61 réponses à ce sujet

[Rascoth]

Hmm... What if you take her with you, kill a normal wyvern, and present its heart to her as the snowy one?

It would actually be quite cool if we couldn't give her false heart in this scenario.

[Fake Sergei]

She calls you "darling" because she's manipulative and because she's always polite, even when being rude. It has nothing to do with liking you.

 

Fair enough - her approval is more about *respect* than *like*, but it still seems strange to me that she greets you with high approval greetings even after you've given her the fake heart.

[In Exile]

Fair enough - her approval is more about *respect* than *like*, but it still seems strange to me that she greets you with high approval greetings even after you've given her the fake heart.

 

I think it makes perfect sense she'd use the same term of endearment even if she hated you. 

[Fake Sergei]

I think it makes perfect sense she'd use the same term of endearment even if she hated you. 

 

Maybe so, but if you have low approval she greets you with snidey insults.  If your approval is high enough her greetings are generic.

[mikeymoonshine]

I can see some reasonable-ish reason to not give it to her or give her a fake one (although i haven't actually done that in any playthrough so far). 

If you play as pro mage freedom it is very likely that your Inquisitor and Vivienne will not get along, at all, and if your Inquisitor is smart they will be aware that Vivienne is using you for her own personal gain. Like she actually does use this entire situation to strengthen her position in the imperial court and I don't think there is anything you can actually do about it, other than not doing the quest at all I guess. 

 

So maybe some Inquisitors would give her the wrong heart in an attempt to foil whatever they suspect she might be up to, she doesn't tell you what it is actually for after all. 

 

So while it did turn out to be a bad move that Inquisitor would only be guilty of assuming Viv's intentions based on past experience, and considering the fact that she does indeed use that situation for her own gain that assumption would not be all that unfair. 

[BansheeOwnage]

Hey, what if there is actually no difference between the two hearts? I mean, my gut said there probably shouldn't be to begin with. So what if Vivienne is just seeing how far you'll go to do her a favour?

[Boost32]

Hey, what if there is actually no difference between the two hearts? I mean, my gut said there probably shouldn't be to begin with. So what if Vivienne is just seeing how far you'll go to do her a favour?

There are differences between the hearts. If you give the right heart, the Duke speaks to Vivienne before he dies, if you give the wrong heart he just dies.

[Marshal Moriarty]

Her explanation for why it has to be you is a joke. Its blatantly 'because you're the player' dressed up in a flimsy argument. Are we really supposed to believe that someone as well connected as her has lost *all* the fighting forces she could call upon? To say its unlikely would be a *vast* understatement. If she was in that kind of dire situation, she'd have a hell of a lot more to worry about than just this!

 

And the fact is this is another example of the game reducing characters who are supposed to be intelligent and perceptive into completely credulous fools around you. You could have demonstrated time and time and time again that you are not the sort of person who can be trusted with secrets, has no real loyalty etc etc and yet she still trusts you with it. Just as all characters are utterly taken in by cunning deceptions, if you just say what they want to hear. This is what you get when you scrap dialogue stat checks on how convincing a liar or how earnestly honest you are capable of projecting yourself to be. Nowadays, you can just say what they want to hear, and they have no choice but to take you at your word.

 

Its especially silly considering she can actually come with you on the mission, and there is no reason given for why she might not want to be present. Rather oddly she doesn't insist on coming along, but doesn't mind coming along either. So if she has no objections to being on the mission, you'd think she'd insist on it or at the very least make it known that she would greatly apppreciate being there.

 

And what would you gain by sabotaging her mission? You have gone out into a dangerous area, brought others with you and put them in danger too. Only to then sabotage the whole reason for going in the first place. What does that achieve? Is it really worth all that just to underscore that you are not her errand boy? And in the process prove to her that she cannot trust you, and that she now owes you absolutely no loyalty in return? Unless you think Vivienne is the forgiving, 'oh I learned my lesson' sort of person. In which case, a career as a detective is probably not for you...

 

Its a short, badly executed mission that really doesn't deserve to be dwelt on in this detail.

[BansheeOwnage]

There are differences between the hearts. If you give the right heart, the Duke speaks to Vivienne before he dies, if you give the wrong heart he just dies.

Huh, that's odd. I didn't know that.

[Addictress]

I was always too soft and empathetic to tell her to kill the noble in her intro scene. Does she disapprove if you do?

[Finvola]

I had her kill the marquis once and I don't think anybody disapproved.

[Almostfaceman]

I was always too soft and empathetic to tell her to kill the noble in her intro scene. Does she disapprove if you do?

 

Nope. She says he had it coming for starting trouble. 

[Terodil]

Just went through this quest again. The choice is agonizing. But ultimately, I am loath to do nothing or to give her the real heart.

 

Firstly, Vivienne takes pride in being one of the most adept players at 'the Game', which is an almost hilariously euphemistic term for lying, backstabbing, and in general, completely amoral politicking with often deadly fall-out. Nothing she says or does can be taken at face value. Even without extrinsic player knowledge about the whole Anders/Justice debacle, an obscure request like that should really set off alarm bells. Vivienne's refusal to explain her intentions with a moralising cop-out ("you wouldn't expect me to betray the council's trust, would you") makes it look even more dodgy.

 

Secondly, discovering her notes on a rejuvenating potion leads to yet another question. Should mages really be toying with life/aging itself? That is a rather big question, and for somebody so staunchly in favour of regulating her fellow mages in much more trivial matters, Vivienne seems completely unconcerned -- I highly doubt the Chantry, which she so ostentatiously supports, would be equally unconcerned. This is entirely in character for her, of course, but the Inquisitor as a potential accomplice really has to wonder about Vivienne's personal interest in this. It has to be pretty damn important.

 

So what do we have? An extremely cunning and powerhungry manipulator and ruthless mage working on a life-prolonging concoction of unknown potency, probably in such massive conflict with authorities and/or the publicly adopted moral system that she will not divulge any details, not even to allay the fears and concerns of the one she asks for help. For all we know, the drink could make Vivienne all but immortal and set her up as a ruthless mage-lord to reign over Orlais/Thedas for centuries to come.

 

Does the Inquisitor really want to enable such a person? Helping Vivienne and doing nothing effectively lead to the same result, completion of the potion with or without the Inquisitor's support. The inquisitor's only alternative is to actively sabotage her plans. This has nothing to do with douchebaggery, but is a deliberation that Vivienne would not hesitate to make herself.

 

It comes down to the Inquisitor now, of course, if s/he wants to take the risk or not. As I write this, my Inquisitor's inclination to help Vivienne has all but disappeared. The potential benefit is obscure at best, even if we (baselessly) assume altruistic motives. The risks, however, are significant and not at all unlikely, given Vivienne's track record. Sabotage would seem to be the lesser evil.

 

Bonus question: What would Vivienne do in the inquisitor's shoes? I doubt she would decide differently. Which is, of course, not very complimentary for my Inquisitor, who considers contemplating the same decisions as Vivienne a warning sign of the highest order.

 

(NB: I quite like Vivienne as a character. She's awesome. But I still can't stand her. ^^)

[BansheeOwnage]

I was always too soft and empathetic to tell her to kill the noble in her intro scene. Does she disapprove if you do?

 

I had her kill the marquis once and I don't think anybody disapproved.

 

Nope. She says he had it coming for starting trouble. 

Why isn't she arrested for murder? I mean, no one was in imminent danger, and you can't just kill someone for running their mouth. Combine that with her status as a mage and her enemies in The Game, and you'd think if she did anything like that she'd pay for it dearly.

 

I actually think that was one of the most "evil" choices the Inquisitor can make.

[Almostfaceman]

Why isn't she arrested for murder? I mean, no one was in imminent danger, and you can't just kill someone for running their mouth. Combine that with her status as a mage and her enemies in The Game, and you'd think if she did anything like that she'd pay for it dearly.

 

I actually think that was one of the most "evil" choices the Inquisitor can make.

 

No idea, best I can recall he's violated some code of conduct... maybe something like the old dueling practices in real history? 

[Terodil]

Well, the Marquis did more than just wag his tongue: He was in the process of drawing his sword on a guest in the middle of a social event (not sure if the Inquisitor was even unarmed at that point). Vivienne explains that that was an 'unforgivable offense'. Duels are an accepted thing in Orlais (Josephine's handling of the territory dispute in Haven is hilarious when she asks the noble to enter a duel with 'Seeker Pentaghast' over the legitimacy of the Inquisition). The Marquis basically forfeited the duel ahead of time. Losers rarely survive duels.

(That said, I agree. Disarmament and possibly trial for attempted assault would be quite enough along with the public disgrace the Iron Lady delivers so deftly. Then again, some Inquisitors are ruthless, and I'm pleased to have that option, even if I don't often take it with my Inquisitors.)

[nightscrawl]

^ Just fyi, the Inquisitor is still armed. Well at least my warrior has been.

[BansheeOwnage]

The thing about him drawing a sword, though, is that it's a moot point once he's in stasis. It would be like a cop non-lethally subduing an armed suspect only to shoot them after they're no longer a threat, and after having a conversation about whether they should kill them no less. That's hardly justifiable, even by more medieval standards, barring some obscure Orlesian code like Almostfaceman suggests. Even then, if that's the case, it's not made clear to the audience.

 

Anyway, I'm just thinking outloud, don't mind me.

[Terodil]

[...] It would be like a cop non-lethally subduing an armed suspect only to shoot them after they're no longer a threat
[...] That's hardly justifiable, even by more medieval standards, barring some obscure Orlesian code

I'm with you in that the punishment seems disproportionate to the offense.

Except... it's not a punishment. It's not a cop arresting a criminal. It's a duel for all intents and purposes, that the marquis lost ahead of time. The entire Orlesian society is one big cluserf* of duelling, with tongues or arms, and it leaves corpses by the wayside in either case.

And while we may disagree nowadays, killing your opponent in a duel was not considered morally reprehensible. In fact, letting them live probably would have been (denying them an honourable death etc.... yeah I know).

[Dean_the_Young]

Why isn't she arrested for murder? I mean, no one was in imminent danger, and you can't just kill someone for running their mouth. Combine that with her status as a mage and her enemies in The Game, and you'd think if she did anything like that she'd pay for it dearly.

 

I actually think that was one of the most "evil" choices the Inquisitor can make.

 

It's because it is the Game, not modern Western common law, and because the way she set it up not only had the noble as the aggressor, but she gave the choice/onus of responsibility to the Inquisitor.

 

Murder, per see, is an accepted part of the game within context, and in this case Vivienne can not only claim to be part of the wounded party, but not the person who made the choice. It works because of Orlesian Game logic. If someone challenged her, it wouldn't be 'Vivienne murdered a helpless man,' it would be 'Vivienne killed a man in self defense on behalf of the Herald of Andraste.'

[Shechinah]

It's because it is the Game, not modern Western common law, and because the way she set it up not only had the noble as the aggressor, but she gave the choice/onus of responsibility to the Inquisitor.

 

Murder, per see, is an accepted part of the game within context, and in this case Vivienne can not only claim to be part of the wounded party, but not the person who made the choice. It works because of Orlesian Game logic. If someone challenged her, it wouldn't be 'Vivienne murdered a helpless man,' it would be 'Vivienne killed a man in self defense on behalf of the Herald of Andraste.'

 

Especially since if you check the moment before Vivienne frosts him, it appears he was about to draw a weapon... either that or he was scratching his back.

[Dean_the_Young]

Especially since if you check the moment before Vivienne frosts him, it appears he was about to draw a weapon... either that or he was scratching his back.

 

In all honesty, the bigger offense to Orlesian sensibilities is probably that he made a scene at her party.

[Dean_the_Young]

I'm with you in that the punishment seems disproportionate to the offense.

Except... it's not a punishment. It's not a cop arresting a criminal. It's a duel for all intents and purposes, that the marquis lost ahead of time. The entire Orlesian society is one big cluserf* of duelling, with tongues or arms, and it leaves corpses by the wayside in either case.

And while we may disagree nowadays, killing your opponent in a duel was not considered morally reprehensible. In fact, letting them live probably would have been (denying them an honourable death etc.... yeah I know).

 

It would also be a loss of face to the person who didn't pursue the duel, which in a face/honor cultures can be worse than death.

 

In public honor cultures, your reputation- how people perceive you- is everything to your individual standing. If you don't have honor, you're nothing, but if you don't defend it, you're less than nothing. This is the sort of cultural basis that leads to hyper-machismo posturing, and extreme reactions to the slightest offense- because if you don't defend your honor/masculinity, it's proof you have none. Not taking offense would be a sign of weakness, and could ruin your standing.

 

One one hand, this meant a lot of challenges to duels. On the other hand, such societies often created elaborate ways to allow parties to back down while preserving face. Dueling usually wasn't to the death- between things like innacurate dueling pistols to deliberate misses, fatalities were often low. Then there were various roles for intermediaries to mitigate or diffuse things- in some cases the idea of having a second duel in your place, which on one hand upheld your honor, but at the same time allowed the other party to safely throw the match (because they aren't throwing the match against the offender, but the innocent representative, and such things could be acceptable without losing face).

 

In short, the sort of honor cultures that allowed frequent dueling also often had elaborate rituals and procedures to allow the duels to end without death.

[IllustriousT]

I always responded to that whole marquis thing with the "I don't care" option, because I really didn't care what happened to him. It felt like it was some silliness of a child and the way Vivienne handled it, only seemed to validate that feeling. I couldn't have him killed because he was scared and afraid like a child about his status as an elite. 

[Statare]

I thought the weirdest thing about this quest is that the "wyvern" is a gurgut. The hell?