Role of Inquisitor and Inquisition in DA4

That's a very stupid idea. If they were going to have Solas kill the Inquisitor off, the time to do it would be during the Trespasser DLC. 

That would've been the logical thing to do, but... this is the Dragon Age writing team who has had a history of writing themselves into corners.

The easiest way to deal with it would have been a recurring protagonist. Remember how Ezio got three games to himself simply because he proved popular and there was more to his story that could be told? Bit of a shame when Ubisoft outplays Bioware in the story consistency department.

That is, of course, the great sticking spot with this little choice. Part of me thinks it was just a little stunt on the part of the Trespasser writer. We've been conditioned to see that type of choice representation as having a certain significance but no matter what the Inquisitor says there, the end result is the same. If it does carry on into DA4, then how it does/does not circumscribe the Fortunate One's (assuming the Inquisitor isn't the DA4 protag. If she/he is, then no conflict) choices could be tricky, but also filled with possibilities. One way to approach it is that the Inquisitor passes certain missions onto the Fortunate One based on that choice. So a Redeeming Inquisitor might give the FO a quest (or quests) to establish a safe route to contact Fen'harel directly. Redemption will have to start with some sort of communication and the Inquisitor shouldn't really depend solely on convenient Plot Armor to do that. Then, the FO could be tasked with gathering evidence of the kindness/beauty/power of this strangely splintered world. Very different from the typical Body Count type adventure though there are bound to be combat challenges doing a little scavenger hunt. The 'stop him' could be the more standard path, though no less weird since you would need quests to find some way to find out exactly what the Plan is. After all, there (hopefully) is no giant 'Drop the Veil' button out there. I get the feeling the Anchor is there to lend a hand...

(Thanks folks. I'll be here all week )



Like the idea of throwing in a little counter-espionage quest. Also love any 'graduated success' quests (prefer to stay away from 'failure' in quests since that usually gives developers hives). In your, counter-espionage example, you can discover the spy cleverly enough and soon enough to turn him/her, or catch the spy just before she/he does some real damage, catch the spy just after he/she does some damage, or never find the spy and keep getting roadblocks in your way. This choice has less danger of impinging on the FO's choices but also a danger of just seeming too trivial. A still running Inquisition has to have both good advantages and good headaches without having to run to the whole 'spy among us' well too often. Conversely, the Rump Inquisition will need to be believably limited without seeming like a liability.



From my own viewpoint, I don't think that will have much if any impact on DA4. Vivienne is far too politically savvy to get caught in northern politics, particularly in Tevinter which she detests. Leilania might help with some espionage, but she will still be very busy in southern Thedas. Cassandra would be the most likely to jump on a nug with her sword and thunder off to the sounds of the guns, but then, it seems like that's exactly what Fen'harel wants us to do. A third religious sect trying to intervene between two others that reject its authority outright seems like a recipe for disaster to me. Thanks for the thoughts.

And? You're going to tell me that DA doesn't build up on an already existing fanbase that played the other titles in the series already? That this game world isn't so lore bloated that any newcomer would be clueless to begin with? ME5 seems to be coming back to old values and look at the time scale there.



Because they are basically service games now with lots of more or less unnecessary DLCs. Ezio had that potential because he was a good character, not making characters that good is not something to be proud of.



But we are not past a point where it would make sense. They're taking the villain along to the next installment but not the hero. Whether Solas was an enemy, love interest or good friend, there is a connection there and throwing it away is just crappy writing. To bring back the LotR analogy: How about if Frodo just gave the ring to some random bum he came across in Bree? This story is only half told and Bioware are screwing themselves sideways by introducing a new nobody who has nothing to do with the established plot. The stakes are high, the entire world is at risk, but sure, let's make some introductions first.

I don't like the Inquisitor. But I agree with this. Even this new nobody protagonist will have, more or less, the same dialogue options the Inquisitor would have, in general conversations, but less options with returning companions, because the backstory isn't there between them. And when you could build up on a character and use that potential in a better way, Bioware chooses not to try, because it needs to take choices into account and Bioware would rather not have them show up in the next game, that is a direct continuation of the last game. It's weak and show lack of faith in the writing staff's ability, the programming staff's ability and a lack of overarching vision. And it's OK, if the game takes place 10, 50, 100 years later, but it's not. But even so, the Inquisitor's vested interest would not have them sit by the sideline. It gets personal, due to the level of involvement with Solas. If the Inquisitor is alive and able, they would be involved.

Yes, actually, that's exactly what I'm going to tell you. Almost a decade has passed since the last Dragon Age game, and BioWare has always been a niche developer in a niche genre. Even at their most successful, they command nothing even close to the established customer base of Ubisoft. They cannot and should not rely on people already being familiar with the plot and characters of Inquisition, and being willing to continue with them.

And yes, I am also saying that the lore is not "too bloated" for newcomers. Dragon Age's lore isn't that complex, and in fact treads extremely familiar ground for anyone with even a passing awareness of the fantasy genre as a whole. If people can handle the lore of Assassin's Creed, when the games aren't even released in chronological order, then they can handle the lore of Dragon Age. If you started with Inquisition and found it a struggle (though I cannot imagine how that possibly could be, it's all extremely derivative), then imagine how new players of DA4 would feel, not just having to learn all the concepts of the world, but also needing to come to grips with a protagonist and group of allies who already have extensive shared history. It strikes me as rather hypocritical of you that you should want the series to be less accessible to newcomers.


Lol, what about the series being "service games" prevents them from reusing the same character if they wanted to? That makes no sense. And as for popularity, or "being a good character", (however you define that), Odyssey was the most popular, and most well-reviewed AC game for a long time, and at the end it was revealed that Alexios/Kassandra had survived from the time of the Peloponnesion War, up to the present day. There's plenty of scope there for Alexios/Kassandra to have continued adventures in different periods of history, all over the world. There was every opportunity to turn AC into the continued adventures of Alexios/Kassandra.


Says who? You? I don't agree. As far as I can see, the Inquisition were conclusively defeated in Trespasser. Solas thoroughly infiltrated the organization and utterly decimated it, and all the supplementary material in the short stories and such only further demonstrates that they can't possibly hope to match his power, barring some sort of game-changing magical artifact or some trope-y bullshit like that, and anyone can pick up an artifact. It doesn't have to be the Inquisitor.


So what? There's plenty of stories that do that. I can even point to an entire genre where that's normally the case: Horror. Plenty of horror series bring the same villain back multiple times, but not the same hero, even if the hero survived.


I feel no connection to Solas and thus neither does my Inquisitor, because I control their feelings. I never wanted him or any of the Inquisition characters to ever come back in the first place. I don't want a continuation of the Solas story, because the Solas story is trite and boring. I wish DA4 was about something else entirely.


Then it would be a different kind of story, but not automatically a bad one. LOTR sucks anyway, because Tolkien can't pace for shit, so who cares? But again, there are plenty of stories that DO switch protagonists from instalment to instalment, or even within the same instalment, and in fact I can, once again, think of an entire genre where that is a common practice: historical and family sagas.


When and where a story "ends" is entirely a matter of personal perspective.


Every protagonist is a nobody until they encounter the plot.


Well that's the exact same situation as every previous Dragon Age game, and you don't seem to have a problem with them. And since DA4 was doubtless going to be taking us to new parts of Thedas, there were going to be introductions anyway, whether we played as the Inquisitor or not. You were always still going to have to learn about new characters and factions.

Some people reach levels of condescension and pretentiousness that I can only aspire to. Not for lack of trying, mind you. But I'm also, usually, dishonest when I do. Usually trying to hit a nerve, or draw a reaction. Some people mean it. Gives me something to think about.

You are doing pretty good with this comment though.

I noticed that too! Lets hope we are not reading too much into things and they are actually planning to bring back the Inquisitor in DA4. Even if it's just a small cameo appearance (though I certainly hope for something more).

Well, to be honest, I think they have always meant that The Inquisitor’s story as The Inquisitor is done, not necessarily that their personal story is complete, as it’s canon in games, books, and comics that The Inquisitor will still be involved in stopping Solas.

I’m more interested in Patrick’s tweet. The fact that marketing will address the Inquisitor question gives me hope that they won’t be reduced to just letters and codices. I don’t think Patrick would define “very well” as “marketing is gonna let ya’ll know that the Inquisitor won’t be involved, sorry.”

So I believe they’re integrated into the story in some fashion. I’ve said this before in this thread, but I think it would be very interesting if something were to happen to The Inquisitor by a third party. It honestly seems like The Evanuris (or two of them) are going to be a huge threat in the next game. They could be a likely suspect, and it would be interesting to see how Solas handles his former enemies targeting the Inquisitor.

For me, this gives plenty of reason for their to be a new protagonist in their own right, while also addressing Solas relationship with the Inquisition.

The same reason why there were (and are) so many players that just played Inquisition at launch without playing DA:O and DA2, or so many players who picked Skyrim without ever playing previous Elder Scroll titles: they were "old" games, especially DA:O. The Witcher series is a great example of this, with the first two games in the trilogy generally being ignored, while the third one gets the entirety of the attention.

People who religiously play a game series from the start are usually a minority, especially so for Dragon Age more than, say, Mass Effect, because the first one doesn't have one over-arching story and characters, while the second one does. And yet still, with the Legendary Edition I found that many players had their first chance to play ME1 because they hopped into the series with ME2, since ME1's clunky gameplay scared them away from the game, despite it being absolutely necessary to the overarching plot of the trilogy.

"Modern" and "fresh" gameplay (graphics too, but I found people willing to endure worse graphics if the gameplay is good) are very important to many people (whether that's a good thing or not) and Inquisition is going to be almost 10 years old when DA4 comes out. Which is why I'd also like for the series to fully commit to a more action-based gameplay to keep that freshness longer and not scare away potential players - but that's another matter, and mostly a personal preference, since there are also people who prefer a push towards a more tactical gameplay.