inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
30,695
gervaise21
12,956
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Jun 28, 2020 17:13:26 GMT
What if over the course of DA4 we find out more and more about Thedosian history and Solas' plans and it becomes harder and harder to justify killing him without becoming a villain yourself? Wouldn't this have just as much relevance to a new PC as the Inquisitor? I was not suggesting the scenario of killing off the Inquisitor simply to give more reasons to kill Solas but would provide an emotional jolt to everyone. As I've explained, it wouldn't necessarily be that Solas was responsible. A real twist would be if it was actually Solas that asked you to track down the real killer. What if it was the killer who took the idol and Solas fears what they are going to do with it? This might sound a bit like the Corypheus plot with his orb, except this time you will know that Solas wants the idol and what he intends to do with it. So you are trying to find the killer and the idol without revealing this to him. There are any number of plot permutations that could follow on from the death or other removal of the Inquisitor from active participation in events that do not automatically damn Solas. |
|
inherit
7457
0
Apr 25, 2022 11:48:41 GMT
133
smudjygirl
111
Apr 10, 2017 16:09:00 GMT
April 2017
smudjygirl
|
Post by smudjygirl on Jun 28, 2020 17:30:18 GMT
There are any number of plot permutations that could follow on from the death or other removal of the Inquisitor from active participation in events that do not automatically damn Solas. Even if Solas is the antagonist, there's no express reason to bring back the Inquisitor regardless. I do think their death would cheapen the story, and if it were necessary it should have happened in Trespasser where we full on knew they were dying. The best way to tie a new PC to Solas is not necessarily through the Inquisitor. For example, say Lucanis is a companion. An elf woman helps him get to Ambrose's mansion quicker and they talk about a 'mysterious' benefactor. It could be that he did something for Solas without even realising it, and that could be a theme that ties into why they go after him. Or we meet him because we take/destroy an item that he needs. But this, again, makes me think about the fact Solas is ultra powerful and was even willing to kill his oldest friend so unless our PC is already someone who is important and would cause the world to panic unnecessarily, why wouldn't he just petrify them? If the Inquisitor can't be PC because 'we need new people' and 'Solas knows our every move', then it follows that they can't be deeply involved with the new PC for the exact same reasons. Then if any information exchange were necessary it could be via Charter or Dorian, or Harding or some other completely unknown agent. As much as i would love the emotional investment that the Inquisitor could provide, if they are a lesser character then there would be no reason for my PC to feel any sympathy for this stranger that uses people and is going to destroy the world. Also, in no way do i think we will work for Solas as a knowning ally, and if it was necessary to build up a relationship between Solas and the PC...again, why the new guy? |
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
30,695
gervaise21
12,956
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Jun 28, 2020 18:08:38 GMT
Also, in no way do i think we will work for Solas as a knowning ally, and if it was necessary to build up a relationship between Solas and the PC...again, why the new guy? Because something had happened to the old guy. Of course the majority of the game might not directly involve Solas at all, which is why it wouldn't matter if it was the Inquisitor or not. I recall the trailer had the words "So you have found me at last...." which suggests the hunt may go on for some time. With so many parties seemingly looking for Solas our PC might simply end up working for them all at various stages in the plot, including inadvertently working for the Trickster himself without realising it. |
|
inherit
664
0
3,126
Grog Muffins
Seethingway
1,169
August 2016
grogmuffins
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by Grog Muffins on Jun 28, 2020 18:30:39 GMT
I dislike the inquisitor but killing them in the intro would be a very cheap. I’m still annoyed at alien 3 for that. I also would hate for 'killing off the last PC' to be a thing that happens more than once, and you can already do that with Hawke. If we're in Tevinter, have the Inquisitor be doing things in Orlais and Ferelden rather than killing them for cheap impact.
I have a world state especially created for protagonists who die, it's one of my canon ones. It's true Bioware didn't know if DAO would get a sequel and Hawke doesn't die in DA2 but I don't think the option to leave Hawke in the Fade was there only for those players who really hated their Hawke and wanted to see them die (not that we know for sure they died but I'm willing to go with that interpretation for now). I expected Trespasser to either end with the Inquisitor's death or have it as an option. This is pretty meta on my part but I'd like to have the option of them dying in DA4, for my own weird thematic world states. But, again, as an option, not have it be mandatory, and not in the beginning. It needs to have the true impact that it deserves, meaning that both the player AND the other characters have emotional investment in them, not like the choice between Hawke and the Warden which had more impact on the player than the Inquisitor. What if over the course of DA4 we find out more and more about Thedosian history and Solas' plans and it becomes harder and harder to justify killing him without becoming a villain yourself? This isn't gonna matter to some players, especially if they're anti-Solas no matter what.
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
31,574
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 28, 2020 18:43:52 GMT
The problem with Solas doing anything to the Inquisitor is that it only works for the people who want to kill Solas. Remember that there are players who want to redeem Solas, too, and that choice was significant enough to be included in the Tapestry in Dragon Age Keep. I am very curious to see how Solas' story will turn out. It's interesting to me to read posts by very vocal anti-Solas people who are rooting for BioWare to give every player more and more reasons to hate and want to kill Solas. What if BioWare does not do that? What if over the course of DA4 we find out more and more about Thedosian history and Solas' plans and it becomes harder and harder to justify killing him without becoming a villain yourself?I'm curious how you think they could spin "Saving the world from a monster who plans on killing everyone" into being a villain simply through Solas's views.
|
|
inherit
7457
0
Apr 25, 2022 11:48:41 GMT
133
smudjygirl
111
Apr 10, 2017 16:09:00 GMT
April 2017
smudjygirl
|
Post by smudjygirl on Jun 28, 2020 19:59:24 GMT
Because something had happened to the old guy. Of course the majority of the game might not directly involve Solas at all, which is why it wouldn't matter if it was the Inquisitor or not. I recall the trailer had the words "So you have found me at last...." which suggests the hunt may go on for some time. With so many parties seemingly looking for Solas our PC might simply end up working for them all at various stages in the plot, including inadvertently working for the Trickster himself without realising it. Yeah, i understood what you meant. I'm just saying it seems pointless to make something happen to the old guy in order to facilitate the new guy just because. If a personal connection is needed, why force a new character? If a new character is necessary, why try to make yet another personal connection?
EDIT because i missed some: I said in an earlier post i think it would be better to have the new PC and co. inadvertently work for Solas or against him and for that to be their connection, but that it would be better done without including the Inquisitor at all. But the second the Inquisition touches the new PC the whole "we can't directly do anything because he knows us!" goes right out the window, because we know he's constantly keeping tabs on the Inquisition. It would quickly, if not immediately, clue him in on the new PC and what they're doing, rendering the whole point of getting them moot.
Not to completely discredit Bioware, i'm sure they could come up with a good way to get around that. But in every situation, it makes me wonder what the point of Trespasser was other than to remove the anchor. The rest of it could end up gone with the wind.
It needs to have the true impact that it deserves, meaning that both the player AND the other characters have emotional investment in them, not like the choice between Hawke and the Warden which had more impact on the player than the Inquisitor. I agree with this, but so far I can't think of a time both my character and I felt the same way about a previous character coming back. Inquisitor had no reason to be anything but suspiciously polite to Morrigan. Varric felt distant because he's both Hawkes best friend and now my Inquisitor's friend, but he was mostly just likeable to the Inquisitor. And both Alistair and Morrigan were more open than i'd have expected them to be about their personal lives, especially Morrigan. To sum up: I feel extremely disconnected to my PC when my previous companions show up, that could be so much worse with a previous PC. (With that being said i want Oghren to come back!) The only time i didn't feel completely disconnected was with Anders. But that's because the Warden only got to see him on the surface, and he had change to an almost unrecognisable standard by the time he meets Hawke. I could imagine something similar happening to Solas, which is fine as long as it doesn't make him "I'M DA BAD GUY HUR HUR HUR" (which is actually something i am not too worried about) I do worry that they won't do the relationship with the Inquisitor and Solas justice, most of all if it is shoehorned in to fit around a new PC. As such i think it's better for the new PC to have motivations as far away from the Inquisitor's story as humanly possible.
|
|
inherit
664
0
3,126
Grog Muffins
Seethingway
1,169
August 2016
grogmuffins
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by Grog Muffins on Jun 28, 2020 20:42:35 GMT
I agree with this, but so far I can't think of a time both my character and I felt the same way about a previous character coming back. Inquisitor had no reason to be anything but suspiciously polite to Morrigan. Varric felt distant because he's both Hawkes best friend and now my Inquisitor's friend, but he was mostly just likeable to the Inquisitor. And both Alistair and Morrigan were more open than i'd have expected them to be about their personal lives, especially Morrigan. To sum up: I feel extremely disconnected to my PC when my previous companions show up, that could be so much worse with a previous PC. (With that being said i want Oghren to come back!) The only time i didn't feel completely disconnected was with Anders. But that's because the Warden only got to see him on the surface, and he had change to an almost unrecognisable standard by the time he meets Hawke. I could imagine something similar happening to Solas, which is fine as long as it doesn't make him "I'M DA BAD GUY HUR HUR HUR" (which is actually something i am not too worried about) I do worry that they won't do the relationship with the Inquisitor and Solas justice, most of all if it is shoehorned in to fit around a new PC. As such i think it's better for the new PC to have motivations as far away from the Inquisitor's story as humanly possible. This is why the reasonable thing I'm expecting is, in a dual-protag case, the Inquisitor will deal with Solas-related stuff while the new PC will deal with other things. These other things might be marginally tied to Solas or eventually lead to him, too, but the meat of this particular effort would be Inquisitor lead. Otherwise we'd need to create a relationship between Solas and the new PC and a personal reason for their investment, which might end up feeling as too much of a rehash of DAI. I like circular/mirrored narratives, as I've mentioned on this forum before. In the Bartimeaus Sequence I enjoy the dynamic between Bartimaeus and Ptolemy, then the mirroring of that dynamic through Bartimaeus and Nathaniel. Bart is part of both relationships but they work because thousands of years passed between them and, while there are some similarities between Ptolemy and Nathaniel, there are also differences. In this case, however, we have a very short period of time between Solas' relationship with the Inquisitor and maybe forming a new one with the new PC so they may not end up feeling different and worthwhile enough.
|
|
inherit
492
0
4,697
OhDaniGirl
Incoming...
1,673
August 2016
ohdanigirl
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Dragon Age The Veilguard
|
Post by OhDaniGirl on Jun 28, 2020 21:08:17 GMT
While it's possible for plans to change, remember that Trespasser was supposed to "Conclusively tie off this protagonist". And every time it's been brought up, BW has has said they wanted to go with a new protag with each new game. I've never seen them insinuate otherwise.  This is a super late reply, but I keep seeing people use this as evidence that the Inquisitor is done, and I just don't think that's accurate. John Epler explains what he actually means by this. His exact quote is: "..You had the mark on your hand, that made you the Inquisitor. We needed to remove that, we needed to take away the thing that made you this figurehead in the world." That is how they, "Conclusively tie off that protagonist story." I think he meant that particular story, not the character as a whole. Just my thoughts on that matter.
|
|
inherit
7457
0
Apr 25, 2022 11:48:41 GMT
133
smudjygirl
111
Apr 10, 2017 16:09:00 GMT
April 2017
smudjygirl
|
Post by smudjygirl on Jun 28, 2020 21:08:52 GMT
I agree with this, but so far I can't think of a time both my character and I felt the same way about a previous character coming back. Inquisitor had no reason to be anything but suspiciously polite to Morrigan. Varric felt distant because he's both Hawkes best friend and now my Inquisitor's friend, but he was mostly just likeable to the Inquisitor. And both Alistair and Morrigan were more open than i'd have expected them to be about their personal lives, especially Morrigan. To sum up: I feel extremely disconnected to my PC when my previous companions show up, that could be so much worse with a previous PC. (With that being said i want Oghren to come back!) The only time i didn't feel completely disconnected was with Anders. But that's because the Warden only got to see him on the surface, and he had change to an almost unrecognisable standard by the time he meets Hawke. I could imagine something similar happening to Solas, which is fine as long as it doesn't make him "I'M DA BAD GUY HUR HUR HUR" (which is actually something i am not too worried about) I do worry that they won't do the relationship with the Inquisitor and Solas justice, most of all if it is shoehorned in to fit around a new PC. As such i think it's better for the new PC to have motivations as far away from the Inquisitor's story as humanly possible. This is why the reasonable thing I'm expecting is, in a dual-protag case, the Inquisitor will deal with Solas-related stuff while the new PC will deal with other things. These other things might be marginally tied to Solas or eventually lead to him, too, but the meat of this particular effort would be Inquisitor lead. Otherwise we'd need to create a relationship between Solas and the new PC and a personal reason for their investment, which might end up feeling as too much of a rehash of DAI. I like circular/mirrored narratives, as I've mentioned on this forum before. In the Bartimeaus Sequence I enjoy the dynamic between Bartimaeus and Ptolemy, then the mirroring of that dynamic through Bartimaeus and Nathaniel. Bart is part of both relationships but they work because thousands of years passed between them and, while there are some similarities between Ptolemy and Nathaniel, there are also differences. In this case, however, we have a very short period of time between Solas' relationship with the Inquisitor and maybe forming a new one with the new PC so they may not end up feeling different and worthwhile enough. If Solas is the big bad, the new PC would be quite uninvolved in their own story. I posit that, while a personal story would be nice, if we're going down the new PC route (which we likely are) then it doesn't matter if they are personally connected to Solas or not. To me, bringing back the Inquisitor in any capacity to move the story along is an acknowledgement that they were needed and their story isn't done, so why bring in a new PC? And since "I love him!" or "I hate the sanctomonious cretin" aren't enough to build a 'personal connection', if they were to come back it would probably have to be a bigger role that I would personally like.
Mirrored narratives can be awesome, but i don't think that would be the case here. From the suggestions people have made i see the Inquisitor getting the pay off or being relagated to a lesser position that would make them pointless in the overall narrative, while the new PC is just a glorified errand boy whose only use in life if making sure they never repeat a protagonist. For those reasons I don't want the dual PC route.
Ultimately it comes down to this for me, and i'm aware i'm repeating myself so i'll stop here. 1) A personal connection is necessary and the Inquisitor should return as PC 2) A personal connection is not necessary and so it should be a new PC, with no direct connection to the Inquisitor.
With my completely uninformed opinion on what i expect, they are opting for option 2) no personal connection is required. Thus i want the Inquisitor as far away from my new PC's business as they can, with the boatload of narrative cop outs they provided to us in Trespasser.
|
|
inherit
471
0
5,383
ladyiolanthe
3,967
August 2016
ladyiolanthe
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
591
695
|
Post by ladyiolanthe on Jun 28, 2020 22:30:52 GMT
I'm curious how you think they could spin "Saving the world from a monster who plans on killing everyone" into being a villain simply through Solas's views. I don't I and others have given plenty of reasons why Solas might not be the villain you want him to be in this thread and others, so I don't really have any desire to spend my time typing it all out again. I am pretty sure you'll just double down and say he needs to die, no matter what, as usual. 
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
36,086
colfoley
18,823
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Jun 28, 2020 22:52:26 GMT
While it's possible for plans to change, remember that Trespasser was supposed to "Conclusively tie off this protagonist". And every time it's been brought up, BW has has said they wanted to go with a new protag with each new game. I've never seen them insinuate otherwise. This is a super late reply, but I keep seeing people use this as evidence that the Inquisitor is done, and I just don't think that's accurate. John Epler explains what he actually means by this. His exact quote is: "..You had the mark on your hand, that made you the Inquisitor. We needed to remove that, we needed to take away the thing that made you this figurehead in the world." That is how they, "Conclusively tie off that protagonist story." I think he meant that particular story, not the character as a whole. Just my thoughts on that matter. it is a legitimate interpretation but it still might be a bit of a stretch. |
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
31,574
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 28, 2020 23:27:29 GMT
I'm curious how you think they could spin "Saving the world from a monster who plans on killing everyone" into being a villain simply through Solas's views. I don't I and others have given plenty of reasons why Solas might not be the villain you want him to be in this thread and others, so I don't really have any desire to spend my time typing it all out again. I am pretty sure you'll just double down and say he needs to die, no matter what, as usual. You misunderstand. I understand reasons why Solas wouldn’t be seen as a villain, but you said that the Inquisitor would be seen as a villain for opposing him. That is the part I was curious about. |
|
inherit
471
0
5,383
ladyiolanthe
3,967
August 2016
ladyiolanthe
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
591
695
|
Post by ladyiolanthe on Jun 29, 2020 1:23:11 GMT
I and others have given plenty of reasons why Solas might not be the villain you want him to be in this thread and others, so I don't really have any desire to spend my time typing it all out again. I am pretty sure you'll just double down and say he needs to die, no matter what, as usual. You misunderstand. I understand reasons why Solas wouldn’t be seen as a villain, but you said that the Inquisitor would be seen as a villain for opposing him. That is the part I was curious about. Oh, okay. As one (possibly extreme, possibly not) example, suppose whatever Solas is doing is, in fact, really and truly necessary to save the world from the Blight? And you end up killing him anyway because you think that the thousands of lives you are saving from being killed by Solas in that one moment are more valuable than all the future lives that might have come had the Blight not been allowed to completely overwhelm the world? So you let the world continue on its not-so-merry way of being overrun by Darkspawn. Which will, in theory, result in the end of all life on Thedas since: (a) The Blight corrupts the land and renders it sterile so no plants can grow. On a large scale, this would result in the collapse of entire ecosystems. (  Mortal populations can't survive by taking on some of the Darkspawn taint like the Architect wanted, because it renders them infertile (see Wardens). The mortals that don't become Grey Warden like beings just get the Blight and die anyway. No more mortal offspring means humans, qunari, dwarves, and modern elves all eventually dwindle out and die. (c) The Darkspawn need non-Darkspawn in order to complete their own lifecycle. (Broodmothers.) So eventually they won't be able to procreate either. So, your PC's actions in such a scenario result in Thedas becoming a dead continent, utterly barren and devoid of life. Seems pretty villainous to me.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
36,086
colfoley
18,823
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Jun 29, 2020 1:38:17 GMT
You misunderstand. I understand reasons why Solas wouldn’t be seen as a villain, but you said that the Inquisitor would be seen as a villain for opposing him. That is the part I was curious about. Oh, okay. As one (possibly extreme, possibly not) example, suppose whatever Solas is doing is, in fact, really and truly necessary to save the world from the Blight? And you end up killing him anyway because you think that the thousands of lives you are saving from being killed by Solas in that one moment are more valuable than all the future lives that might have come had the Blight not been allowed to completely overwhelm the world? So you let the world continue on its not-so-merry way of being overrun by Darkspawn. Which will, in theory, result in the end of all life on Thedas since: (a) The Blight corrupts the land and renders it sterile so no plants can grow. On a large scale, this would result in the collapse of entire ecosystems. ( Mortal populations can't survive by taking on some of the Darkspawn taint like the Architect wanted, because it renders them infertile (see Wardens). The mortals that don't become Grey Warden like beings just get the Blight and die anyway. No more mortal offspring means humans, qunari, dwarves, and modern elves all eventually dwindle out and die. (c) The Darkspawn need non-Darkspawn in order to complete their own lifecycle. (Broodmothers.) So eventually they won't be able to procreate either. So, your PC's actions in such a scenario result in Thedas becoming a dead continent, utterly barren and devoid of life. Seems pretty villainous to me. Its an interesting parrellel but I think that from the marketing...well the marketing seems to indicate that Solas could easily be spreading the Blight/ Red Lyrium as part of his plan to bring down the Veil...as much as he might hate it again his options seem to be fairly limited...plus he will need some sort of weapon to stop the Evanuris. Actually I just had a thought what if THAT is why he was so ass pull vague about his plans to stop the Evanuris his "I had plans" line isn't the writers being stupid but more along the lines of his plan to deal with the Evanuris are so much worse then actually bringing down the Veil. Not to mention Corypheus talked about finding the Blight in the Black City... But that seems like a bit of a distraction. Someone is certainly spreading Red Lyrium in DA 4. The three pictures and some of the analysis from our people point to RL encroachment. And similar indications were in the muril...and we know the Idol would seem to play some role in something too. Right now Solas is the biggest game in town about this theory. Which of course could just tie into my theory that he wants us to stop him of course, or find another way.
|
|
inherit
471
0
5,383
ladyiolanthe
3,967
August 2016
ladyiolanthe
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
591
695
|
Post by ladyiolanthe on Jun 29, 2020 3:14:30 GMT
Its an interesting parrellel but I think that from the marketing...well the marketing seems to indicate that Solas could easily be spreading the Blight/ Red Lyrium as part of his plan to bring down the Veil...as much as he might hate it again his options seem to be fairly limited...plus he will need some sort of weapon to stop the Evanuris. Actually I just had a thought what if THAT is why he was so ass pull vague about his plans to stop the Evanuris his "I had plans" line isn't the writers being stupid but more along the lines of his plan to deal with the Evanuris are so much worse then actually bringing down the Veil. Not to mention Corypheus talked about finding the Blight in the Black City... But that seems like a bit of a distraction. Someone is certainly spreading Red Lyrium in DA 4. The three pictures and some of the analysis from our people point to RL encroachment. And similar indications were in the muril...and we know the Idol would seem to play some role in something too. Right now Solas is the biggest game in town about this theory. Which of course could just tie into my theory that he wants us to stop him of course, or find another way. I disagree that Solas is the one spreading red lyrium. He was viscerally horrified by the Blight in DAI. He believes anyone who tries to do anything with Blight magic is mad to use it. Red Templars and Venatori were spreading red lyrium throughout DAI. Once it took hold it could continue to grow on anything organic as well as on stone. So by the time DA4 begins, who knows how much of Thedas will be infected with red lyrium? I believe it is not improbable that Corypheus' forces' actions in DAI were responsible for the red lyrium we saw in the EA Play video. I've seen some people speculate that the red lyrium idol might be the weapon that Fen'Harel used as a lure to trap the Evanuris and the Forgotten Ones. What if it is, and that's why he wants it again? Maybe he means to use it to lure the Evanuris and the Forgotten Ones to him once they are freed so that they can be dealt with in some other way. Maybe he means to use it on them.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
36,086
colfoley
18,823
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Jun 29, 2020 3:26:27 GMT
Its an interesting parrellel but I think that from the marketing...well the marketing seems to indicate that Solas could easily be spreading the Blight/ Red Lyrium as part of his plan to bring down the Veil...as much as he might hate it again his options seem to be fairly limited...plus he will need some sort of weapon to stop the Evanuris. Actually I just had a thought what if THAT is why he was so ass pull vague about his plans to stop the Evanuris his "I had plans" line isn't the writers being stupid but more along the lines of his plan to deal with the Evanuris are so much worse then actually bringing down the Veil. Not to mention Corypheus talked about finding the Blight in the Black City... But that seems like a bit of a distraction. Someone is certainly spreading Red Lyrium in DA 4. The three pictures and some of the analysis from our people point to RL encroachment. And similar indications were in the muril...and we know the Idol would seem to play some role in something too. Right now Solas is the biggest game in town about this theory. Which of course could just tie into my theory that he wants us to stop him of course, or find another way. I disagree that Solas is the one spreading red lyrium. He was viscerally horrified by the Blight in DAI. He believes anyone who tries to do anything with Blight magic is mad to use it. Red Templars and Venatori were spreading red lyrium throughout DAI. Once it took hold it could continue to grow on anything organic as well as on stone. So by the time DA4 begins, who knows how much of Thedas will be infected with red lyrium? I believe it is not improbable that Corypheus' forces' actions in DAI were responsible for the red lyrium we saw in the EA Play video. I've seen some people speculate that the red lyrium idol might be the weapon that Fen'Harel used as a lure to trap the Evanuris and the Forgotten Ones. What if it is, and that's why he wants it again? Maybe he means to use it to lure the Evanuris and the Forgotten Ones to him once they are freed so that they can be dealt with in some other way. Maybe he means to use it on them. That plan still has him using Red Lyrium...despite being horrified by it...twice.  Which is what I think the point is. I think the fact that he has such a viseral abhorant reaction to the use of Red Lyrium will only serve to demonstrate how desperate he is and willing to cross any line in his attempt to bring back the Elvhen Empire. Though you are right that Red Lyrium could be spreading on its own, or a part of the Venatori's continued efforts, I just would see it as a possibility that Solas could be desperate enough to use RL in his specific plans and responsible for spreading it...afterall we know that it can affect the Veil and given all the marketing to this point we know RL is not going away and the Idol already seems to have reached McGuffin status.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
11466
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2020 6:23:37 GMT
While it's possible for plans to change, remember that Trespasser was supposed to "Conclusively tie off this protagonist". And every time it's been brought up, BW has has said they wanted to go with a new protag with each new game. I've never seen them insinuate otherwise. This is a super late reply, but I keep seeing people use this as evidence that the Inquisitor is done, and I just don't think that's accurate. John Epler explains what he actually means by this. His exact quote is: "..You had the mark on your hand, that made you the Inquisitor. We needed to remove that, we needed to take away the thing that made you this figurehead in the world." That is how they, "Conclusively tie off that protagonist story." I think he meant that particular story, not the character as a whole. Just my thoughts on that matter. Yikes talk about a non-answer answer from Epler- so which is it? Are they tying off the protagonist, or the story? Now its that they wanted to tie off "that protagonist story"?  Is the emphasis on "protagonist" or "story" here? That is, is it that they're tying off that story from the protagonist (as in, potentially one of many stories this protagonist may have?), or are they tying off the story of that protagonist (as in THE story, singular- i.e. that protagonist's story has come to an end)? I'm still leaning towards them probably introducing a new PC, not because that's my preference (I don't have strong feelings either way) but because they're 3 for 3 so far (3 DA titles, 3 different PCs) and so 4 for 4 seems like a reasonable bet... but this quote doesn't help clarify anything, at least imo. Sometimes it feels like they're deliberately trolling us with these types of comments or answers.
|
|
inherit
424
0
6,660
Andrew Waples
4,257
August 2016
andrewwaples1
Andrew_Waples
|
Post by Andrew Waples on Jun 29, 2020 7:57:34 GMT
While it's possible for plans to change, remember that Trespasser was supposed to "Conclusively tie off this protagonist". And every time it's been brought up, BW has has said they wanted to go with a new protag with each new game. I've never seen them insinuate otherwise. This is a super late reply, but I keep seeing people use this as evidence that the Inquisitor is done, and I just don't think that's accurate. John Epler explains what he actually means by this. His exact quote is: "..You had the mark on your hand, that made you the Inquisitor. We needed to remove that, we needed to take away the thing that made you this figurehead in the world." That is how they, "Conclusively tie off that protagonist story." I think he meant that particular story, not the character as a whole. Just my thoughts on that matter. Like HOF and Hawke they still gave them something to do in the subsequent sequels. I see no reason why they can't do that with Inky.
|
|
Shari'El
N2
Enchantment?
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 74 Likes: 232
inherit
956
0
Aug 13, 2016 18:37:33 GMT
232
Shari'El
Enchantment?
74
Aug 13, 2016 18:30:40 GMT
August 2016
shariel
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Shari'El on Jun 29, 2020 8:00:36 GMT
Its an interesting parrellel but I think that from the marketing...well the marketing seems to indicate that Solas could easily be spreading the Blight/ Red Lyrium as part of his plan to bring down the Veil...as much as he might hate it again his options seem to be fairly limited...plus he will need some sort of weapon to stop the Evanuris. I actually think that the red lyrium might be spreading itself, at this point. After you capture Suledin Keep (Emprise du Lion), you can hear a background dialogue from a tranquil mage, explaining to another agent that ridding the ecosystem of Red Lyrium is a fruitless effort. They point out that even if you remove the crystal itself, it's already been introduced into the food chain. First worms, moles and other underground critters, then birds and other predators, etc. In the tech teaser from EA Play we see a tree possibly corrupted by red lyrium. In DAI the corruption is intentional, but we have no proof it's intentional in DA4.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
36,086
colfoley
18,823
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Jun 29, 2020 8:04:33 GMT
Its an interesting parrellel but I think that from the marketing...well the marketing seems to indicate that Solas could easily be spreading the Blight/ Red Lyrium as part of his plan to bring down the Veil...as much as he might hate it again his options seem to be fairly limited...plus he will need some sort of weapon to stop the Evanuris. I actually think that the red lyrium might be spreading itself, at this point. After you capture Suledin Keep (Emprise du Lion), you can hear a background dialogue from a tranquil mage, explaining to another agent that ridding the ecosystem of Red Lyrium is a fruitless effort. They point out that even if you remove the crystal itself, it's already been introduced into the food chain. First worms, moles and other underground critters, then birds and other predators, etc. In the tech teaser from EA Play we see a tree possibly corrupted by red lyrium. In DAI the corruption is intentional, but we have no proof it's intentional in DA4. crikey |
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
30,695
gervaise21
12,956
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Jun 29, 2020 8:24:30 GMT
Yikes talk about a non-answer answer from Epler- so which is it? Are they tying off the protagonist, or the story? Now its that they wanted to tie off "that protagonist story"?
This is why if that slide truly showed the aims of Trespasser then it was an epic fail. Not only did it leave players unclear on the future of the Inquisitor PC but apparently the writers were trying to be ambiguous about it. The important word here though is protagonist. As John Epler explained it finished the story of the Inquisitor as the leader of a Thedas wide organisation. Even if you don't disband the Inquisition it was going to be cut down in size so that it was merely the Divine's personal army and she would be controlling it, not the PC. Not only that but the thing that made the PC unique and marked them out as special in the eyes of the population had been taken away. So they are no longer the Herald of Andraste either. Thus their importance in the world was gone and all that remained was their tie to Solas. Incidentally the epilogue makes clear that not everyone even believed them about him. Hardly surprising since people preferred to stick their heads in the sand when Hawke discovered the extent of the Qunari spy network. The Chantry had done such a thorough job with their propaganda down the years that the majority of people would probably react to the idea of an ancient elven god creating havoc in a similar way to that of Sera about the Temple of Mythal; it can't be true, he's just a demon or some deranged apostate with delusions of grandure.
So the "no longer the Inquisitor" character continues to work with a select group of believers in their story as the Shadow Inquisition. The scene at Haven confirms they are going to be looking for new people that Solas doesn't know. The fact that he turned up at one of their gatherings of interested parties shows that he is keeping track on people like Charter whom he does know. The fact that he was fishing for information would suggest that their policy of using new people was working as he felt he had to come in person. The "no longer the Inquisitor" character is not going to be driving the story forward in the next game because that is part of their strategy in dealing with Solas. So they are no longer the protagonist. However, they will still be involved at a distance and may be brought in at some stage as appropriate. So it is a case that the story of them as the Inquisitor protagonist has been tied off but not their overall story.
Of course the writers could back-track on this as Trespasser was written before the DA4 project was shelved and then rebooted. However, on the evidence provided thus far, I'd say that the old PC/Inquisitor is not going to be the protagonist in the next game, either solely or in some dual-role capacity. If they were brought back, then technically they shouldn't even be called the Inquisitor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
11466
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2020 8:42:32 GMT
Yikes talk about a non-answer answer from Epler- so which is it? Are they tying off the protagonist, or the story? Now its that they wanted to tie off "that protagonist story"? This is why if that slide truly showed the aims of Trespasser then it was an epic fail. Not only did it leave players unclear on the future of the Inquisitor PC but apparently the writers were trying to be ambiguous about it. The important word here though is protagonist. As John Epler explained it finished the story of the Inquisitor as the leader of a Thedas wide organisation. Even if you don't disband the Inquisition it was going to be cut down in size so that it was merely the Divine's personal army and she would be controlling it, not the PC. Not only that but the thing that made the PC unique and marked them out as special in the eyes of the population had been taken away. So they are no longer the Herald of Andraste either. Thus their importance in the world was gone and all that remained was their tie to Solas. Incidentally the epilogue makes clear that not everyone even believed them about him. Hardly surprising since people preferred to stick their heads in the sand when Hawke discovered the extent of the Qunari spy network. The Chantry had done such a thorough job with their propaganda down the years that the majority of people would probably react to the idea of an ancient elven god creating havoc in a similar way to that of Sera about the Temple of Mythal; it can't be true, he's just a demon or some deranged apostate with delusions of grandure. So the "no longer the Inquisitor" character continues to work with a select group of believers in their story as the Shadow Inquisition. The scene at Haven confirms they are going to be looking for new people that Solas doesn't know. The fact that he turned up at one of their gatherings of interested parties shows that he is keeping track on people like Charter whom he does know. The fact that he was fishing for information would suggest that their policy of using new people was working as he felt he had to come in person. The "no longer the Inquisitor" character is not going to be driving the story forward in the next game because that is part of their strategy in dealing with Solas. So they are no longer the protagonist. However, they will still be involved at a distance and may be brought in at some stage as appropriate. So it is a case that the story of them as the Inquisitor protagonist has been tied off but not their overall story. Of course the writers could back-track on this as Trespasser was written before the DA4 project was shelved and then rebooted. However, on the evidence provided thus far, I'd say that the old PC/Inquisitor is not going to be the protagonist in the next game, either solely or in some dual-role capacity. If they were brought back, then technically they shouldn't even be called the Inquisitor.  agree with essentially everything here.. and not to go jumping off like grease on a hot griddle but I was actually just writing a reply to a different post of yours from earlier in the thread, so I'll just put it here: It did strike me that a lot of the stories in Tevinter Nights would fit with the Joplin heist concept and it occurred to me that originally many of these might have been quests in the game. I think its not insignificant that its also perfectly consistent with the Inquisition/Inquisitor/resistance against Solas shifting gears (i.e. at the end of Trespasser) from open military force to espionage/infiltration. We've now got a consistent theme and trend going from the end of Dragon Age 3, through the written material, to the original conception of DA 4 (Joplin), i.e. of this focus on espionage. If Joplin was going to represent a break or new direction in the series I'd be more inclined to assume that this new direction and focus would have died with the Joplin concept.. but since its one piece of a consistent theme connecting the previous game to the next one via the books, I expect that at least some of that is going to be present no matter what DA4 ends up looking like.
|
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
30,695
gervaise21
12,956
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Jun 29, 2020 8:51:25 GMT
Incidentally, if we go by the trailer and the WiP pictures, then red lyrium and the idol are likely going to be the main drivers of the plot in DA4 and the fact is they could do so even with Solas and the Inquisitor largely on the side-lines. There are enough other parties either wishing to use red lyrium/the idol for their own ends or trying to prevent others from doing so that should keep us busy. Given the connection with the Blight as well, it does seem that it is going to be red lyrium that ties us back to all the previous games and gives the idol its special significance as well. To be honest, given who the idol likely depicts and the fact that Flemeth/Mythal made an appearance in every previous game, it is she who is really the overall antagonist for the series. She has been pulling strings and nudging people in the direction she wished them to take, including Solas. No one can say they have a special connection to her, apart from perhaps Solas, and even he probably doesn't really know her.
Whilst the Inquisitor has a personal connection to Solas, they have none to the idol. Technically if we are going on a feeling of personal responsibility and involvement, then either Hawke or Varric ought to be involved (I really hope not again). If we are looking for a way to cleanse the world of the Blight, then the Warden has a personal interest in that based off the information about their activities in DA4 but we know they have no intention of bringing them back.
Really making the idol the focus does allow a line to be drawn under the Solas/Inquisitor relationship so far as driving forward the plot is concerned. The new PC is likely going to be focussed on the idol and as I say above, even leaving Solas out of the mix, there are plenty of other parties who are going to have their own agenda with respect to that. For all we know Solas doesn't actually need the idol for his ritual but to prevent others from misusing it and interfering adversely with the results of his plan. Even if Solas does need it and we were to kill him, that wouldn't prevent others from misusing it. So the main conundrum is likely to be not how to stop Solas but how to destroy the idol permanently.
|
|
Shari'El
N2
Enchantment?
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 74 Likes: 232
inherit
956
0
Aug 13, 2016 18:37:33 GMT
232
Shari'El
Enchantment?
74
Aug 13, 2016 18:30:40 GMT
August 2016
shariel
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Shari'El on Jun 29, 2020 9:27:38 GMT
...For all we know Solas doesn't actually need the idol for his ritual but to prevent others from misusing it and interfering adversely with the results of his plan. Even if Solas does need it and we were to kill him, that wouldn't prevent others from misusing it. So the main conundrum is likely to be not how to stop Solas but how to destroy the idol permanently. Tevinter Nights spoilers Everybody thought the idol is gone, dissolved into Meridith.
It was one of Solas' agents who freed it from her crystallised body, with a potion he probably got from Solas. Nobody else had the means or knowledge of doing so.
I think he needs it for something, otherwise he wouldn't have taken the risk - it was safer within Meridith.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
36,086
colfoley
18,823
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Jun 29, 2020 11:16:26 GMT
Yikes talk about a non-answer answer from Epler- so which is it? Are they tying off the protagonist, or the story? Now its that they wanted to tie off "that protagonist story"?
This is why if that slide truly showed the aims of Trespasser then it was an epic fail. Not only did it leave players unclear on the future of the Inquisitor PC but apparently the writers were trying to be ambiguous about it. The important word here though is protagonist. As John Epler explained it finished the story of the Inquisitor as the leader of a Thedas wide organisation. Even if you don't disband the Inquisition it was going to be cut down in size so that it was merely the Divine's personal army and she would be controlling it, not the PC. Not only that but the thing that made the PC unique and marked them out as special in the eyes of the population had been taken away. So they are no longer the Herald of Andraste either. Thus their importance in the world was gone and all that remained was their tie to Solas. Incidentally the epilogue makes clear that not everyone even believed them about him. Hardly surprising since people preferred to stick their heads in the sand when Hawke discovered the extent of the Qunari spy network. The Chantry had done such a thorough job with their propaganda down the years that the majority of people would probably react to the idea of an ancient elven god creating havoc in a similar way to that of Sera about the Temple of Mythal; it can't be true, he's just a demon or some deranged apostate with delusions of grandure.
So the "no longer the Inquisitor" character continues to work with a select group of believers in their story as the Shadow Inquisition. The scene at Haven confirms they are going to be looking for new people that Solas doesn't know. The fact that he turned up at one of their gatherings of interested parties shows that he is keeping track on people like Charter whom he does know. The fact that he was fishing for information would suggest that their policy of using new people was working as he felt he had to come in person. The "no longer the Inquisitor" character is not going to be driving the story forward in the next game because that is part of their strategy in dealing with Solas. So they are no longer the protagonist. However, they will still be involved at a distance and may be brought in at some stage as appropriate. So it is a case that the story of them as the Inquisitor protagonist has been tied off but not their overall story.
Of course the writers could back-track on this as Trespasser was written before the DA4 project was shelved and then rebooted. However, on the evidence provided thus far, I'd say that the old PC/Inquisitor is not going to be the protagonist in the next game, either solely or in some dual-role capacity. If they were brought back, then technically they shouldn't even be called the Inquisitor.
the fun part about this is they could get reeeaaaallly cute in the marketing for the game. No the ',Inquisitor' is not the protagonist *wink wink* |
|
Mortal populations can't survive by taking on some of the Darkspawn taint like the Architect wanted, because it renders them infertile (see Wardens). The mortals that don't become Grey Warden like beings just get the Blight and die anyway. No more mortal offspring means humans, qunari, dwarves, and modern elves all eventually dwindle out and die.
agree with essentially everything here.. and not to go jumping off like grease on a hot griddle but I was actually just writing a reply to a different post of yours from earlier in the thread, so I'll just put it here: