whether you want to play through the whole game again with different choices, or not.

[CardButton]

Inquisitor is bland and boring, and I'm absolutely happy if we could move away from him. People make a lot of assumptions about what role Solas will play anyway. Maybe it will connect to Solas, maybe not. We don't know. It may end up being about about Tevinter and archedemons, we don't know, and I doubt a forum suggestions would make developers sway one way or the other on the big issue like this, artistic integrity and all that jazz, so this is just a discussion about whether we want to see the Inquisitor returns. I say no and you say yes. That's all there is to it.

OK ... I'd hate to call you on it, but...

 

There are DA fans who would like to see a new PC over a returning one because they see the genuine potential of such a character and feel that it is enough to sacrifice the potential of a returning Inquisitor PC.  That is a very valid opinion, one of which I admire and somewhat share ... though the potential of both together I feel surpasses either individually.  They feel they could get a better story from the new PC, but they aren't denying the fact that their is still a story to tell with the Inquisitor.  That being said, considering how Anti-Inquisitor you seem to be (to the point where you call it "wishful thinking" that those of us who still see enough potential in the Inquisitor as a character for them to return in DA4 as a playable PC) it does seem that your core reason for wanting a new PC is ... that you don't want a returning Inquisitor PC, because YOU found them bland and boring.  

 

While I do agree that the method of role play with the Inquisitor was more restrictive than with PC's of previous installments (a combination of being the leader of an organization and almost exclusively dealing with story elements that began in previous games ... hurting the characters inherent connection to those elements) it was never bad enough to prevent good role play.  Sometimes you have to create a Character that fits the setting that is given, you aren't often granted free range in an RPG, creativity within restrictions is necessary at times.  It sounds crappy to say, but if you could not find a way to role play your PC in DA:I so that they would at least be somewhat interesting to you, then it is just as much your fault as it is the game. 

 

I find intrinsic value with the Inquisitor returning because I feel the game can finally give me a chance at finding out who they are.  Solas mentions something intriguing to you in one of your discussions with him where the title became more important than the name, in reference to himself as well of course.  The characters of Trevelyan, Levellan, Cadash, and Adaar (both literally and figuratively in DA:I) were lost to the character of the Inquisitor, because they considered the "Inquisitor" or the "Herald of Andraste" as people who were more important (kind of fitting that we didn't get origin stories if this was intended then lol).  Even your companions and LI's seemed to have issues at times separating the ideal from the reality of the Inquisitor.

 

Long story short the reason I find the prospect of the Inquisitor's return is ironically because I don't want the Inquisitor to return, I want the chance to define who that character is when they aren't forced to be a simple title and I think the pursuit of Solas in Tevinter has a pretty good chance of giving me that. 

[nightscrawl]

I find intrinsic value with the Inquisitor returning because I feel the game can finally give me a chance at finding out who they are.  Solas mentions something intriguing to you in one of your discussions with him where the title became more important than the name, in reference to himself as well of course.  The characters of Trevelyan, Levellan, Cadash, and Adaar (both literally and figuratively in DA:I) were lost to the character of the Inquisitor, because they considered the "Inquisitor" or the "Herald of Andraste" as people who were more important (kind of fitting that we didn't get origin stories if this was intended then lol).  Even your companions and LI's seemed to have issues at times separating the ideal from the reality of the Inquisitor.

I think this was absolutely intentional on the part of the devs. I also incorporate it into my Inquisitor's RP. I know who he is as a person, but the rest of Thedas does not; they only know the Inquisitor or the Herald of Andraste.

[Battlebloodmage]

OK ... I'd hate to call you on it, but...

 

There are DA fans who would like to see a new PC over a returning one because they see the genuine potential of such a character and feel that it is enough to sacrifice the potential of a returning Inquisitor PC.  That is a very valid opinion, one of which I admire and somewhat share ... though the potential of both together I feel surpasses either individually.  They feel they could get a better story from the new PC, but they aren't denying the fact that their is still a story to tell with the Inquisitor.  That being said, considering how Anti-Inquisitor you seem to be (to the point where you call it "wishful thinking" that those of us who still see enough potential in the Inquisitor as a character for them to return in DA4 as a playable PC) it does seem that your core reason for wanting a new PC is ... that you don't want a returning Inquisitor PC, because YOU found them bland and boring.  

 

While I do agree that the method of role play with the Inquisitor was more restrictive than with PC's of previous installments (a combination of being the leader of an organization and almost exclusively dealing with story elements that began in previous games ... hurting the characters inherent connection to those elements) it was never bad enough to prevent good role play.  Sometimes you have to create a Character that fits the setting that is given, you aren't often granted free range in an RPG, creativity within restrictions is necessary at times.  It sounds crappy to say, but if you could not find a way to role play your PC in DA:I so that they would at least be somewhat interesting to you, then it is just as much your fault as it is the game. 

 

I find intrinsic value with the Inquisitor returning because I feel the game can finally give me a chance at finding out who they are.  Solas mentions something intriguing to you in one of your discussions with him where the title became more important than the name, in reference to himself as well of course.  The characters of Trevelyan, Levellan, Cadash, and Adaar (both literally and figuratively in DA:I) were lost to the character of the Inquisitor, because they considered the "Inquisitor" or the "Herald of Andraste" as people who were more important (kind of fitting that we didn't get origin stories if this was intended then lol).  Even your companions and LI's seemed to have issues at times separating the ideal from the reality of the Inquisitor.

 

Long story short the reason I find the prospect of the Inquisitor's return is ironically because I don't want the Inquisitor to return, I want the chance to define who that character is when they aren't forced to be a simple title and I think the pursuit of Solas in Tevinter has a pretty good job at giving me that chance. 

More like I just can't identify with the role I'm being put into. I enjoy Hawke greatly and wouldn't have minded him to be back but I don't want to play as him anymore because I see DA as more of a world with different heroes than a single savior. I call it wishful thinking because I see it as a low chance it would happen, not that there's anything against people who want him back. We all have our opinions, I may not agree with it, and I just basically stated that it's a waste of time since the decision like this would be so big that no amount of posts from the forum would make them based such a decision on the forum. I want a new hero, and I wouldn't oppose to inquisitor shows up during Solas quest like with Hawke. I want a perspective from Tevinter as a Tevinter person. I don't want to be an Inquisitor again. Nothing more, nothing less to it.

[CardButton]

More like I just can't identify with the role I'm being put into. I enjoy Hawke greatly and wouldn't have minded him to be back but I don't want to play as him anymore because I see DA as more of a world with different heroes than a single savior. I call it wishful thinking because I see it as a low chance it would happen, not that there's anything against people who want him back. We all have our opinions, I may not agree with it, and I just basically stated that it's a waste of time since the decision like this would be so big that no amount of posts from the forum would make them based such a decision on the forum. I want a new hero, and I wouldn't oppose to inquisitor shows up during Solas quest like with Hawke. I want a perspective from Tevinter as a Tevinter person. I don't want to be an Inquisitor again. Nothing more, nothing less to it.

Of course your entitled to your opinion  . If you cant identify with the role your being put into, that is a perfectly valid reason for not wanting the Inquisitor to return, I didn't say it wasn't ... I just figured that it was your core reason.    As for the idea that Bioware would make a decision based off of forums like this, I don't think anyone thought that they would, but I do think many of us believe that the chance of a returning Inquisitor is a genuine possibility.  

 

That being said ... stranger things have happened.  After playing through DA:I a couple of times (and replaying DA2) it would actually make a lot of sense if Hawke was initially intended as the original PC for DA:I in the early stages of the games development and Bioware changed their minds due to the negative fan reactions they got from DA2.  I have no way of proving it of course, but considering the way DA2 and DA:I played out I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. 

[AresKeith]

The odds of DA4 not being about Solas are the same as the odds would have been for ME3 not being about the reapers.

I mean, sure, its possible Bioware just spent the entire previous game setting up a villain just to ignore him, its possible all the big speeches about how someone has to stop Solas were just an elaborate prank the devs were playing on us, its possible the devs talking about Solas being an antagonist were just lies...

He most likely will be in the next game but I doubt the whole game is gonna revolve around his story

If anything he'll be in Act 3

[BansheeOwnage]

I honestly hope not.  I hope that if they make a new DA game, that they realise how integral your character having a backstory is.  I'd prefer to start as a character a la Origins, where I have a small snippet to start my journey with.  So I know why my character is where they are and what they hope to accomplish there.

I agree with you about backstory. But if DA4 has the Inquisitor, there is plenty of backstory in place! More than an origin story could have. You do know why your character is there and what they hope to accomplish.

[BansheeOwnage]

 

I'm glad you're happy with it, honestly, but I really disliked this direction and never considered Solas an antagonist, just an easy out.

It can't be an easy way out, because that was the plan for Solas since his conception. And you keep using "antagonist" in a way that makes me think "villain" and/or "nemesis". An antagonist is simply someone who, to varying degrees, opposes the protagonist. He most certainly is that. I'm not angry at Bioware for making him a villain though, because he isn't one. I want my antagonists and their goals to be believable and somewhat relatable. I want them to have depth, and be complex. They gave us that with Solas. They can still screw it up, of course, but we'll just have to see.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I honestly hope not.  I hope that if they make a new DA game, that they realise how integral your character having a backstory is.  I'd prefer to start as a character a la Origins, where I have a small snippet to start my journey with.  So I know why my character is where they are and what they hope to accomplish there. 

I hope they don't. The origins in Dragon Age: Origins are one of my least favorite parts of the game, and one of the reasons Dragon Age: Origins is my least favorite Dragon Age game. The more predefined the protagonist's backstory is, the less of you 'your' character is. While having preset protagonists can work great, that's not why I play Bioware games. I'd much rather they keep doing what they did with the Inquisitor in keeping the backstory vague and/or mostly up to the player. 

[BansheeOwnage]

I hope they don't. The origins in Dragon Age: Origins are one of my least favorite parts of the game, and one of the reasons Dragon Age: Origins is my least favorite Dragon Age game. The more predefined the protagonist's backstory is, the less of you 'your' character is. While having preset protagonists can work great, that's not why I play Bioware games. I'd much rather they keep doing what they did with the Inquisitor in keeping the backstory vague and/or mostly up to the player. 

Well, of course I think most people want some sort of balance here. Too specific, and it ruins roleplay. Too vague, and you don't actually have a character to roleplay.

 

As for my personal opinion, I thought DA:I's approach was too vague. I think the key is to have a backstory that makes as few choices for you as possible, though that is easier said than done.

[In Exile]

Well, of course I think most people want some sort of balance here. Too specific, and it ruins roleplay. Too vague, and you don't actually have a character to roleplay.

 

As for my personal opinion, I thought DA:I's approach was too vague. I think the key is to have a backstory that makes as few choices for you as possible, though that is easier said than done.

 

The problem with DA:O isn't detail. It's that not only does the origin not give you a reason to care about the main plot, it often gives you a reason to actively oppose doing anything about it, and Ostagar isn't very good at actually establishing why abandoning Ferelden to get the Orlesian GWs isn't the best option. 

[BansheeOwnage]

The problem with DA:O isn't detail. It's that not only does the origin not give you a reason to care about the main plot, it often gives you a reason to actively oppose doing anything about it, and Ostagar isn't very good at actually establishing why abandoning Ferelden to get the Orlesian GWs isn't the best option. 

I don't think an origin necessarily needs to be directly related to the main plot, it just connects the character to the main plot.

[Rogue Unit]

Bioware screwed up not making Hawke the inquistor and they will again if the Inquistor doesn't return for DA4. But the one arm thing cripples arches, dual wielding rogues, S&S and Two handed Warriors. Basically anything inquistor except mages are serverly handicapped in a fight.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Bioware screwed up not making Hawke the inquistor and they will again if the Inquistor doesn't return for DA4. But the one arm thing cripples arches, dual wielding rogues, S&S and Two handed Warriors. Basically anything inquistor except mages are serverly handicapped in a fight.

Or they can get a prosthetic limb. We had prosthetic limbs in medieval times that could hold shields and weapons, and that is without magic and the engineering prowess of the Dwarves and Qunari. 

 

 

Well, of course I think most people want some sort of balance here. Too specific, and it ruins roleplay. Too vague, and you don't actually have a character to roleplay.

 

As for my personal opinion, I thought DA:I's approach was too vague. I think the key is to have a backstory that makes as few choices for you as possible, though that is easier said than done.

Do you have a game in mind that strikes the sweet spot to use as an example? 

[Sah291]

 

Do you have a game in mind that strikes the sweet spot to use as an example? 

 

 

I agree with Banshee, DAI was a bit too vague on backstory for me. But backstory need not be a mission we have to play through. I actually really liked the way DAI handled it, with scenes like the one you get with Josie asking about your character and their past, or the one with Viv when she asks a Dalish mage about how they learned magic, etc. I'd like to see more of that sort of approach. We are always grilling the NPCs with a million questions, after all, it could stand to be a little less one sided. 

[Nefla]

Bioware screwed up not making Hawke the inquistor and they will again if the Inquistor doesn't return for DA4. But the one arm thing cripples arches, dual wielding rogues, S&S and Two handed Warriors. Basically anything inquistor except mages are serverly handicapped in a fight.

I find your lack of prosthetic attachments disturbing

[Battlebloodmage]

[CardButton]

I find your lack of prosthetic attachments disturbing

I like the idea, but whatever we get will have to be a bit more complex.  While it's true that every Quizzy still has full access to their sword arm I'm more or less certain the Inquisitor lost their arm up past the elbow.   While I'm totally on board with the idea of a prosthetic, whatever we get is going to at bare minimum need to serve as a replacement for the missing joint as well.  That being said with the magic and rudimentary tech portrayed in the setting (along with the people and resources the Quizzy has at their disposal) its not out of the range of possibilities. 

[Nefla]

I like the idea, but whatever we get will have to be a bit more complex.  While it's true that every Quizzy still has full access to their sword arm I'm more or less certain the Inquisitor lost their arm up past the elbow.   While I'm totally on board with the idea of a prosthetic, whatever we get is going to at bare minimum need to serve as a replacement for the missing joint as well.  That being said with the magic and rudimentary tech portrayed in the setting (along with the people and resources the Quizzy has at their disposal) its not out of the range of possibilities. 

Oh? I thought it was just the hand and wrist! In any case I still want my devices