90 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Or they can invent their own cuisine. Hmmm, steak a la dark.

[fantasypisces]

Here's something to keep in mind. The talking darkspawn from Amaranthine, after the battle he walked around helping people, but he still infected them with the taint. Seeing that in the epilogue made me happy with my choice of killing the Architect.

[KnightofPhoenix]

fantasypisces wrote...

Here's something to keep in mind. The talking darkspawn from Amaranthine, after the battle he walked around helping people, but he still infected them with the taint. Seeing that in the epilogue made me happy with my choice of killing the Architect.

It wasn't clear for me that he was responsable. I thought it was the person I freed from Kal-chirol. It's hinted at that he is tainted.

And even if it is the darkspawn's fault, they can still live isolated as their own culture and people. So that doesn't make me regret my decision to spare the Architect. I am still worried of course, but in general I do not regret it.

[Thor Rand Al]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

fantasypisces wrote...

Here's something to keep in mind. The talking darkspawn from Amaranthine, after the battle he walked around helping people, but he still infected them with the taint. Seeing that in the epilogue made me happy with my choice of killing the Architect.

It wasn't clear for me that he was responsable. I thought it was the person I freed from Kal-chirol. It's hinted at that he is tainted.

And even if it is the darkspawn's fault, they can still live isolated as their own culture and people. So that doesn't make me regret my decision to spare the Architect. I am still worried of course, but in general I do not regret it.

I wonder if you get the same thing about the taint infection if you killed the guy or left him in there.

[KnightofPhoenix]

@ Thor.

I plan to find out.

[Kryyptehk]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

@ Thor.
I plan to find out.

Do tell us when you do, because I want to know. I thought it was the messenger that came up during the Battle of Amaranthine, who I ordered killed.

[DrekorSilverfang]

My viewpoint of him is that he is effectively a scientist with no ethics. At the same time he seems to have good intentions. This can make him seemingly shift from "evil" to "good". I let him live(along with his messenger cause he was a cool dude). My reasoning is he was the lesser of 2 evils and there wasn't a choice to burn everything to ashes like I wanted...

[InvaderErl]

I actually thought his idea of trying to awaken the Old God was logically sound. I mean if it had worked he would have stopped the problem before it ever began. Granted it backfired catastrophically but I didn't think that at least conceptually it was that out there.



I let him live mainly because all I had was the game info to go on and said wth he doesn't seem evil. That and I still have a sneaking suspicion the Old God's being turned into Archdemons forcing the Wardens to kill them is a front for some kind of xanatos gambit on the part of an unrevealed villain so anything that screws with that is a good thing in my book

[Sarah1281]

The main reason a Blight is a problem (besides the giant dragon flying around killing people but that only showed up at Denerim and the Blight was a problem long before then) is because the darkspawn are organized and can attack intelligently. The darkspawn the Architecht 'awakens' are even smarter and are organized all the time. There are only two (possibly three) old gods left but until the darkspawn are completely eradicated if they are awakened they will always remain a potential Blight-worthy threat. Maybe the Architecht means no harm and will do no harm (unlikely given his track record) but he won't live forever and who knows what his awakened successors will do. It's just not worth the risk.

[Thor Rand Al]

Kryyptehk wrote...
Do tell us when you do, because I want to know. I thought it was the messenger that came up during the Battle of Amaranthine, who I ordered killed.

it is about the messenger:
"The darkspawn messenger, set free" (who I ordered to have killed) "after joining the Wardens in the battle of Amaranthine, struck out on his own.  The city soon buzzed of a cloaked but lisping figure who aided travelers in danger.  At the same time, reports of isolated cases of the darkspawn disease emerged.  No one connected the two."

It was nice, kinda sweet that he was trying to help people which in a way makes me feel a teeny bit guilty about killing the Architect but at the same time, the taint is another of the reason's why I did it.  But that's why I have multiple DAO endings just for things like this.  Next time I play I'll spare him and see what the ending for that 1 is and compare the 2.

But anyways Bioware why is he alive when I ordered him to be killed lol.

[Corephyfish]

I guess thats the good thing about having choices, everyone can decide for themselves. I p;ersonally didnt kill him because I didnt have enough info on him (havent read the books yet) and he seemed genuinely sorry and remorseful over his actions, plus the darkspawn messenger helping me in Amaranthine gave me faith/hope that not all Darkspawn are evil/mindless beasts and do actually have a consience.

[Sarah1281]

Even if that's the case, interacting with them spreads the taint and the more contact they have with non-wardens, the more people die. Even the Messenger in the end of the game tries to help save people and ends up tainting some of them.

[Thor Rand Al]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Even if that's the case, interacting with them spreads the taint and the more contact they have with non-wardens, the more people die. Even the Messenger in the end of the game tries to help save people and ends up tainting some of them.

If the Architect would of said he'd found a way to stop spreading the taint with his experiments then I might of thought about letting him live, more strongly then I was.  I kept on thinking about even if i did allow this what would happen if they wanted to go up to the surface.

[elearon1]

The possibility of ending the Blights had me pausing for awhile, but in the end my character saw what the darkspawn were - she saw how they reproduced, knew that they were truly corrupt to the point that merely being in their presence causes taint, and the idea that future darkspawn would be intelligent and capable of higher level tactical thinking made her mind for her. To my character - and honestly probably most of my characters - the darkspawn will never be anything but a threat to the natural races. You broke the spine of the spawn when you slew the archdemon, so without the architect and his foul magics they will be weakened for ages ... and even if it means another blight in centuries to come, here and now they are manageable and the continent will live many generations without having to look over their shoulder in fear of a thinking darkspawn army crawling up their backsides.

[Daerog]

My opinion on the matter: The Architect is a cool character, reading The Calling before the Awakening is recommended, the Architect is neither good or evil, I am sympathetic to the Old Gods with the little information we have on them, and I think the blight should end. I did not capitalize "blight" because I want to stop the whole thing, not just the Blights but the blight itself.

The darkspawn and the blight are hopelessly connected as far as can be determined, so while it would be great for them to live and be a new civilization on Thedas, I don't see much hope in it. So, darkspawn must be removed to remove the blight, and after them the Grey Wardens would need to be removed.

Now to figure out how to free the Old Gods without the blight getting near them... or killing them without darkspawn help. To the Tevinter Imperium to research the song of the Old Gods!

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Even if that's the case, interacting with them spreads the taint and the more contact they have with non-wardens, the more people die. Even the Messenger in the end of the game tries to help save people and ends up tainting some of them.

They can still live isolated as an independent people and civilisation. To deny them that right and freedom because they carry a "disease", is not something I am comfortable with.

EDIT: I am worried about how they will reproduce though. But if the darkspawn do not age, then they don't need to reproduce.

The fact that they are intelligent makes them more dangerous yes, but it potentially also makes them productive and capable of becoming a civilisation. They can become a people we can negotiate with.
And I do not think that they will always live peacefully and war might be started between them and the other races, but it probably won't be a war of annihilation like the Blights are. A few wars here and there are good. Diversity is also good.  

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 19 mars 2010 - 02:12 .

[AntiChri5]

Until they find some other way to reproduce we will always be at war. No matter how long lived every species needs to replenish their numbers or die out.

[KnightofPhoenix]

War isn't a problem and I have no illusion that absolute peace is possible or even desirable. Humans waste no time fighting each other, why would they contemplate real peace with the darkspawn?

I would much rather fight an enemy that is rational, resonable and has some principles (The Withered said they won't kill more than necessary) instead of having to deal with the blight.
The freed darkspawn won't be like the Blight, where its sole purpose is extermination.

A few wars, based on rational interests, is always good at the end. So I don't see any real problem with that.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 19 mars 2010 - 02:45 .

[AntiChri5]

I would rather have an enemy who is not capable of rational thinking. It wont help out all that much in a one on one fight but in a large scale war.......If the best they can come up with is"Graaaaaah chaaaaaaarge!" the war will be far less costly.

[KnightofPhoenix]

AntiChri5 wrote...

I would rather have an enemy who is not capable of rational thinking. It wont help out all that much in a one on one fight but in a large scale war.......If the best they can come up with is"Graaaaaah chaaaaaaarge!" the war will be far less costly.

Is it?
The Blights were very devastating and they claimed millions of lives, precisely because they are nothing but raging beasts.

A rational enemy is more dangerous tactically speaking. But I do not think they will be as devastating as the Blight in the long run, because rationally speaking they have very little reason to start a war of annihilation. 
I think the lack of reason is more terrifying to be honest. An insane lunatic would scare me more than a rational calculating criminal (think the Joker vs Ras Al Ghul, who is scarier?).   

And a smart enemy means more competition, which is good for both sides.  

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 19 mars 2010 - 03:01 .

[AntiChri5]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

I would rather have an enemy who is not capable of rational thinking. It wont help out all that much in a one on one fight but in a large scale war.......If the best they can come up with is"Graaaaaah chaaaaaaarge!" the war will be far less costly.

Is it?
The Blights were very devastating and they claimed millions of lives, precisely because they are nothing but raging beasts.

A rational enemy is more dangerous tactically speaking. But I do not think they will be as devastating as the Blight in the long run, because rationally speaking they have very little reason to start a war of annihilation. 
I think the lack of reason is more terrifying to be honest. An insane lunatic would scare me more than a rational calculating criminal (think the Joker vs Ras Al Ghul, who is scarier?).   

And a smart enemy means more competition, which is good for both sides.  

The Blights are a problem because an Archdemon is able to unify and organize the Darkspawn (and give them better ideas than the mob charge)

And there will always be reasons for war between Darkspawn and everything else. The Darkspawn need other races to reproduce. Looking at how often wars break out over here with much less justification i cant see any peace lasting more than a week.

[KnightofPhoenix]

AntiChri5 wrote...
The Blights are a problem because an Archdemon is able to unify and organize the Darkspawn (and give them better ideas than the mob charge)

And there will always be reasons for war between Darkspawn and everything else. The Darkspawn need other races to reproduce. Looking at how often wars break out over here with much less justification i cant see any peace lasting more than a week.

I already said, bringing peace is not my intention. War is productive as long as it stays within rational boundaries.

If helping the Architect might avert future blights, then I would prefer to have him as an enemy than the alternative, because he is rational and has some principles.
Also, if the darkspawn are capable of becoming a free thinking people and civilisation, then I won't deny them that right.

Diversity and conflict are beneficial in the long run, so I welcome it. I never said I wanted absolute peace.   

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 19 mars 2010 - 03:11 .

[AntiChri5]

Why change how things are going with the 'spawn? We are winning. They only have a couple of Old Gods left, if we play our cards right we could wipe them out entirely.



I am normally against genocide but with the Darkspawn we will only ever be their prey, so why not get rid of them?

[KnightofPhoenix]

AntiChri5 wrote...

Why change how things are going with the 'spawn? We are winning. They only have a couple of Old Gods left, if we play our cards right we could wipe them out entirely.

I am normally against genocide but with the Darkspawn we will only ever be their prey, so why not get rid of them?

Can you guarantee that we can win the last 2 blights?
Can you guarantee that even if we win, it won't result in the death of millions?
I know I can't.

I am not saying you are wrong. But if we apply that logic and stretch it a bit, I can justify any genocide.
Plus, the darkspawn messenger I freed is trying to help people. He wasn't hunting them down. He might have infected them with the taint, but it wasn't out of malic and hatred. He just wants to help.

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't deny a race the possibility of it becoming a civilisaton, if they are capable of doing so. Even if they will become enemies, I would prefer them over the Blight.  

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 19 mars 2010 - 03:21 .

[AntiChri5]

It only justifies genocide against the Darkspawn because any civilisation they have would be built on our bones.

Everything they are is built around harming us. The survival of their race depends on mutilating and torturing us. They can have their own civilisation when they can survive indefinatly without harming us.

EDIT: Codex mentions that the Blights have been getting progressively less and less destructive.

Modifié par AntiChri5, 19 mars 2010 - 03:27 .