314 réponses à ce sujet

[Dai Grepher]

Cutting down Ben-Hassrath? Sure, if they can spot them. More than likely, it'll result in a greater level of indiscriminate abuse of city elves, while human qunari freely observe. Join Tevinter? You have more faith in Thedosians than I do. At any rate, it's my belief that the qunari feel the situation is desperate because of Solas, who they probably feel is too great a threat to ignore, but can't trust the southerners to help, because their organizations have been infiltrated.

I meant the Qunari ben-hassrath. As for the spies, they are unreliable to the Qunari. Look at Jerran in Trespasser. Look at all the Tal-Vashoth. All Ferelden and Orlais would have to do is improve their security and properly verify new soldiers.

As for the Qunari, I don't think the Triumvirate was even concerned with the Inquisitor. They were probably ignoring him, which made Viddasala believe that she had to act on her own. Had the Triumvirate acted, they would have approached the Inquisition with the information about the agent of Fen'Harel through Hissrad to see how the Inquisition would react first.

But we should probably move this to private messages.

[Cute Nug]

So the Inquisitor can arrive in 1.8 months. In regards to my original claim, I am wholly unperturbed.

 

Even with that in mind, we are ignoring one important factor in the Orlesian noble families, who will all be traveling with their own retinues. Even if the Inquisitor manages the impressive 11 day journey to the fortress, it amounts to nothing when it only leads to more time spent waiting around  for the families to arrive. This was definitely not worth the homework. 

 

Don't they all just use the fast travel magic pyramids and have magic maps to decide where they want to teleport to?

 

With all the psycho bears and wolves every hundred feet in Thedas overland travel is impossible without the protagonist and maybe three companions to kill stuff.

[KaiserShep]

I meant the Qunari ben-hassrath. As for the spies, they are unreliable to the Qunari. Look at Jerran in Trespasser. Look at all the Tal-Vashoth. All Ferelden and Orlais would have to do is improve their security and properly verify new soldiers.As for the Qunari, I don't think the Triumvirate was even concerned with the Inquisitor. They were probably ignoring him, which made Viddasala believe that she had to act on her own. Had the Triumvirate acted, they would have approached the Inquisition with the information about the agent of Fen'Harel through Hissrad to see how the Inquisition would react first.But we should probably move this to private messages.

Except its really the Inquisition's ties to the agents of Fen'Harel that get their attention, and of course the mark, which they knew had something to do with the elven orb, and even knew that it was given to the ancient Tevinter magister monster.

[The Baconer]

Well clearly not since the game developers say it couldn't have been. Although someone using Dagna's estimate might argue otherwise.

In any case, if the templars can get to Therinfal from Val Royeaux in good time, then the Orlesian nobles can in better time since they would be traveling lighter. And like I wrote, if they can't, then all it means is the nobles were already closer to Therinfal to begin with.


And this means he can't travel?


His claim is shaky because it's through marriage, but as to how Fereldans feel about Orlesians, there has been an ongoing effort to improve peace between the two nations ever since Cailan ruled. An exchange of culture between nobles would be common, as was the case with Bryce going to Orlais before Origins, and Teagan going to Orlais in Masked Empire.


Committed, no doubt. Capable though?


Impotent or indifferent? They just didn't have all that much involvement. But those Qunari sure were impotent. The whole lot of them were destroyed by anywhere between 1 to 4 people.

But I think my only point was that this is a lot of ground to cover. Did the Qunari really have the forces for that?

I would expect the Templars' trip to take quite a few months. Less so for the nobles, and even less for the Inquisition of course, but a good investment of time for all involved.

Yes, it could infer that Abernache travels about, but it's not a certainty that he spends a significant amount of time in Ferelden or was already in the country when he received word. The same goes for his peers.

Ferelden is still wary, or hostile at worst, regarding Orlais. Tensions still remain in Trespasser. Heck, an official accord for peace only happens with the Inquisition's participation.

I believe that the Qunari believe(d) they were capable of executing the plan.

Impotent, 100%. If they were so apathetic toward their own country being laid to waste, the Qunari wouldn't have much to worry about in that regard.

[Kimarous]

It's a saying. Nobody saying that is calling someone a horse. 

 

 

In a hilarious bit of appropriate timing, I had a tab open as I read that where the audio went "Yeah, I'm too fast for you, I'm a horse!" XD

 

On-topic, I'm not the best suited to debate things objectively, seeing as how I haven't even finished a single playthrough yet and I rarely play more than a single playthrough anyway, but I will express my in-universe rationale. My Inquisitor is a Cadash warrior who sincerely believes herself to be the Herald and isn't proud of her past as a Carta thug. Based on this, she sided with the mages over the templars for three reasons:

- The mages invited her while the templars openly rejected her

- She thinks people who willingly inject lyrium into their bodies are not of sound mind

- She reasons that, by helping the mages, she will get the support of the entire faction; the templars, at best, would probably only provide a PORTION of their forces, which could prove insufficient to close the Breach and she wasn't willing to risk it

 

Even if you argue "but there's better stuff on the templar side / Samson sucks compared to the Venatori leader / other 'irrefutably objective' pro-templar arguments", I can't reconcile why my character would even consider such a notion.

[Cantina]

When it comes down to is: Temples or Mages? It is right by you, not everyone else.

 

Now if someone were to ask me directly, “Which side did I choose?” I always side with the Mages.

 

I won’t go into a long rant about how (in my opinion) the Mages are better seeing as I have done that before and a few people have already done so in this thread.  I will however point out my choice was based on not just the events from DAI but the previous games and the events in the book “Dragon Age Asunder.”

 

But what really bothers me is: this so-called choice to begin with.  Back in DAO or even DA2 the choices you were presented with seem to truly make sense and really made me stop, think and choose. The only time DAI has this is when your Inquisitor is passing judgment on someone.

 

Back in DAO you’re in the middle of a war and trying to rebuild an army that was lost. You did not hear Alistair go, “Well you need to decide to ask the Dwarves or the Elves for their help.”  You could say to me, “You had to choose between the Mages or Templars in the Tower.” That situation was different.

 

One location with two possible outcomes to which your Warden had to really think if the tower was indeed worth saving.

 

Were as in DAI you got a choice between time magic or a Mystique wannabe demon. These two events are different and not in the same location.  As these events are separate you would think it would be important for the Inquisitor to aide both. But you can’t. Instead the developers forced a pointless choice upon the player. This choice is only there to force the progress of the story instead the story having a natural flow.

 

You could say, “Well aren’t most choices just there to progress the story?” Yes, and no. In DAO the choice between Mages and Templars was more of urgency. Your character was there in the moment. This lead to some serious thinking. “Should the tower be save?” Etc. etc.

 

The Inquisitor has the opportunity in DAI to see what is going on with the Mages but not the Templars. Why is this? Did the developers forget? Was the glimpse into the Mages some sort of last minute change? Whatever the reason maybe it makes no sense to allow the player to see into one faction but not the other.

 

Choices in the game should be based on a reason or several reasons. Not based on which faction you support. That’s like choosing which American football team you support. Then your whole life changes for the good and/or worse after.

 

DAI should have allowed the player to pursue both factions. Have a mixture of the Venatori and Red Templars marching on Haven. Then later allow the player to aid both Lilly and Cullen in gong after these factions. Then while in the Arbor Wilds have the player encounter both generals from each of these factions.  

 

Again, look back at DAO. If the player had to choose between going after Lohgain or the Archdemon the game would have turned out differently and not illustrate the importance of how both factions are equally a threat. Whereas in DAI they separate these factions and allow the player to choose which faction is worse than the other. Which then falls into the realm of why even have both factions in the game or allow the player to pursue both?

 

A main villain having lackeys is fine, hell its expected. But when the developers throw in two different sets of lackey factions or choosing mages or the Templars to aide in your endeavor it makes me feel as though the developers are trying to branch out to new ideas. New ideas are fine, sometimes they can be great. But not all ideas are good ideas. Putting too much in a game without much payout is about as much fun as going to see a superhero movie with too many villains. And once the movie is over you realize the production team seem to care more about stuffing the movie then the actual story. 

 

The developers for DA4 should really focus on how well the story flows from one point to the next. Instead of the player lathering their body in their factions colors, and screaming at the top of his or her lungs to show their support.

 

In any game that has a story, choices for the player should come off as a natural circumstance. Your character walks through the woods and finds an injured citizen. Do you save them? Kill them? Or just walk away? Then later find out whatever your choice was has rewards and/or consequences.

 

When a player is randomly dropped into choice with no real reason for the choice to be there, it makes me as a player feel as though the developers are behind me, breathing down my neck and yelling, "Choose! Choose! Choose!" Followed by them twirling their mustache and tenting their fingers. 

[Dai Grepher]

I would expect the Templars' trip to take quite a few months. Less so for the nobles, and even less for the Inquisition of course, but a good investment of time for all involved.

Okay. But how long it takes the templars to get there should have no implication against how long it takes the nobles or the Inquisition to get there.

Yes, it could infer that Abernache travels about, but it's not a certainty that he spends a significant amount of time in Ferelden or was already in the country when he received word. The same goes for his peers.

As long as it's possible, that's all that matters.

Ferelden is still wary, or hostile at worst, regarding Orlais.

Based on what? And if only wary, they are still allowed to visit Ferelden, aren't they?

Tensions still remain in Trespasser.

Only because Orlais is trying to absorb the Inquisition's might into their own.

Heck, an official accord for peace only happens with the Inquisition's participation.

Eh, depends who rules. The Ferelden monarch will always approach the Inquisition with the offer first, and if its Anora representing Ferelden it all goes over rather easily with the Inquisition doing little. But this doesn't mean Ferelden and Orlais don't already have other agreements or a standing peace treaty. Anora's letter states she is interested in a new peace treaty. Which indicates a reaffirmation after the events in Halamshiral. Or if Gaspard now rules, Anora seeks a peace treaty with the new ruler.

I believe that the Qunari believe(d) they were capable of executing the plan.

A lot of ground to cover. A lot that could go wrong. Tevinter still going strong.

Impotent, 100%. If they were so apathetic toward their own country being laid to waste, the Qunari wouldn't have much to worry about in that regard.

But were they apathetic? I mean, when we first run up to mages and templars in the Hinterlands we say that we are not their enemy. They attack us anyway. Ferelden was likely met with the same hostility. So they logically pulled their soldiers back to protect the more populated regions, and let the mages and templars kill each other.

The only questionable area is Crestwood, but that may have been due to the Mayor not requesting help for fear of his past deeds coming to light. And the local soldiers may have been busy elsewhere.

[Dai Grepher]

Were as in DAI you got a choice between time magic or a Mystique wannabe demon. These two events are different and not in the same location.  As these events are separate you would think it would be important for the Inquisitor to aide both. But you can’t. Instead the developers forced a pointless choice upon the player. This choice is only there to force the progress of the story instead the story having a natural flow.

Agreed. It makes no sense that you can't do both. It's logical that you can't get the mages if you go after templars first, because Alexius just leaves with the mages by the time you get the templars, and the mages flee to avoid Ferelden's monarch(s) and the templars. But you should be able to stop Alexius first and then go straight to Therinfal afterward. Redcliffe is on the way to Therinfal anyway, and your meeting with Alexius technically only takes place over the course of about 10 minutes. So you should be able to leave and go to Therinfal while the mages pack their bags and head for Haven.

[sniper_arrow]

When it comes down to is: Temples or Mages? It is right by you, not everyone else.

 

Now if someone were to ask me directly, “Which side did I choose?” I always side with the Mages.

 

I won’t go into a long rant about how (in my opinion) the Mages are better seeing as I have done that before and a few people have already done so in this thread.  I will however point out my choice was based on not just the events from DAI but the previous games and the events in the book “Dragon Age Asunder.”

 

But what really bothers me is: this so-called choice to begin with.  Back in DAO or even DA2 the choices you were presented with seem to truly make sense and really made me stop, think and choose. The only time DAI has this is when your Inquisitor is passing judgment on someone.

 

Back in DAO you’re in the middle of a war and trying to rebuild an army that was lost. You did not hear Alistair go, “Well you need to decide to ask the Dwarves or the Elves for their help.”  You could say to me, “You had to choose between the Mages or Templars in the Tower.” That situation was different.

 

One location with two possible outcomes to which your Warden had to really think if the tower was indeed worth saving.

 

Were as in DAI you got a choice between time magic or a Mystique wannabe demon. These two events are different and not in the same location.  As these events are separate you would think it would be important for the Inquisitor to aide both. But you can’t. Instead the developers forced a pointless choice upon the player. This choice is only there to force the progress of the story instead the story having a natural flow.

 

You could say, “Well aren’t most choices just there to progress the story?” Yes, and no. In DAO the choice between Mages and Templars was more of urgency. Your character was there in the moment. This lead to some serious thinking. “Should the tower be save?” Etc. etc.

 

The Inquisitor has the opportunity in DAI to see what is going on with the Mages but not the Templars. Why is this? Did the developers forget? Was the glimpse into the Mages some sort of last minute change? Whatever the reason maybe it makes no sense to allow the player to see into one faction but not the other.

 

Choices in the game should be based on a reason or several reasons. Not based on which faction you support. That’s like choosing which American football team you support. Then your whole life changes for the good and/or worse after.

 

DAI should have allowed the player to pursue both factions. Have a mixture of the Venatori and Red Templars marching on Haven. Then later allow the player to aid both Lilly and Cullen in gong after these factions. Then while in the Arbor Wilds have the player encounter both generals from each of these factions.  

 

Again, look back at DAO. If the player had to choose between going after Lohgain or the Archdemon the game would have turned out differently and not illustrate the importance of how both factions are equally a threat. Whereas in DAI they separate these factions and allow the player to choose which faction is worse than the other. Which then falls into the realm of why even have both factions in the game or allow the player to pursue both?

 

A main villain having lackeys is fine, hell its expected. But when the developers throw in two different sets of lackey factions or choosing mages or the Templars to aide in your endeavor it makes me feel as though the developers are trying to branch out to new ideas. New ideas are fine, sometimes they can be great. But not all ideas are good ideas. Putting too much in a game without much payout is about as much fun as going to see a superhero movie with too many villains. And once the movie is over you realize the production team seem to care more about stuffing the movie then the actual story. 

 

The developers for DA4 should really focus on how well the story flows from one point to the next. Instead of the player lathering their body in their factions colors, and screaming at the top of his or her lungs to show their support.

 

In any game that has a story, choices for the player should come off as a natural circumstance. Your character walks through the woods and finds an injured citizen. Do you save them? Kill them? Or just walk away? Then later find out whatever your choice was has rewards and/or consequences.

 

When a player is randomly dropped into choice with no real reason for the choice to be there, it makes me as a player feel as though the developers are behind me, breathing down my neck and yelling, "Choose! Choose! Choose!" Followed by them twirling their mustache and tenting their fingers. 

 

Bioware wants us to make those "hard" choices, even if those choices don't make sense sometimes (like this one IMO). 

[AlanC9]

But you should be able to stop Alexius first and then go straight to Therinfal afterward. Redcliffe is on the way to Therinfal anyway, and your meeting with Alexius technically only takes place over the course of about 10 minutes. So you should be able to leave and go to Therinfal while the mages pack their bags and head for Haven.

Of course, if anyone at Bio had noticed that, they'd have just moved Therinfal someplace else.

Let's all drop this nonsense about a "natural flow." Having some event pre-empt something you wanted to do while you're doing something else is every bit as natural as being able to do both things. There's no particular reason the universe should be set up to let the Herald do everything she wants.

[The Baconer]

Okay. But how long it takes the templars to get there should have no implication against how long it takes the nobles or the Inquisition to get there.

 

Only in the sense that it might give us an idea of how much time has passed before the Inquisition can discuss pursuing the Templars or Mages. 

 

 

As long as it's possible, that's all that matters.

 

Fair enough. 

 

 

Based on what? And if only wary, they are still allowed to visit Ferelden, aren't they?

 

Based on rather recent hostilities. Being aware of their own weakness while also being aware of nobles like Gaspard calling for war. Then there's the Orlesian attempt to wrangle the Inquisition. 

 

They can certainly visit Ferelden, but I wouldn't expect them to be received the way visiting nobility usually are. Being forced to make camp or stay at an inn instead of being given space at the local manor or castle etc. 

 

 

A lot of ground to cover. A lot that could go wrong. Tevinter still going strong.

 

Right, that's why I said that I believed that they believed they could succeed, not that I believed they would. Still would cause a remarkable amount of damage in any event. 

 

 

 

But were they apathetic? I mean, when we first run up to mages and templars in the Hinterlands we say that we are not their enemy. They attack us anyway. Ferelden was likely met with the same hostility. So they logically pulled their soldiers back to protect the more populated regions, and let the mages and templars kill each other.

The only questionable area is Crestwood, but that may have been due to the Mayor not requesting help for fear of his past deeds coming to light. And the local soldiers may have been busy elsewhere.

 

No, I think they are weak, indifference was your claim. 

 

Redcliffe isn't some hovel. Being met with violent and unorganized resistance shouldn't be the signal to cut and run. The commoners would have been left to fend for themselves, without even being directed to move in or around fortified areas. In spite of this, they can get whooped by one boat, within their capital city no less. I'd rather give them the benefit of the doubt and say they are weak. 

[straykat]

Bioware wants us to make those "hard" choices, even if those choices don't make sense sometimes (like this one IMO). 

 

It doesn't even feel like much of a choice. It's feels divorced from the war context, and is more about flavor and sealing the breach. Only the Divine idea makes me really stop and think (which, of course, this contributes to.. just not directly).

[Dai Grepher]

Only in the sense that it might give us an idea of how much time has passed before the Inquisition can discuss pursuing the Templars or Mages.

I can get on board with that. It may conflict with Dagna's estimate however.
 

Fair enough.

Then we have an accord.
 

Based on rather recent hostilities.

The most recent hostility I can think of was actually Loghain keeping "Orlesian" Grey Warden's out of Ferelden during the Fifth Blight. The last aggressive move from Orlais was like 9:3 or something like that.
 

Being aware of their own weakness while also being aware of nobles like Gaspard calling for war.

If they had a military weakness, all the more reason to put on a strong front for Orlesian nobles.

Gaspard was indeed seen as a saber-rattler, but he was also known as a wannabe usurper. And Celene had been keeping him in check for almost two decades. One Grand Duke shooting his mouth off means nothing to Ferelden. He only becomes a concern if he manages to become Emperor, and even then Ferelden approaches the situation with a peace treaty. I think this shows that Ferelden is open to a cordial relationship with Orlais.
 

Then there's the Orlesian attempt to wrangle the Inquisition.

That happens after Champions of the Just, so it isn't applicable.
 

They can certainly visit Ferelden, but I wouldn't expect them to be received the way visiting nobility usually are. Being forced to make camp or stay at an inn instead of being given space at the local manor or castle etc.

Ugh! How gauche. Surely the great Ferelden can do better than that.

I think a lot of banns and arls would take it as a matter of pride to put on a strong show for the Orlesians. To show that they are better than the perception, if not those who perceive them. I think this was the thought process behind Anora commissioning the building of a university. It was to rival the one in Orlais. Ferelden and Orlais are peaceful with each other, but they are rivals. They would try to outdo each other.
 

Right, that's why I said that I believed that they believed they could succeed, not that I believed they would. Still would cause a remarkable amount of damage in any event.

I could see them thinking they could do it, but I think it would portray them as foolish in that case. They should know that it wouldn't work. And its too much of a risk. A wiser approach, and one right up the Qunari's alley, would be to take the lands closer to Par Vollen first in order to establish a strong foothold near the south. It would break the Accords as Dragon's Breath would, but at least they would have a battlefront with open supply lines connected to the homeland.

Would Dragon's Breath have caused damage? Sure. But the Qunari want to conquer, not destroy. Any dead banns would be replaced instantly. A dead monarch(s) would be replaced soon enough, not that they are needed to mount a military defense. And after the dust settled all the nations would understand that the Llomeryn Accords were broken and it would be time for a new exalted march against the Qunari. That's exactly what the Qunari would want to avoid.
 

No, I think they are weak, indifference was your claim.

Indifferent to Inquisition matters, yes. Not to Ferelden matters though. I just don't see why you think Ferelden is weak, I guess. Of course the blight weakened them, but in Awakening the Hero can build things back up, and create the Silver Order. The (other) monarch(s) of Ferelden can keep things stable elsewhere. Alistair or Anora can state that they can't spare troops because they are needed in the central Bannorn. If you save Amaranthine and build up Vigil's Keep you get an outcome with a strong military force.

I mean, I guess if you abandoned Redcliffe to the undead, Annulled the Circle, and lost most of your forces at Denerim, then maybe Ferelden would be weak after all that. But even so, we're talking 10 years later.
 

Redcliffe isn't some hovel. Being met with violent and unorganized resistance shouldn't be the signal to cut and run. The commoners would have been left to fend for themselves, without even being directed to move in or around fortified areas.

Are you referring to Alexius here? Because we don't know the circumstances of that. For all we know, Teagan had his soldiers patrolling outside Redcliffe because they had established a perimeter. Alexius' move came from inside that perimeter from within the mages themselves, which Teagan would not have expected. It's possible Alexius simply walked into Redcliffe Castle as if he were a guest and then simply locked Teagan out.
 

In spite of this, they can get whooped by one boat, within their capital city no less. I'd rather give them the benefit of the doubt and say they are weak.

The fire ship? That's an extraordinary circumstance. Like 9/11. The delivery of a large payload through one small unsecured method. The Venatori finding one security flaw in a city and suicide bombing it is not a fair indication of Ferelden's military might as a whole.

That would have been an awesome side quest though.

[The Baconer]

The most recent hostility I can think of was actually Loghain keeping "Orlesian" Grey Warden's out of Ferelden during the Fifth Blight. The last aggressive move from Orlais was like 9:3 or something like that.

Or the brutal occupation that is recent enough for people to stil remember firsthand.

Ugh! How gauche. Surely the great Ferelden can do better than that.

Nobody regards Ferelden as great but Ferelden. But then, Ferelden doesn't really care.

I could see them thinking they could do it, but I think it would portray them as foolish in that case.

Ok.

Indifferent to Inquisition matters, yes. Not to Ferelden matters though. (...)But even so, we're talking 10 years later.

Yes, Ferelden people being killed on Ferelden land, and Ferelden's holdings being claimed by interlopers... is an exclusively Inquisition matter.

Ten years is hardly a long time regarding issues of this scope. The lore has already made a point of that with Ferelden's current state.

As for DA:O/DA:A epilogue flavor text, I don't care. The continuity never cared either.

Are you referring to Alexius here? Because we don't know the circumstances of that.

Yeah. Alexius sent him away, as per the dialogue.

The fire ship? That's an extraordinary circumstance. Like 9/11. The delivery of a large payload through one small unsecured method. The Venatori finding one security flaw in a city and suicide bombing it is not a fair indication of Ferelden's military might as a whole.

They had to breach the port and fight their way up the Drakon river into the heart of the city. It's as unsecured as Ferelden wants it to be.

[Dai Grepher]

Except its really the Inquisition's ties to the agents of Fen'Harel that get their attention, and of course the mark, which they knew had something to do with the elven orb, and even knew that it was given to the ancient Tevinter magister monster.

What ties? They didn't know it was Solas at first. And if they did, they should have known that Solas left after Corypheus was killed. The Qunari had no problem with the mark. They even entrusted the Inquisition to handle matters of magic that they believed were beyond the capabilities of the Ben-Hassrath.

Of course, if anyone at Bio had noticed that, they'd have just moved Therinfal someplace else.

Let's all drop this nonsense about a "natural flow." Having some event pre-empt something you wanted to do while you're doing something else is every bit as natural as being able to do both things. There's no particular reason the universe should be set up to let the Herald do everything she wants.

Then they should have. Or they should have made In Hushed Whispers take place over the course of a few days. Or both.

I didn't write that the Herald should be able to do both in any circumstance. I wrote that he should as the circumstances were written. If BioWare wants an either/or choice, fine, but then don't set the game up in a way where both should be possible. Set it up so only one or the other is possible.

Or the brutal occupation that is recent enough for people to stil remember firsthand.

Nobody regards Ferelden as great but Ferelden. But then, Ferelden doesn't really care.

People? What people? Those over 50? My Cousland was born 8:99, Fergus was probably born 8:94 or so. Even he would have been young during the time of the occupation, and would not have seen the full horror of it. Anora was born 8:100, and she had Loghain's stories to grow up on. She didn't seem to have a problem getting along with Orlesians, neither in Origins nor in Inquisition. Nathaniel Howe was born 9:1 I believe. Cailan was born 9:3 I think. Alistair 9:10. Alfstanna looks pretty young. All the major nobles in Ferelden have little to no memory of the occupation. Even Eamon and Teagan were sent to the Free Marches as teenagers (supposedly). They lost their sister to the war, and yet Eamon married Isolde and Teagan has a good relationship with his sister-in-law. Arl Bryland is half Orlesian, and fought for Ferelden in the war. Bann Loren has Orlesian banners in his castle. And don't forget that the only reason Orlais was able to invade in the first place is because some Ferelden nobles allowed it, and betrayed their king. So if the surviving Fereldans have a problem with anyone, it should be their fellow Fereldans before the Orlesians.

If Ferelden regards Ferelden as great, then all the more reason to appear as such to Orlesian nobles by being good hosts.

Yes, Ferelden people being killed on Ferelden land, and Ferelden's holdings being claimed by interlopers... is an exclusively Inquisition matter.

But proper procedure would be that the mayor would contact the local bann for help. Crestwood's mayor was hiding the state of his village because of what he did in the past. As long as the bann thinks there is no problem there, he will send his soldiers to other areas that have requested help.

Or are you referring to Redcliffe? Well again, we don't know how Alexius was able to force Teagan out, and Teagan's solution was to get the crown's help in expelling the rebel mages since the crown was responsible for granting them asylum.

Ten years is hardly a long time regarding issues of this scope. The lore has already made a point of that with Ferelden's current state.

But we don't see Ferelden's current state. We only see Redcliffe (which seems to be peaceful), Crestwood (which is facing crisis because of its own mayor and a rift in the lake causing the undead to rise), the Storm Coast (which is uninhabited except by a small band of cultists), and the swamp (which is uninhabited except for some Avvar or Chasind or whatever they were). The only other area is Bann Loren's castle, which Bann Alfstanna had raised concerns about.

As for DA:O/DA:A epilogue flavor text, I don't care. The continuity never cared either.

Yeah, but if that's all we have to go on. Inquisition doesn't show Ferelden's current military strength.

Yeah. Alexius sent him away, as per the dialogue.

But how was he able to send him away? It couldn't have been a matter of greater forces.

They had to breach the port and fight their way up the Drakon river into the heart of the city. It's as unsecured as Ferelden wants it to be.

I get what you're arguing, but realistically they wouldn't be able to sail the ship upstream without wind in the sails or magic to propel them forward, and the river is blocked by all kinds of obstructions. But leaving all that aside, since maybe the crown cleared the river to facilitate trade, the specifics of the mission aren't clear. Was Ferelden warned ahead of time about the fire ship? As I recall, your only options are to go after the fire ship, have banns move their ships into place, or have the Qunari send a dreadnought. And even the Inquisition can fail to stop the ship if the correct strategy is not employed. Which would seem to indicate that the ship was well disguised or looked unsuspecting.