4630 réponses à ce sujet

[Hanako Ikezawa]

So you make a big issue out of "Solas (apparently) giving information to Inquisitor for benefit of player and therefore acting OOC". but completely ignore the fact that writers couldn't really put light on his entire motivation or plans for the sake of not spoiling the meatiest parts of the future games, or ask us to look for hints ourselves, instead of handing us information on a silver platter? Which, you know, Bioware kind of tends to do, at least in DA.

I would much rather Trespasser never happened. The endgame encounter between Solas and Flemeth did a much better job foreshadowing than the discussion in Trespasser. Nothing positive was added by it. 

 

I've had an entire posts written about that, so I'm not going to repeat myself. Only thing I'm going to say here that the whole "pathological liar" has most definitely been denied by Weekes, and many things Solas tells us are in the base games are most definitely true and supporting his characterization as someone who uses a lot of obfuscation, but hardly ever straightforwardly lies, and in fact seems to avoid it whenever he can.

No, the thing that Patrick Weekes denied was that Solas isn't a pathological liar in terms of lies of commission. He never denies that Solas wasn't a pathological liar in terms of lies of omission or lies of influence, which is what Solas does throughout the game. He may tell the truth, but he doesn't tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

@midnight tea:  I am sure you are aware that the best liars use the truth a lot. 

 

That he obfuscates the truth from the beginning of the game truly doesn't bother you?

Do you see your Inquisitors as not worthy or capable of handling truth at that moment? 

Yep. There are three kinds of lies. Lies of commission, lies of omission, and lies of influence/character lies. 

 

To use a well-known court thing, when a witness agrees to testify they agree to not do any of the three kinds of lies. They swear to tell the truth(so not lie of commission), the whole truth(so no lies of omission), and nothing but the truth(so no lies of influence/character lies). 

[Medhia_Nox]

Pathological liars are actually terrible liars - not because people don't believe their lies - but because the lies are compulsive and inconsistent. 

 

If Mr. Weekes specifically said Solas is not a pathological lair... then I would absolutely agree.  Solas is in full control of his deceptions.

 

There is actually a difference between a pathological liar and a sociopath intent on manipulating with lies, half-truths and obfuscations. 

[midnight tea]

Then I would hope that Solas wouldn't be coy in not telling the Inquisitor. 

 

IF the man's cause is just, then there is no reason that "heroes" would not align with it.

 

I have had no indication that he has even so much as tried to question whether or not the Veil could - for example - be let down slowly, with all the world in agreement to the purpose.  Is it a foolish thing to consider?  Perhaps - perhaps not. 

 

After all - does not Solas claim that the world without the Veil is superior?  Would not - with some irrefutable examples - the leaders of the world not agree to this superior world? 

 

... And how many years WE ourselves spent to come to accept that the world we have now - with no institutionalized discrimination, separation of church and state, free access to information, and no rulers or religious institutions fiercely protecting the established status quo to the point of absurdity - is superior to what we had before?

I mean... wasn't there a bloody Civil War in America to abolish slavery??? Because half of the country was unconvinced that freedom for everyone is actually better for everyone? How many years did we have to fight for equality on many levels? And there are still some that are unconvinced that this is better :/

 

So how do you expect the world; with the South mostly shaped by Chantry rhetoric that deems everything behind the Veil as dangerous, or Qunari who actually are working to strengthen the Veil, to just accept the Veillless world and everything that comes with it? In a perfect world where everyone was rational and logical this could proooobably be accomplished. But we know Thedas isn't such world - it's ruled by biases, emotions, close-mindedness and conformism, similarly to ours. So it's naive to suggest that Solas would just be able to approach leaders of the world, provide "irrefutable examples" and everybody would be just like "okay, so is 5 o'clock tomorrow the best time to tear that pesky Veil"?

 

....Heck, even though Inquisition has vastly improved the state of South, no matter of it's leader's quality, Ferelden and Orlais still want to either dismantle or absorb it, seeing it as a threat, rather than a force to build upon in order to help the South become better for everyone. Celene wanted to slowly, but steadily improve the situation of the elves, only for her political rival to use it against her and had thrown Orlais into devastating civil war. Andraste stood against slavery imposed by Tevinter, only to jump-start a cult that supports existence of society where entire groups of people are discriminated or subjugated.

 

And hey - who knows; perhaps Solas do indeed wants to show people that the world could be better without the Veil or simply different than it is now? But perhaps he knows that he can't just do it the simple way? After all, the South began pulling itself form the edge of the abyss and actually working towards greater goal only in face of a giant, unknown threat. And no, I'm not saying that Solas is just orchestrating a fake threat to make everyone work together. But the truth is we don't really know what he wants to accomplish.

[Sah291]

I have had no indication that he has even so much as tried to question whether or not the Veil could - for example - be let down slowly, with all the world in agreement to the purpose.  Is it a foolish thing to consider?  Perhaps - perhaps not. 
 
After all - does not Solas claim that the world without the Veil is superior?  Would not - with some irrefutable examples - the leaders of the world not agree to this superior world?

Maybe he thinks ripping it off now like a band aid will cause less suffering in the long run, and would allow the world to start recovering more quickly, rather than drawing it out. Letting the Veil drop slowly might even prompt more wars as people fight over repairing it or taking down.

There is no way all of Thedas leaders would come to a consensus on the Veil, when they can't agree on the role of magic in the world, and whether mages should be free. And who says any of them are qualified to decide the fate of the elven people anyway? Or that they wouldn't be biased to keep the status quo, since they benefit from being in power.

Just throwing counter arguments out there.

[midnight tea]

@midnight tea:  I am sure you are aware that the best liars use the truth a lot. 

 

That he obfuscates the truth from the beginning of the game truly doesn't bother you?

Do you see your Inquisitors as not worthy or capable of handling truth at that moment? 

 

How do you expect *anyone* to handle "hello, I'm an ancient elf, also known at my time as the Dread Wolf. You know, the god? I'v created the Veil you say your Maker has created and slept for thousands of years and awoke now with plans to change the world, but sadly Corypheus - who was supposed to blow himself up by attempting to open my orb - sort of still has it now and plans to use it to unknown ends."

 

And it's not like Quizzies had nothing better to do than "handle" Solas's truth - suddenly they've had an ENTIRE WORLD on their head and had to figure out how to save it.

 

Context. It matters.

[Medhia_Nox]

... And how many years WE ourselves spent to come to accept that the world we have now - with no institutionalized discrimination, separation of church and state, free access to information, and no rulers or religious institutions fiercely protecting the established status quo to the point of absurdity - is superior to what we had before?

I mean... wasn't there a bloody Civil War in America to abolish slavery??? Because half of the country was unconvinced that freedom for everyone is actually better for everyone? How many years did we have to fight for equality on many levels? And there are still some that are unconvinced that this is better :/

 

So how do you expect the world; with the South mostly shaped by Chantry rhetoric that deems everything behind the Veil as dangerous, or Qunari who actually are working to strengthen the Veil, to just accept the Veillless world and everything that comes with it? In a perfect world where everyone was rational and logical this could proooobably be accomplished. But we know Thedas isn't such world - it's ruled by biases, emotions, close-mindedness and conformism, similarly to ours. So it's naive to suggest that Solas would just be able to approach leaders of the world, provide "irrefutable examples" and everybody would be just like "okay, so is 5 o'clock tomorrow the best time to tear that pesky Veil"?

 

....Heck, even though Inquisition has vastly improved the state of South, no matter of it's leader's quality, Ferelden and Orlais still want to either dismantle or absorb it, seeing it as a threat, rather than a force to build upon in order to help the South become better for everyone. Celene wanted to slowly, but steadily improve the situation of the elves, only for her political rival to use it against her and had thrown Orlais into devastating civil war. Andraste stood against slavery imposed by Tevinter, only to jump-start a cult that supports existence of society where entire groups of people are discriminated or subjugated.

 

And hey - who knows; perhaps Solas do indeed wants to show people that the world could be better without the Veil or simply different than it is now? But perhaps he knows that he can't just do it the simple way? After all, the South began pulling itself form the edge of the abyss and actually working towards greater goal only in face of a giant, unknown threat. And no, I'm not saying that Solas is just orchestrating a fake threat to make everyone work together. But the truth is we don't really know what he wants to accomplish.

 

You really think taking the time to prove his claims is the "simple way"?

 

Interesting - I think taking the time, for an immortal, to prove what he knows is true - to people and enlightening them instead of destroying them is the hard way.

 

Yes, I don't know - and he refused to explain.  If that's deliberate storytelling - then my opinion of Solas remains.  He purposefully withholds information - and claims it is necessary.  Since he is not a being a trust - that claim is denied (by me).

 

If it was done for a cliffhanger storytelling ending - then I personally think it's terrible storytelling that, for me, made Solas look like a total ass. 

[BansheeOwnage]

 

But the dwarves. The dwarves are a different matter. We know there is heavily implied interaction between them and the elves in the form of a war or conflict of some sort. But we are not sure in what context. The main thing that was implied was that the evanuris went after Titans, the dwarves themselves were rarely mentioned.

 

Were they even considered people by the elves? Were the ancient dwarves really different from modern day dwarves ("the dwarves don't really remember the dwarves" ->Cole)? Why is that Solas himself admits he knew little of the dwarves in no small part because he could never find them in the fade?

 

You would think Solas would know about the dwarves, given their implied conflict with the Evanuris.

I have a bad feeling the dwarves were all basically like the Sha-Brytol at one point, and the Sha-Brytol are remnants of them. The worst case scenario is that they are basically drones, the white blood cells of the titans. Although they do seem to have some semblance of culture even then. So the best case scenario is that they're a hivemind, though that's certainly not something I'd like to be a part of. If that's the case, I hope the dwarves do not regain their connection to the titans. Or full connection rather, since their stone-sense is real.

 

It most certainly is. Emotions are what drives will, and will enacts changes in the world by forming energy from the Fade when you use magic. Magical effects can also spontaneously happen in case of strong emotions, and that's how most mageborn children were found by the templars.

 

That's also what makes mages so dangerous if they lose control of themselves. Basically, the only safe mage is one who is aware of their emotions at all times and never gives in to their passions enough to lose control of their magic.   

Hmm, that gives me new perspective on the tranquil. They don't really have the will to do anything, just minor preferences, like "I prefer not to cause trouble", "I prefer to survive". They could never use magic even if they were connected to the fade!

 

 

And i specialy want to thank Midnight Tea Sah291 Almostfaceman German Soldier Bansheeownage Nightscrawl Secret Rare Medhia_Nox Lezio Abyiss108 Hanakoo Ikezawa Dawnstone Bayonet Hipshot Maia 0407 Xerrai Addictress The Elder King Baboontje Guinevere 134 mrs anomaly Reznore57 Lynroy straykat Ieldra ( with an i ) IlustriousT Shechinah Aren Rosemuk Myahele Dai Grepher Illyria Modern Academic Skin Vision Qun00 Hellion Rex Mistic Gaia300 thatsoneevildude Witch Cocktor Macha 'Anu Donguijote and 59 others Illegitimus Ellawynn Ghost Gal In Exile Vanilka Alanc9 Fiskrens Heimdall Donk AutumWitch sweenykill LadyofColckwork7 Dean the Young XEternalXDraemsX RenAdaar Catilina Silcron and many others without you this topic would never have reached the 100 pages ( and even beyound )

 

So enjoy the Cake and Champagne you deserved it  . 

 

 

Thanks all for the discussion

[Shechinah]

There is actually a difference between a pathological liar and a sociopath intent on manipulating with lies, half-truths and obfuscations. 

 

I think I can see why you might consider Solas to be a sociopath but I must disagree since I see him as displaying traits in a way that sociopaths, to my knowledge, do not.

 

An example would be that, from what I can tell, Solas' capability and way of feeling empathy is not similar to how I've heard people with sociopathy describe their version of empathy and love. This is also partially based on Solas' dialogue both with the Inquisitor and with the companions as well as some of the quests the Inquisitor can gain approval from him with.  

 

Basically, Solas does not seem a sociopath to me because his behavior and traits do not match what I know of people with sociopathy. It's an interpretation of his character that I do not think work.

[Medhia_Nox]

How do you expect *anyone* to handle "hello, I'm an ancient elf, also known at my time as the Dread Wolf. You know, the god? I'v created the Veil you say your Maker has created and slept for thousands of years and awoke now with plans to change the world, but sadly Corypheus - who was supposed to blow himself up by attempting to open my orb - sort of still has it now and plans to use it to unknown ends."

 

And it's not like Quizzies had nothing better to do than "handle" Solas's truth - suddenly they've had an ENTIRE WORLD on their head and had to figure out how to save it.

 

Context. It matters.

 

The same way I handled:  "Hello, you are now the most important person on all of Thedas, a living herald of our God, the leader of our Inquisition."

 

Personally - I could handle the elf's confessions much easier.

 

And I would actually respect him as someone worthy of my trust.

 

But he doesn't tell us - not because we can't handle it - but because he can't turn everyone to stone yet.

[BansheeOwnage]

Btw. @Bancheeownage i hope the fires in Canada are not near your house so terrible i have seen it on the news. 

Oh, thank you for your concern! But no, luckily (for me) the fires are quite a ways away from where I live Terrible for the people who live(d) there though...   

[Baboontje]

How do you expect *anyone* to handle "hello, I'm an ancient elf, also known at my time as the Dread Wolf. You know, the god? I'v created the Veil you say your Maker has created and slept for thousands of years and awoke now with plans to change the world, but sadly Corypheus - who was supposed to blow himself up by attempting to open my orb - sort of still has it now and plans to use it to unknown ends."

 

And it's not like Quizzies had nothing better to do than "handle" Solas's truth - suddenly they've had an ENTIRE WORLD on their head and had to figure out how to save it.

 

Context. It matters.

 

Haha, imagine him introducing himself to Bull.

 

The Iron Bull: "I'm -THE- Iron Bull."

Solas: "Indeed. I'm the Dread Wolf-...I mean Solas! I am Solas!"

Inquisitor: "...wat"

[midnight tea]

I would much rather Trespasser never happened. The endgame encounter between Solas and Flemeth did a much better job foreshadowing than the discussion in Trespasser. Nothing positive was added by it. 

 

....By your own assessment. There are quite a few people who disagree with it, myself included. I loved Trespasser and I know many people who did so as well, for everything that it's added. You're entitled to your opinion on the matter, but ultimately it will simply be an opinion among many - which generally were favorable towards the DLC.

 

No, the thing that Patrick Weekes denied was that Solas isn't a pathological liar in terms of lies of commission. He never denies that Solas wasn't a pathological liar in terms of lies of omission or lies of influence, which is what Solas does throughout the game. He may tell the truth, but he doesn't tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. 

 

It seem that your problem appears to be that anyone who isn't 100% truthful is a 'pathological liar' that cannot be trusted. Sadly we know that life - and Bioware stories - don't work that way.

 

We also know that Weekes stated that in much earlier draft Solas lied or omitted truth way more frequently that he actually does. And we know that that version of Solas didn't make it into the game. 

 

Also - lies by omission aren't ''pathological lies" since pathological liars feel a compulsory need to lie and twist the truth. Solas lies from necessity and at times where he can be honest or truthful - he is. He tells us as much as he can without outing himself, and in fact seems to enjoy moments when he is actually truthful, being appreciative of Inquisitor's curiosity about himself or fields of his study or opinion on the matters.

[Medhia_Nox]

....By your own assessment. There are quite a few people who disagree with it, myself included. I loved Trespasser and I know many people who did so as well, for everything that it's added. You're entitled to your opinion on the matter, but ultimately it will simply be an opinion among many - which generally were favorable towards the DLC.

 

 

It seem that your problem appears to be that anyone who isn't 100% truthful is a 'pathological liar' that cannot be trusted. Sadly we know that life - and Bioware stories - don't work that way.

 

We also know that Weekes stated that in much earlier draft Solas lied or omitted truth way more frequently that he actually does. And we know that that version of Solas didn't make it into the game. 

 

Also - lies by omission aren't ''pathological lies" since pathological liars feel a compulsory need to lie and twist the truth. Solas lies from necessity and at times where he can be honest or truthful - he is. He tells us as much as he can without outing himself, and in fact seems to enjoy moments when he is actually truthful, being appreciative of Inquisitor's curiosity about himself or fields of his study or opinion on the matters.

 

I would forgive a pathological liar sooner than the person you describe Solas to be - as you have said, the pathological liar has no free will.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

....By your own assessment. There are quite a few people who disagree with it, myself included. I loved Trespasser and I know many people who did so as well, for everything that it's added. You're entitled to your opinion on the matter, but ultimately it will simply be an opinion among many - which generally were favorable towards the DLC.

And that's fine. I'm glad most people enjoyed it. Meanwhile I just feel I wasted a lot of money amd time on the game and possibly franchise because of it. 

 

It seem that your problem appears to be that anyone who isn't 100% truthful is a 'pathological liar' that cannot be trusted. Sadly we know that life - and Bioware stories - don't work that way.

 

We also know that Weekes stated that in much earlier draft Solas lied or omitted truth way more frequently that he actually does. And we know that that version of Solas didn't make it into the game. 

 

Also - lies by omission aren't ''pathological lies" since pathological liars feel a compulsory need to lie and twist the truth. Solas lies from necessity and at times where he can be honest or truthful - he is. He tells us as much as he can without outing himself, and in fact seems to enjoy moments when he is actually truthful, being appreciative of Inquisitor's curiosity about himself or fields of his study or opinion on the matters.

Yes. By the very nature of lying, the more someone does it the less they can be trusted. 

 

Fair enough. He isn't a pathological liar. He is a sociopathical liar. Better? 

[midnight tea]

You really think taking the time to prove his claims is the "simple way"?

 

Interesting - I think taking the time, for an immortal, to prove what he knows is true - to people and enlightening them instead of destroying them is the hard way.

 

What if there is no time? What if he tried to prove his claims, but nobody listened? He does tell us that he was tired of not being heeded. And he had to try and communicate with people who have lost their conscious connection with the Fade and are now fearful of things lurking in it, as well as entirely new power structure that did a lot to prove that will go great lengths to keep themselves in power, ever if at the cost of truth.

 

You don't see that at least a hindrance in communication?

 

I'm deeming you way as "simple" because it IS simple. Or simplistic, rather.

 

 

 

Yes, I don't know - and he refused to explain.  If that's deliberate storytelling - then my opinion of Solas remains.  He purposefully withholds information - and claims it is necessary.  Since he is not a being a trust - that claim is denied (by me).

 

If it was done for a cliffhanger storytelling ending - then I personally think it's terrible storytelling that, for me, made Solas look like a total ass. 

 

It also made us spend at least 100 pages of this thread to discuss his character and why people like/dislike him. And 6k pages of Solas thread are not filled with idle fawning over a character, believe me - OR that 'fawning' is caused by how intriguing the epilogue was, for all the storytelling opportunities it brings and discussion it spurs.

 

So I wouldn't say that it's a "terrible storytelling" - it seems to have accomplish exactly what writers wanted. That their character 'looks like a total a**' for some is an expected byproduct of choosing to create a polarizing character and wanting to keep us hungry to know what's going to happen next - which we know for a fact they did with full intention. And I can't blame them. Not only I'd do that myself, I actually did it to my characters and stories as well. How people perceived them at the beginning, middle and end of story gave me an interesting insight into my audience member's minds.

[Shechinah]

He is a sociopathical liar(though not a sociopath, just having sociopathical tendencies). Better? 

 

Can you specify that qualifies these tendencies as being of the sociopathic kind?

 

I think I can see where you might be coming from with it but I think i must still disagree as, well, see above in #2636.

[midnight tea]

I would forgive a pathological liar sooner than the person you describe Solas to be - as you have said, the pathological liar has no free will.

 

So you're able to forgive a person who "has no free will", but you can't find it in you to forgive a person who - for one reason or another - feels like he has no choice?

Interesting...

[roselavellan]

The difference lies in the scale though. For some, myself included, I would hold someone just as culpable for genocide for defense as one who commits genocide in malice. In terms of a small number of people, I would agree, but genocide is a different matter.

 

I think there is a scale, too.

 

So, what if you're defending 200 people of your own group against 200 people from another group? What if you're defending 50 people of your own group from 200 people from another group? Wouldn't there be a difference in scale too?

 

And would it be as bad if you're killing 200 monkeys to save 50 people? (And what if the difference between modern Thedosians and the ancient elves is almost as big as the difference between a human and a monkey?)

 

If you acknowledge that it's a matter of scale, then surely you can see that some scenarios are better than others.

 

And the thing is, we don't even know what this scenario is that will happen in DA4. So we really can't judge Solas yet, since we don't know what the situation is. Is he trying to save lives? Or what if he's really doing something for the greater good for a significant portion of Thedosians? I'm not saying that it will absolve him of the deed, but it's possible that with better knowledge of the circumstances, it might transpire that he's less morally guilty than some here assume.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Can you specify that qualifies these tendencies as being of the sociopathic kind?

 

I think I can see where you might be coming from with it but I think i must still disagree as, well, see above in #2636.

Mostly in the sense that he will put on a facade to manipulate others for his own ends. There is also him not having much concern or respect towards most people but is capable of empathy and connection, though most of the time only as long as it benefits him(like when he kills his 'friend' the moment they disagree with him). His personality isn't that of a sociopath since he is too composed and calculating for that, being more like a psychopath than a sociopath in that regard since the latter tend to be more erratic and careless.

 

I'm with you when it comes to disagreeing with those who call him a psychopath or a sociopath. He has too much going that runs contrary to that, even in Trespasser. That's why I just say he has tendencies of those. 

[midnight tea]

 

Yes. By the very nature of lying, the more someone does it the less they can be trusted. 

 

Fair enough. He isn't a pathological liar. He is a sociopathical liar. Better? 

 

So Irena Sendler who lied and cheated to save thousands of Jewish children during WWII can't be trusted?

 

I'm not saying that Solas does the exact equivalent of that, but her example shows well that people can lie for many reasons, including the noblest of ones, and that in itself doesn't necessarily undermines their trustworthiness.

 

And no - Solas is not a 'sociopathical liar', because that's not even a thing. And if you want to imply that Solas is a sociopath  - he's not. A sociopath is someone who, by definition, is "someone who lies incessantly to get their way and does so with little concern for others; and has little regard or respect for the rights and feelings of others.". And we do know that it's not the case. We know from both approval system, things he said that he does indeed care, which is further underlined by Patrick Weekes saying things like him being one of the staunchest supporters of freedom of personal thought, which is one of reasons why he argues extensively with IB in game.

[Witch Cocktor]

And the thing is, we don't even know what this scenario is that will happen in DA4. So we really can't judge Solas yet, since we don't know what the situation is. Is he trying to save lives? Or what if he's really doing something for the greater good for a significant portion of Thedosians? I'm not saying that it will absolve him of the deed, but it's possible that with better knowledge of the circumstances, it might transpire that he's less morally guilty than some here assume.

 

We can't?

 

And about the greater good, isn't his goal just to save his people, with the side-effect of Thedas succumbing to inevitable chaos? Not sure if there's a greater good in that. Greater good for Solas and his people, yeah sure, but something tells me we won't be Solas or Solas' people in DA4. We gun watch the world burn and die so that our superiors, ancient elves, can live on!

[Mistic]

And the thing is, we don't even know what this scenario is that will happen in DA4. So we really can't judge Solas yet, since we don't know what the situation is. Is he trying to save lives? Or what if he's really doing something for the greater good for a significant portion of Thedosians? I'm not saying that it will absolve him of the deed, but it's possible that with better knowledge of the circumstances, it might transpire that he's less morally guilty than some here assume.

 

True, we can't condemn him for things he hasn't done yet. However, it's not as if we can't judge him for the things he has done before. And compare him to other cases in-universe.

 

-He defies powers that be and ends up causing a terrible disaster that changes the world forever. Check.

-Considers his people superior, wants to restore the old empire, no, make it even better than before. Check.

-His way to do that involves tinkering with the Veil, potentially causing a world cataclysm. Check.

-When he's weak, he deceives the heroes and pretends to be another person so he can continue his plans. Check.

-Creates a network of secret agents to do his bidding. Check.

-Cares for some of his allies, but won't hesitate to use them as disposable tools if he needs it. Check.

 

The catch? All those points weren't for Solas. They were for Corypheus. But as with the Blackwall example mentioned several posts ago, the presentation is what really matters. That's why Solas is a fascinating character while Corypheus is... well, Corypheus.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

So Irena Sendler who lied and cheated to save thousands of Jewish children during WWII can't be trusted?

 

I'm not saying that Solas does the exact equivalent of that, but her example shows well that people can lie for many reasons, including the noblest of ones, and that in itself doesn't necessarily undermines their trustworthiness.

Not by the people she lied to, no. The Gestapo definitely saw her as untrustworthy once they learned of the truth. 

 

Yes, someone can have noble reasons for lying, but that still undermines their trustworthiness to the people they are lying to. There is a reason why in stories there are people that can't fully trust someone who say hides their real identity from them, even though the person can be hiding that for noble reasons like protecting those close to them. The people can still like and support them, but they don't necessarily trust them. 

 

And no - Solas is not a 'sociopathical liar', because that's not even a thing. And if you want to imply that Solas is a sociopath  - he's not. A sociopath is someone who, by definition, is "someone who lies incessantly to get their way and does so with little concern for others; and has little regard or respect for the rights and feelings of others.". And we do know that it's not the case. We know from both approval system, things he said that he does indeed care, which is further underlined by Patrick Weekes saying things like him being one of the staunchest supporters of freedom of personal thought, which is one of reasons why he argues extensively with IB in game.

Yes it is. And if you read above you'll know I do not see Solas as a sociopath, instead at most just having some sociopathic tendencies. So there's no point continuing this line of dialogue since we both agree on that. 

 

Though I discount the approval system with him, since that can just be his persona approving of those things. Vivienne approves too, yet has a dialogue about how it is a waste of time. So she only approves because it makes the Inquisition and thus herself look good. Solas' approval can be a similar thing. Not saying it is, just it can be. Again, hard to trust someone who lies and manipulates. 

[Shechinah]

Mostly in the sense that he will put on a facade to manipulate others for his own ends. There is also him not having much concern or respect towards most people but is capable of empathy and connection, though most of the time only as long as it benefits him(like when he kills his 'friend' the moment they disagree with him). His personality isn't that of a sociopath since he is too composed and calculating for that, being more like a psychopath than a sociopath in that regard since the latter tend to be more erratic and careless.

 

Hmm... I disagree including with that Solas is like a psychopath.

 

I see Solas as displaying empathy that is non-beneficial and not self-centered as seen in his dialogue with other companions and his remarks. I'll see if I can find the dialogue in question that I am thinking about to provide some more substance for this section of my post.

 

To me, it seemed like Solas' murder of Felassan was not based solely on a disagreement; it seemed like it was more based on that Felassan posed a threat to Solas and his plans because of what he knew of Solas and said plans especially as he had the ear of Briala. He had deliberately sabotaged Solas' efforts to acquire the mirror network by preventing Briala from informing him the password something I think Solas did know about.

 

I should note that I am not saying that Solas' murder of Felassan was right, I am saying that I consider it to be motivated by more than simply disagreement.