The Blanketfort (crying and throwing up) - The Official Solas Thread [Spoilers]

Varric lies a lot, so I dunno if I'd say it was an insult coming from him? lol Also, he did say "or noble rebel".

And can I just say I'm glad that whole thing about his name changing in association wasn't dropped? Though I'm still interested in why the change in modern elven understanding of him seems to have coincided with the fall of the dales? Specifically with Gisharel becoming the sole source for most Creator myth. Gisharel is so suss, to me.

Salos was Varric all along.

Also, a consummate liar. Very much the pot calling the kettle black.

feels like a reference to the idea discussed in codex entry: the rebel god. just speaking to the dichotomy of Solas. the dreadwolf in his white wolf vs black wolf aspects, his propaganda portrayals by evanuris back in the day as the big bad wolf come to destroy all thats good, and as the heroic noble demi-god, leader of a righteous rebellion, deliverer from evil, as portrayed on the walls in trespasser by his followers and the former slaves that he freed. its also his dichotomy in the modern day: some characters were in TN like "he's a demon" and others were like "he's gonna save us, the elves". and his dichotomy in the fandom (evil bad guy wanna kill him vs 'Solas was right, I wanna help him, save him'). just reminding us again that neither is the truth and the truth is somewhere in between, which iirc solas says himself in trespasser. he is both of these things, and neither. and which he is to any given character in the world can be a matter of perspective.

Fair enough, but no one in universe has ever called him the God of Lies. That's what I find so strange. To his enemies in ancient times he was the Dread Wolf and a master of trickery. This is not the same as lies. Even the Evanuris admit that he does know a lot about the "People and their spirits" and that his advice "seems fair but turns slowly to poison". That suggests something that is not an outright lie (as PW has always maintained) but he can deceive, either by being evasive in his answers or omitting information. Also, he was known for his dark wisdom (as in Felassan's stories).  It's not what he says that is the problem but what he doesn't say.

After all, if he is a God of Lies, how do we know that he spoke any truth to the Inquisitor?

We don’t. We just know that everything he said in the base game was a lie. It’s up to you to trust his words in Trespasser or not.

Yes, I'll grant you that but I just feel that saying he is a god of lies is just too simplistic and does not reflect how even his enemies viewed him. As you say, to be a successful liar requires wit and skill, in other words a trickster or deceiver. If you are a liar, you just lie, whether you are a convincing liar or not. Don't worry, I'm just being pedantic. If the writers are happy that he should now simply be known as the God of Lies, that is how my new PC will understand it.

Varric is a writer of pulp fiction, so I assumed he was just exaggerating for effect. He says "god of lies or heroic rebel against tyranny", I think to accentuate how polarising Solas has been, and bringing us back to the two opposing choices we were given in Trespasser.

I think most of us who played DAI with him as a friend/lover would know it's not a black or white issue. But that sort of approach is not gonna sell Varric's books (or DA4).    And a lot of players who didn't spend much time with him would be more than happy to just call him a liar and kill him without further thought.

If he can blink armies of Qunari into stone, I don't think he would feel the need to lie. Except to mislead you, maybe, which is still an indication he has something bad planned.

I see what you mean. No, I don't think he is a literal "God of Lies", more an expert at manipulation, as you say, or someone proficient at playing the game, as he hinted at/after Halamshiral. If his end goal was to lie, he would never have needed to cover up so many half-truths with, "Oh, I saw it in the Fade". He had an agenda, and lies were an unfortunate part of attaining it.

Hence his constant justification for why people should believe him: "I saw it in the Fade." Yet, he admits that the Fade can offer two different perspectives of the same event, so how does he know which to choose? It's why it seems unreasonable for him to resent people not taking his word on something. You can imagine him rolling up to the Dalish:

Solas: "You've got that lore wrong."
Keeper: "How would you know?"
Solas: "I saw it in the Fade."
Keeper: "How do you know that's true?"
Solas: "A spirit told me."
Keeper: "Spirits are dangerous, how do you know it wasn't a demon and lying?"
Solas: "Because... Oh hang it, I know these things."
Keeper: "Bloody apostate Circle mages, think they're so clever. Get out of here."
Solas: (To the Inquisitor) "I had a run in with the Dalish....."

Not even just two different perspectives but that even the perspectives offered can be twisted via emotion and personal bias.  That the events they show are as much like a "dream" of someone who survived events or incidents than an actual attempt at an accurate retelling.

Solas really should no better that just about anything associated with the Fade is not really going to be a good source of information.  The Fade might be a gold mine for psychologists but not so much for archeologists and historians.