1316 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sandtigress wrote...
Just to be absolutely correct, he never talks about freeing his people individually like he does in Awakening, that I recall. His plans were more along the lines of "free everyone in a few fell swoops" rather than one by one by awakening them.

By "free", does he talk about intelligence and sentience to each individual darkspawn in the Calling?

Because it's clear in Awakening that he seeks to create darkspawn individuals who can think for themselves.

[Sandtigress]

I'm not really sure - his goal then seemed more to be just getting rid of the Archdemon's influence and control over the darkspawn. It doesn't seem to me that he really believed the darkspawn capable of the same kind of sentience that he had, but someone else might have gotten a different impression.



Its something I might have to reread in order to get a more accurate impression.

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

According to Sandtrigress, in the Calling, the Architect never wanted to free his people. Now he does. That's evidence that his plan did change to a certain extent.
If he indeed wanted to turn everyone into ghouls, then why didn't he turn the PC and his companions? He in fact mended their wounds.

He wants your cooperation so that you can be an ambassador for his master plan.  When you won't cooperate, he tries to kill you.  Reason enough for my character to decide he's too dangerous to let live.

His experiments were to test the resistance to the taint and for the purposes of his joining. Beyond that, you are purely speculating, using info about a book that your character hasen't read. 

My character had plenty of reason not to trust him and to want him dead.  I didn't find any that gave sufficient cause to spare him.

And the Architect was using his army to combat the Mother (the breeding ground), not your settlements, with the exception of the Vigil.
That's reason enough for me.

He's attacking your base but that's not reason enough to kill him?  As for the Mother, that too was his doing.  Again, simply too dangerous to let live.

Seeing how you killed most of his people in the base and are trying to escape, then yes. You expect him to flash the exit sign for you so you know where to go?

If he is as benevolent as you say... YES.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

What I found odd was that the only reason you were able to escape was because of Velanna's sister, who by all accounts was working with the Architect. Did she just go against him because she either didn't know what he was planning or didn't like it if it involved her sister? Because if she wasn't acting against him and he was testing the wardens then it makes no sense for him to try and kill them. Unless he didn't think people who couldn't stand up to two dragon thralls could take on the Mother?

I was actually thinking about that.
Maybe he didn't want the WArdens to suspect he is letting them free.

What I found equally odd is that he apparently thinks losing the base (or something in it) was unfortunate and that they can't go back for it now....well if he freed the Wardens, what did he expect?

EDIT: and at the end, he said he wanted to explain hismelf, that's why he restrained you.
So I think it's more probably that Seranni did this on her own accord.

I will note that he admits to be basically a complete space case in regards to human motivations and the like. He completely lacks a lot of what we take for granted as socialization and understanding of emotion. If anything, I think the game did a decent job of portraying a creature with Asperger's...

That stated, some things he might simply do for the lulz because he needs to do something else and honestly can't fathom your desires or emotions until he learns more about humans. A purely morally neutral being, as it were.

He wasn't in a state to explain himself and probably needed to be elsewhere and the thralls were jonesing for a fight. So he left knowing that you wouldn't understand just yet because he had no bargaining chips to discuss with you. So distract you and leave. The dragons weren't even a tough fight.

When he meets you at the tower, he knows he has a position of negotiation and decides to talk.

Granted, it has all sorts of hole but at least provokes some thought.

[Addai]

I should add that I was kind of disappointed that we got the option to kill him. He makes for a great X factor in future stories.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

He's attacking your base but that's not reason enough to kill him?  As for the Mother, that too was his doing.  Again, simply too dangerous to let live.

Ummmm, point of clarification. He specifically states that his party approached the Wardens to have a discussion but should have anticipated that the Keep would respond poorly to seeing the group of Darkspawn. Soooooo if he isn't lying, then the Keep provoked a response when they attacked first.

Get game facts straigh please.

[AnniLau]

Having spent most of her life trapped by an institution which automatically assumed she was dangerous and that they knew the best way to 'deal' with her, my Elf Mage had some sympathy for the Architect's goals and point of view.



My HNF is going to take him out though.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

According to Sandtrigress, in the Calling, the Architect never wanted to free his people. Now he does. That's evidence that his plan did change to a certain extent.
If he indeed wanted to turn everyone into ghouls, then why didn't he turn the PC and his companions? He in fact mended their wounds.

He wants your cooperation so that you can be an ambassador for his master plan.  When you won't cooperate, he tries to kill you.  Reason enough for my character to decide he's too dangerous to let live.

Speculation. My character hasen't seen anything to suggest he has a grand master plan other than what he already told us and what his notes suggest.

The Architect is dangerous yes. But not more dangerous that the bligths that he can potentially avert. Reason enough for my character to let him live.

Addai67 wrote...

His experiments were to test the resistance to the taint and for the purposes of his joining. Beyond that, you are purely speculating, using info about a book that your character hasen't read. 

My character had plenty of reason not to trust him and to want him dead.  I didn't find any that gave sufficient cause to spare him..

My character has plenty of reasons to give him the benefit of the doubt (all of which I have already stated). I didn't find any sufficient cause to murder him while heis offering his support against a greater threat. 

Addai67 wrote...

And the Architect was using his army to combat the Mother (the breeding ground), not your settlements, with the exception of the Vigil.
That's reason enough for me.

He's attacking your base but that's not reason enough to kill him?  As for the Mother, that too was his doing.  Again, simply too dangerous to let live.

He attacked once and failed. Now his army is fighting the mother.
And while I take what he said with a grain of sault, I do believe that his primary intention was to enlist the Wardens to help him, while bringing an army underneath the keep, because a lone messenger would be killed too easily.

Yes, the Mother was his doing and he stands up to it and tries to fix his mistake, instead of ignore it. Signs that he is reasonable to me.

Seeing how you killed most of his people in the base and are trying to escape, then yes. You expect him to flash the exit sign for you so you know where to go?

If he is as benevolent as you say... YES.

Benevolent =/= stupid.

You seem to think that I am saying killing the Architect is a "wrong choice". I never said that. I actually paused the game for 5 to 10 minutes to think, killed the Architect, felt something was wrong, reloaded and spared him. So it wasn't obvious to me why I would spare him at first. 

If sparing the Architect has even a 1% chance to avert the blight, I consider sparing him a risk worth taking. You don't. Both  positions are valid and I never tried to impose my choice on others. I merely explained why I think the choice of sparing him is valid.  

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 mars 2010 - 05:15 .

[Sandtigress]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
If sparing the Architect has even a 1% chance to avert the blight, I consider sparing him a risk worth taking. You don't. Both  positions are valid and I never tried to impose my choice on others. I merely explained why I think the choice of sparing him is valid.  

Of course, at the same time, he apparently started the last Blight.    So yeah...I think my characters will likely be half and half on sparing/killing him.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sandtigress wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
If sparing the Architect has even a 1% chance to avert the blight, I consider sparing him a risk worth taking. You don't. Both  positions are valid and I never tried to impose my choice on others. I merely explained why I think the choice of sparing him is valid.  

Of course, at the same time, he apparently started the last Blight.    So yeah...I think my characters will likely be half and half on sparing/killing him.

The blight would have happened with or without him. Plus, you don't know that until you've made your choice.

Think of it from the Architect's perspective. You find the old god.
If you do nothing, there is a 100% chance that it will be found and tainted one day, thus starting a blight. It's unavoidable, it's only a matter of time.

If you attempt to do the joining or whatever it is he was planing to do, there is a 50% chance that all the blights would be averted, and 50% chance that Urthemiel would be tainted regardless.

What is the better course of action?
Even if the second action had a 1% chance to avoid a blight, it seems to be better than do nothing, which would have a 100% chance to start a blight anyhow.

Of course that's assuming that the Architect can't kill the old god while it sleeps. Too many info is left out for us to judge this.

But we do know that the blights would have happened with or without him.  

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 mars 2010 - 05:24 .

[Sandtigress]

I'm meta-gaming a little here (well, not in my actual game, so I'm metaing?) so this is more about just discussing the Architect than playing on whether you should spare him or not, but his original plan was to slay the archdemons while they slept, and to do that, he found out where the old gods were located. That implies that he found Urthemiel more quickly than the darkspawn would have, since they would be searching largely at random, while he found a more direct pathway.



That says to me that he might try again, which implies the potential for another Blight within our PC's lifetime, and wouldn't that be fun? Of course, it sort of depends on how well he learns from past mistakes, and how far he's willing to test things before attempting to destroy another old god.



But like I said, that's all speculation stuff from outside of the game. I'd forgotten he didn't mention the Blight-starting thing until after you sided with him. I did that part pretty late last night. :-P

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sandtigress wrote...
That says to me that he might try again, which implies the potential for another Blight within our PC's lifetime, and wouldn't that be fun? Of course, it sort of depends on how well he learns from past mistakes, and how far he's willing to test things before attempting to destroy another old god.

Well seeing how the PC is like a demi-god / goddess and a one man / woman army or army group even, then that wouldn't be too bad would it?

Plus, meta-gaming here, the Architect can be killed. So I do not think that the next blight would depend on him. If there is going to be another blight in a sequel, it will not depend on the Architect. 

Unless Bioware is planing to make two games in one, where one PC can pick up flowers and play with butterflies throughout the game and the other is soaked in blood, fighting the 6th blight. Which I doubt will happen sadly

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 mars 2010 - 05:35 .

[Volourn]

"I don't really like that this expansion was so dependent on reading The Calling. You don't get to know Utha at all in-game, and why she's on the Architect's side. Access to her thought process might have made a great difference in engendering faith in the Architect's version of affairs."



It doesn't depend on the expansion. You should base your character's decision on what he/she knows not some silly book that contains knowledge yiour character doesn't know.

[vandoug]

I killed the Architect in all my playthroughs (just twice, btw). I'll kill him once more if I'm going to play another round. Darkspawns are originated from corrupt souls. It interprets to me that evil is their nature as this is the view from the author and the developer, awakened/freed or not. It's impossible to coexist with them peacefully as whole. Blights are good for darkspawns as whole including those awakened. The Architect's vision is delusional.

I believe Evolution is the very principle of the nature. The storyline needs to be advanced. The author/developer needs returns. And we players want more content to play. So the awakening and the next blight is inevitable and a must in the second game of the trilogy. My feeling is that killing this architect or not won't change the direction or the big picture. If I were the developer, I'd do this in DA2: Use the Architect if the player spared him in DA1, have another one instead if the player killed him previously; Or even don't bother if the next blight will happen several hundred years later.

Modifié par vandoug, 23 mars 2010 - 01:11 .

[elearon1]

Volourn wrote...
It doesn't depend on the expansion. You should base your character's decision on what he/she knows not some silly book that contains knowledge yiour character doesn't know.

Agreed.  That said, I have not read the Calling and chose to kill the Architect because I did not believe it was in the best interest of humanity to have a race of intelligent darkspawn.  The only thing humanity has had going for it in all previous Blights is that the darkspawn are mostly mindless and while no more blights may occur if the Architect succeeds, that does not mean the Spawn won't come looking to conquer human lands.  They still need humans (I use humans as a neutral pronoun here to refer to all non darkspawn races)  to reproduce, after all, and "wardens" in order to maintain their intelligence; and there is nowhere near a human civilization they would be tolerated.  I do not see the races living in any kind of peace and if there must be war I'd rather there be war with a near mindless enemy than one which can strategize and potential out think us.  

And yes, as someone else suggested, killing the Architect is very much like committing genocide - that is why it should be a difficult decision - but at the end of the day the good of my people will always be more important than the good of theirs.  Deny it or try to pretty it up all you like, that is the reality of life. 

[Efesell]

It's still important to note that by killing the Architect you are not preventing the Darkspawn from becoming an intelligent race. At most you're delaying it and depriving them of a leader who doesn't actually want to genocide every other race.

I know it's a little difficult to shake the "Darkspawn evil! Kill!" mentality, but it's awfully shortsighted.

[Sarah1281]

It's still important to note that by killing the Architect you are not preventing the Darkspawn from becoming an intelligent race. At most you're delaying it and depriving them of a leader who doesn't actually want to genocide every other race.

Becuase he has intelligent followers out there? I suppose they could possibly continue his work of awakening darkspawn but if they can't then yes, you really are preventing them from becoming an intelligent race. If the Architect was not the first of his kind, why hasn't anyone seen any evidence of an intelligent darkspawn before? Did they not know how to awaken anyone and thus remained the only intelligent one?



It's important to note that since darkspawn can't reproduce on their own then darkspawn like the Architect or those awakened (if being awakened changes anything in their genetic material) cannot have natural selection and evolve naturally. The broodmothers would need to be awakened like the Mother (and may go insane from remembering exactly how the transformation took place) and even then each new broodmother would need to have be awakened individually, which could only be done by other intellient darkspawn.



Kill the Architect and either kill his followers or if they don't have his knowledge on how to awaken their fellow darkspawn and you do stop them from being intelligent. The Architect looks so different than the others that it's not just a matter of him being born intelligent; something really weird happened with his creation and it's unlikely that whatever it is will happen again or that if it does they'll have the same degee of success.

[Efesell]

What makes them 'intelligent' is freedom from the Song. Something that will happen eventually anyway unless one of the last two Blights actually succeed.

So, it seems to be an inevitable outcome.

[elearon1]

Efesell wrote...It's still important to note that by killing the Architect you are not preventing the Darkspawn from becoming an intelligent race. At most you're delaying it and depriving them of a leader who doesn't actually want to genocide every other race.
I know it's a little difficult to shake the "Darkspawn evil! Kill!" mentality, but it's awfully shortsighted.

When the next intelligent leader comes up we kill him too.  The problem is, they can't make new intelligent Spawn without Warden blood and the abduction of Wardens will not go unnoticed ... especially now that we know to be aware of the possibility.  We will be more vigilant and deprive the Spawn of their chance to awaken for the good of humanity ... that is our job.

[elearon1]

Efesell wrote...What makes them 'intelligent' is freedom from the Song. Something that will happen eventually anyway unless one of the last two Blights actually succeed.
So, it seems to be an inevitable outcome.

And who knows what else might happen by then?  By putting off the strength of your enemy for even a generation you buy yourself time to devise new and better ways to combat him.  By the time the last blight occurs the Chantry may have found a way to finally reconcile with the Maker, who can know?  Best to hedge your bet and put off the inevitable as long as you can.

[Efesell]

I feel that a Blight is a far more horrible outcome than a smarter race of Darkspawn.

And I still can't look past the part where it'd be two more blights and THEN a smarter race of Darkspawn.

[elearon1]

Efesell wrote...

I feel that a Blight is a far more horrible outcome than a smarter race of Darkspawn.
And I still can't look past the part where it'd be two more blights and THEN a smarter race of Darkspawn.

A lot can change in a few hundred years, you're assuming the world, science, magic, etc. will still be the way it is.  I would rather win a peace of mind for the next many years than force them to deal with a newer, dangerous threat here and now.

[Efesell]

Where's the peace of mind? If you kill him his followers go back and the deep roads are still as active as ever there. Plus the whole "A new blight seems inevitable" business.

I know that's just epilogue-speaking but I'm not getting the peace of mind thing from his death.

[Sarah1281]

Where's the peace of mind with his life? Them retreating makes it seem like they're planning something and it seems that the only thing the Architect has done right is figuring out the anti-Joining. Even that has problems, though, as he can't tell if the darkspawn are going to have a problem until they've evidentally escaped from him. Although how in the world the Mother managed to get away from him...she's not very mobile and doesn't seem capable of hiding the crazy.

[Efesell]

Well with him spared I know that I've done something toward the goal of preventing the blights, rather than just sit on my heels and hoping that they work out like the others have. I've also made the attacks less frequent and the Deep Roads a safer place.

So, I do get a much greater sense of peace when he's alive yes.