Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf?

Yes, a lot of people have their individual gripes with the game but to call its narrative a failure is...an interesting stretch. Dreadwolf isn't going to fix Inquisition's story but expand on it, the way all sequals do.

I agree that the main game was pretty sound in its overall narrative. If anything DAI was being used to "fix" DA2 because that had been left with unresolved plot issues that should have been resolved in the cancelled expansion. However, once the mage/Templar rebellion had been resolved in Act 1 and we discovered there had been nothing sinister in the disappearance of Hawke alluded to in the epilogue to DA2 with their appearance at the beginning of the Skyhold section, the narrative was easy enough to follow and largely resolved when we defeated Corypheus at the end. There were some loose threads, such as the Grey Warden situation, but that was no different to the fact that we had only defeated the Blight on the surface in DAO and it might reasonably be assumed this would be an ongoing theme in subsequent games. Even the final reveal about Solas was just something to intrigue the player and encourage speculation about his involvement in the future, without it detracting from the resolution to DAI. They could have left the Inquisitor on that balcony and aside from explaining why the Inquisition was no longer a major force the next game, which they could have done via a codex, their contribution to the ongoing world narrative was pretty much done.

The problems first started to emerge when DG revealed on leaving his role as lead writer that the story originally envisaged for DAI had been split in two. Why he had to do this I don't know, since it created problems for his successor that could have been avoided. So, the team tried to deal with this with Trespasser, allegedly intended to tie off the Inquisitor's role in the narrative but instead made the situation worse. The stupid part is much of the criticism and speculation could have been avoided by simply not having that confrontation with Solas.

Or, by this logic, did Empire Strikes Back fix A New Hope? (Interesting example to since there is some of the same stuff going on, Tarkin was the villain in the first one, Vader was kind of a side hustle, and then we hadn't even been introduced to the Emperor yet). Is Mass Effect 3 'fixing' the story of Mass Effect 2?

This is not a particularly good analogy with respect to this thread because Empire Strikes Back was part of a trilogy where we had an ongoing protagonist in Luke, plus his supporting team of Leia, Han, Chewbacca and the robots. The story could have ended with a New Hope but nevertheless there were enough aspects to suggest there was an overarching story that could be covered in subsequent films. If Star Wars hadn't been such a phenomenal success, it is likely there would have been no sequel and that didn't harm the resolution in a New Hope. The Empire Strikes Back was the one film in the series where there was no real resolution at the end and there obviously had to be a sequel.

The same is true of the Mass Effect trilogy. Again, we had one protagonist throughout the series, Shepard, and some supporters that were part of the team in all three games, Joker, Garrus, Chakwas, Liara (in DLC only for ME2). Whilst the Reapers were obviously an ongoing threat (a bit like the Blight in Thedas), each of the games had a narrative that was resolved within it. However, ME2 had that final scene with the Reapers advancing menacingly, that meant there had to be a sequel.

If Dragon Age was always intended to be a series of stand alone stories so far as the central protagonist was concerned, with the setting itself being the ongoing constant, then they should have kept to that theme and not had Solas confront the Inquisitor. It is like saying that having discovered his relationship to Darth Vadar, Luke should have been side-lined for Return of the Jedi and an entirely new protagonist take his place. Now with ME2 it was possible to end the game with Shepard dead but so far as the story was concerned that was it; you couldn't play ME3 with that world state import. Essentially, in that version with no Shepard, there is no ongoing story to tell, the Reapers invade at the beginning, there is no effective resistance and they win.

All this being said, since they have confirmed that DA:D will have a new hero, I intend approaching it as a new game, not a direct sequel/resolution of the previous one. In other words, I shall role play my new character, who does not know the Inquisitor, except perhaps by rumour, and has no reason to expect them to make an appearance in their life.

Lazarillo
N4

Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, SWTOR
Posts: 1,025 Likes: 2,011

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 19, 2023 20:46:32 GMT

Quote

Post by Lazarillo on Jun 19, 2023 20:46:32 GMT

Jun 18, 2023 20:37:22 GMT q5tyhj said:

How is telling the rest of the story "fixing" the first part of the story? I don't see how that follows. And how do we know that the Solas/Veil plotline isn't "the name game", especially given what the lore reveals in Trespasser imply about the role of dragons in the areas the Solas/Veil plot is going to touch upon (i.e. the Evanuris, the Black City, the Old God dragons)? The assumptions you're making here appear to be of fairly dubious justification.

to the best of my knowledge they didn't elaborate on what the split would entail. In terms of narrative, setting, gameplay elements, how much of the game would be devoted to one antagonist or the next. All we have is our own guess work on exactly what this means and since it didn't happen,

I'm not really, when they name their planned next game after Inquisition's villain, I feel like assumptions that it'll be about Inquisition's villain are safe enough to make, at least in as much as we're also not assuming it's not actually a Mass Effect game, y'know? If it was called something like, I dunno, Dragon Age: Rebellion, or something similar, it'd be harder to guess at their intentions. But so far, we have a name of the game, and the one bit of promo art they've done is a picture of the guy.

To be clear, this has little to do with the main thread topic of how it'll hypothetically handle a protagonist. But regardless of how it does so, assumptions on what it is about seem quite easy to make. Would I like it to be better than that? Yes, but I also don't have any evidence it will, while 100% of the evidence I've been shown indicates it won't.

From there though I think its a rather significant stretch to assume either a sunk cost fallancy or that Inquisition needs Dreadwolf to 'fix' its story[...]Dreadwolf isn't going to fix Inquisition's story but expand on it, the way all sequals do.

This is, of course, gonna be a different-strokes-for-different-folks sort of thing, but DAI had a terribly weak story that ended in an incomplete fashion, trying to leave the onus of the storytelling to the next game, rather than wrapping up its story in its own. DA2, to be fair, did similarly, that was perhaps its biggest flaw in terms of storytelling, I'd say. And DAO didn't need a sequel to "expand" its story, nor do any of its sequels really do anything to expand that. It stands alone magnificently (and ironically, what it left in terms of setting and intrigue kinda ended up being ruined by attempts to follow up in Inquisition, since all DAI really did was go "unreliablenarratorslol!" and say that none of the plot threads established had any reason we could assume to mean anything anyway in future entries).

Regardless, if the developers thought DAI didn't need to be "fixed", they wouldn't again, be apparently, based on the frigging name of the game be wasting ten years developing a followup with fixing it as the central thrust.

colfoley
N7

Posts: 19,292 Likes: 37,526
Member is Online

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 20, 2023 2:21:23 GMT Absafraginlootly likes this

Quote

Post by colfoley on Jun 20, 2023 2:21:23 GMT

Jun 19, 2023 8:42:22 GMT gervaise21 said:

Yes, a lot of people have their individual gripes with the game but to call its narrative a failure is...an interesting stretch. Dreadwolf isn't going to fix Inquisition's story but expand on it, the way all sequals do.

I agree that the main game was pretty sound in its overall narrative. If anything DAI was being used to "fix" DA2 because that had been left with unresolved plot issues that should have been resolved in the cancelled expansion. However, once the mage/Templar rebellion had been resolved in Act 1 and we discovered there had been nothing sinister in the disappearance of Hawke alluded to in the epilogue to DA2 with their appearance at the beginning of the Skyhold section, the narrative was easy enough to follow and largely resolved when we defeated Corypheus at the end. There were some loose threads, such as the Grey Warden situation, but that was no different to the fact that we had only defeated the Blight on the surface in DAO and it might reasonably be assumed this would be an ongoing theme in subsequent games. Even the final reveal about Solas was just something to intrigue the player and encourage speculation about his involvement in the future, without it detracting from the resolution to DAI. They could have left the Inquisitor on that balcony and aside from explaining why the Inquisition was no longer a major force the next game, which they could have done via a codex, their contribution to the ongoing world narrative was pretty much done.

The problems first started to emerge when DG revealed on leaving his role as lead writer that the story originally envisaged for DAI had been split in two. Why he had to do this I don't know, since it created problems for his successor that could have been avoided. So, the team tried to deal with this with Trespasser, allegedly intended to tie off the Inquisitor's role in the narrative but instead made the situation worse. The stupid part is much of the criticism and speculation could have been avoided by simply not having that confrontation with Solas.

Or, by this logic, did Empire Strikes Back fix A New Hope? (Interesting example to since there is some of the same stuff going on, Tarkin was the villain in the first one, Vader was kind of a side hustle, and then we hadn't even been introduced to the Emperor yet). Is Mass Effect 3 'fixing' the story of Mass Effect 2?

This is not a particularly good analogy with respect to this thread because Empire Strikes Back was part of a trilogy where we had an ongoing protagonist in Luke, plus his supporting team of Leia, Han, Chewbacca and the robots. The story could have ended with a New Hope but nevertheless there were enough aspects to suggest there was an overarching story that could be covered in subsequent films. If Star Wars hadn't been such a phenomenal success, it is likely there would have been no sequel and that didn't harm the resolution in a New Hope. The Empire Strikes Back was the one film in the series where there was no real resolution at the end and there obviously had to be a sequel.

The same is true of the Mass Effect trilogy. Again, we had one protagonist throughout the series, Shepard, and some supporters that were part of the team in all three games, Joker, Garrus, Chakwas, Liara (in DLC only for ME2). Whilst the Reapers were obviously an ongoing threat (a bit like the Blight in Thedas), each of the games had a narrative that was resolved within it. However, ME2 had that final scene with the Reapers advancing menacingly, that meant there had to be a sequel.

If Dragon Age was always intended to be a series of stand alone stories so far as the central protagonist was concerned, with the setting itself being the ongoing constant, then they should have kept to that theme and not had Solas confront the Inquisitor. It is like saying that having discovered his relationship to Darth Vadar, Luke should have been side-lined for Return of the Jedi and an entirely new protagonist take his place. Now with ME2 it was possible to end the game with Shepard dead but so far as the story was concerned that was it; you couldn't play ME3 with that world state import. Essentially, in that version with no Shepard, there is no ongoing story to tell, the Reapers invade at the beginning, there is no effective resistance and they win.

All this being said, since they have confirmed that DA:D will have a new hero, I intend approaching it as a new game, not a direct sequel/resolution of the previous one. In other words, I shall role play my new character, who does not know the Inquisitor, except perhaps by rumour, and has no reason to expect them to make an appearance in their life.

In your opinion, Tresspasser made the situation worse. And I do recognize that and even fully emphasize with the situation that posters like you and Hanako and a few others are in over here thinking that your Inquisitor would have the desire to get involved full tilt to do something about the situation. The trouble is when I am reading a lot of these comments the idea that Tresspasser as a bad thing isn't treated as opinion by those who hold it but objectifiable reality. That BioWare commited some cardinal sin against writing in structuring their story this way. Whereas me and a lot of other people disagree with that assessment or are overall indifferent to the Solas plotline in the first place. As I have stressed before Tresspasser felt like the perfect tie off for my Inquisitor's storyline. Yes, much like the Warden or Hawke they can continue to appear in cameos and references and codex entries and make their prescence in the universe known...they will still be doing any number of things...but their involvement in the mainline story of Dragon Age, I felt, ended with her stabbing a knife through the map of Tevinter. And it took me a long time to see the logic of the other side because I was pretty convinced I was right, but I got there, but that is how confident I was that Tresspasser ended the Inquisitor's story and I'm still sticking to the headcanon until such time as BioWare updates it.

Regardless though and regardless of our individual feelings on the matter it is the authorial intent, stated numerous times now, for Tresspasser tieing off their story. We can like or disagree with it but to say that BioWare made the situation worse when that was exactly what they set out to do, sounds maybe a little arrogant.

As for the rest...I think you are missing the forest through the trees here.

Yes you are right that Star Wars and a few other examples have continuing characters and a continuing protagonist, and that Dragon Age is a little unique in how it handles its storytelling in this regard...I want you to imagine a hypothetical:

Say Mark Hamil died in between the filming of A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back. This would've had to neccessitate a course correction in the series. Maybe they would've promoted Han, maybe they wouldn've had to create an entirely new character to match Vader and create the same stakes, maybe they would've even had to write Vader out or diminish his role and start from scratch. And while this situation didn't happen here this kind of thing happens all the time in Industry Fiction. Video game makers, movie writers, and tv producers have to adapt their narratives all the time in order to tell their stories because actors die, or lose interest, or become too rich to justify rehiring for future programs. Indeed this has already happened with Dragon Age with the likes of at least Kate Mulgrew.

The point for Dragon Age is that yes it going about telling a long term storyline through the eyes of different protagonists may be somewhat unique way of going about it as a baked in bit of the game, each game as still tried to tell a story which has built off the previous work. So you may view DA:D as a seperate entity entirely but BioWare isn't. Albeit a sequel ten years at least after its last game so the storyline may need a few updates, but it will still be connected much the same way Top Gun was connected to Maverick.

Jun 19, 2023 20:46:32 GMT Lazarillo said:

Jun 18, 2023 20:37:22 GMT q5tyhj said:

How is telling the rest of the story "fixing" the first part of the story? I don't see how that follows. And how do we know that the Solas/Veil plotline isn't "the name game", especially given what the lore reveals in Trespasser imply about the role of dragons in the areas the Solas/Veil plot is going to touch upon (i.e. the Evanuris, the Black City, the Old God dragons)? The assumptions you're making here appear to be of fairly dubious justification.

to the best of my knowledge they didn't elaborate on what the split would entail. In terms of narrative, setting, gameplay elements, how much of the game would be devoted to one antagonist or the next. All we have is our own guess work on exactly what this means and since it didn't happen,

I'm not really, when they name their planned next game after Inquisition's villain, I feel like assumptions that it'll be about Inquisition's villain are safe enough to make, at least in as much as we're also not assuming it's not actually a Mass Effect game, y'know? If it was called something like, I dunno, Dragon Age: Rebellion, or something similar, it'd be harder to guess at their intentions. But so far, we have a name of the game, and the one bit of promo art they've done is a picture of the guy.

To be clear, this has little to do with the main thread topic of how it'll hypothetically handle a protagonist. But regardless of how it does so, assumptions on what it is about seem quite easy to make. Would I like it to be better than that? Yes, but I also don't have any evidence it will, while 100% of the evidence I've been shown indicates it won't.

From there though I think its a rather significant stretch to assume either a sunk cost fallancy or that Inquisition needs Dreadwolf to 'fix' its story[...]Dreadwolf isn't going to fix Inquisition's story but expand on it, the way all sequals do.

This is, of course, gonna be a different-strokes-for-different-folks sort of thing, but DAI had a terribly weak story that ended in an incomplete fashion, trying to leave the onus of the storytelling to the next game, rather than wrapping up its story in its own. DA2, to be fair, did similarly, that was perhaps its biggest flaw in terms of storytelling, I'd say. And DAO didn't need a sequel to "expand" its story, nor do any of its sequels really do anything to expand that. It stands alone magnificently (and ironically, what it left in terms of setting and intrigue kinda ended up being ruined by attempts to follow up in Inquisition, since all DAI really did was go "unreliablenarratorslol!" and say that none of the plot threads established had any reason we could assume to mean anything anyway in future entries).

Regardless, if the developers thought DAI didn't need to be "fixed", they wouldn't again, be apparently, based on the frigging name of the game be wasting ten years developing a followup with fixing it as the central thrust.

The fundamental mistake and disagreement is the assumption that Solas was Inquisition's villain. And given that he only appeared as a 'villain' (which is kind of stretching things since even in Tresspasser he wasn't overly antagonistic) in the last ten minutes of the last DLC, I've always found that logic suspect. And since they are bothering to name the next game after it is only further proof. The game isn't about Inquisition's Villain. Dreadwolf is about the Dreadwolf so the villain gets the game named after him.

Similarly the storyline in Inquisition, the main plot which was to command the Inquisition and defeat the forces behind the Breech, was solved during Inquisition. That story was wrapped up. Any of its DLC was just side stories, expansions, or set up for the next storeline, the type of bridge that BioWare has been known for.

I do agree with you that Origins was more or less a stand alone game that they then turned into a franchise but it had enough lingering plot threads to make work...and the existance of unreliable narrators is one of my favorite features of DA because that is a feature of real life historical study as well.

And do you have any support for your opinion that the next game will be 'fixing' Inquisition other then your read on the name of the game? Any statements from the devs that they think Inquisition was a failure? And statements from EA? Any financial reports that we could point to?

On some level you kind of have a point. Any sequel is an opprotunity to 'fix' and address the criticisms of previous instalments via gameplay or story issues that came up. This is one of the nice things about creating sequels if you do it right but what I get from your comments is not a little adjustment but that of the fundamental breakdown. You feel Inquisition sucked so bad that you are viewing the next game as a hail marry attempt to fix it. Which sure, as legitimate as any other opinion but I'm just not sure where you are coming from given how sequels typically work. And, for me, having the name of Dreadwolf is a prime example that they are making it a sequel and that its job isn't to 'fix' Inquisition. This isn't Halo we're talking about where Halo 5 was so badly panned that its sequel basically retconned and ignored any of the narrative consequences from the ending, they are going full into it and adressing it as naturally as they can and taking Inquisition's ball and running with it.

Patreon
(for my writing, posting chapters of my novel)

Hanako Ikezawa
N7

Scribbles

Posts: 22,991 Likes: 31,578

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 20, 2023 3:25:12 GMT via mobile

Quote

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 20, 2023 3:25:12 GMT

Jun 20, 2023 2:21:23 GMT colfoley said:

I want you to imagine a hypothetical:

Say Mark Hamil died in between the filming of A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back. This would've had to neccessitate a course correction in the series. Maybe they would've promoted Han, maybe they wouldn've had to create an entirely new character to match Vader and create the same stakes, maybe they would've even had to write Vader out or diminish his role and start from scratch. And while this situation didn't happen here this kind of thing happens all the time in Industry Fiction. Video game makers, movie writers, and tv producers have to adapt their narratives all the time in order to tell their stories because actors die, or lose interest, or become too rich to justify rehiring for future programs. Indeed this has already happened with Dragon Age with the likes of at least Kate Mulgrew.

Practically every time you are talking about the would just recast someone else for the role. In your example, they’d get someone else to play Luke since he’s the character the OT is based around. Him and Anakin’s redemption.

Hanako Ikezawa
N7

Scribbles

Posts: 22,991 Likes: 31,578

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 20, 2023 3:28:21 GMT via mobile NotN7 likes this

Quote

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 20, 2023 3:28:21 GMT

Jun 20, 2023 2:21:23 GMT colfoley said:

Similarly the storyline in Inquisition, the main plot which was to command the Inquisition and defeat the forces behind the Breech, was solved during Inquisition. That story was wrapped up.

Oh really? Last I checked the game ends with us finding out the man responsible for everything is still out there and planning on doing something even worse. So no, the Inquisition’s mission is not finished yet.

gervaise21
N7

∯ Oh Loredy...

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 13,101 Likes: 31,186

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 20, 2023 17:45:16 GMT Hanako Ikezawa and OhDaniGirl like this

Quote

Post by gervaise21 on Jun 20, 2023 17:45:16 GMT

As I have stressed before Tresspasser felt like the perfect tie off for my Inquisitor's storyline.

Please explain why you think this? Are you saying that your Inquisitor is just happily relaxing and not the slightest bit troubled by the implications of that conversation with Solas?

I am not just speaking for my own reaction. When discussing Trespasser with casual players, back just after we had all played it, they were looking forward to playing the Inquisitor again next game. Unlike me, they had never visited these boards or knew that the team at Bioware had previously declared there would be a new protagonist each game. No doubt, particularly after this length of time, if they are still interested in Dragon Age, they will play it with a new protagonist, but it was quite clear to me that had the turn around on the game been a lot shorter, they would have been surprised to be presented with this. This is entirely due to that final scene with Solas. Omit that from the narrative and I agree that Trespasser was a pretty good tie off to the Inquisitor's story.

However, allowing an aggressive disband with the words "I'm off to save the world again" and having that final map stabbing scene where the Inquisitor declares either we are going to stop Solas by any means necessary or "save our friend from himself", does not suggest a closed book where the Inquisitor is concerned. Yes, they declared they needed to find new team members that Solas didn't know but they were still going to be part of our Inquisitor's team. In Tevinter Nights, PW even has Solas still addressing the Inquisitor through Charter and continuing to apologise for his actions. (This in fact only works if you were on good terms with him). If the Inquisitor was happily taking a back seat, why does Solas keep drawing them back in? Why does he assume they are still running the Inquisition, when that should either be the responsibility of the Divine or no one, because you disbanded the organisation?

For that matter, if the writers thought that they had done such a good job with Trespasser, why did they authorise a comic series that had Harding and Varric go "all around the houses", to arrive back at exactly the same conclusion we reached at the end of Trepasser?

We can like or disagree with it but to say that BioWare made the situation worse when that was exactly what they set out to do, sounds maybe a little arrogant.

I would suggest they know it didn't do what they intended, based on the examples I have given above, but, as you say, this is merely my opinion and clearly other people like yourself disagree. They have even admitted that having their arm chopped off was not sufficient reason for them to be retired, somewhat borne out by the fact that Neve has an artificial leg and yet that doesn't hold her back, plus in the Sera epilogue the Inquisitor can be seen with a crossbow attached to what remains of that arm and actively engaged in activities with the Jennies.

Similarly the storyline in Inquisition, the main plot which was to command the Inquisition and defeat the forces behind the Breech, was solved during Inquisition. That story was wrapped up. Any of its DLC was just side stories, expansions, or set up for the next storeline, the type of bridge that BioWare has been known for. 

As Hanako has said, I agree that story wrapped up nicely at the end of the main game. However, Trespasser setting up the next story line is not in keeping with previous games. Legacy should have been tied into the Exalted March expansion and, so far as I can tell, would have tied up Hawke's story in that game, since it ends with them, or their sibling, getting married (with Varric dead). It was the cancellation of Exalted March that necessitated involving Hawke and some of the plot threads set up in the main game and DLC in DAI. That was not the case with DAO. Whilst many people have wanted to see their Warden again, their story was wrapped up at the conclusion to either the main game or the associated DLC, although owing to the introduction of a Warden plot in DAI, they had to come up with a reason why that wouldn't involve them because they could see that otherwise they should have made an appearance. Also, if they stated that Trespasser was meant to tie off the Inquisitor's story, then even the writers considered that their story wasn't wrapped up in the main game. In fact, it was the Inquisition still being an active force when that original aim had been dealt with that lay behind the national powers calling for an Exalted Council to discuss the future of the organisation. I am also happy to concede that Trespasser tied off their story as Lord Inquisitor of Thedas and even the title Herald of Andraste (as that was linked to the anchor) but not their involvement as an individual in future events connected with Solas.

So, whilst I am prepared not to see the Inquisitor at all in the next game, I do not accept that Trespasser finished their story as a PC, despite what they claimed was the aim of that DLC, because the writers have made it abundantly clear both in Trespasser and subsequent associated media that their story is tied to that of Solas.

Last Edit: Jun 20, 2023 18:12:32 GMT by gervaise21

Absafraginlootly
N4

"Abso-fraggin-lutely!" ~ Captain John Sheridan and Satai Delenn

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 1,666 Likes: 4,633

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 2:33:38 GMT via mobile colfoley, Walter Black, and 1 more like this

Quote

Post by Absafraginlootly on Jun 21, 2023 2:33:38 GMT

Trespasser left me pretty damn certain that I'd be playing a new character in the fight against Solas, whilst my inquisitor tries to stop him aswell, whether independently or in concert with one another. That's what the game communicated to me when my inquisitor declared she would stop him and then said we'd need people he doesn't know.

I also think I kinda get where Bioware is coming from when they say that trespasser was tying up the inquisitors story line. In DAI they led a huge organisation+army and wielded a magical mark to hunt down Corypheus and stop the breach. They got him, and closed it, but that still left them with an awesomely powerful magic doohickey and a huge army that Bioware probably didn't want (in)conveniently around for next story. So in trespasser the inquisitor lost their army, either disbanding it or losing control of it to the Chantry, and lost their powerful magic ability. Trespasser does wrap up what's left dangling from DAI's storyline in that sense.

Stopping Solas is a new story, one that they've decided will be played by a new protagonist, perhaps they should not have introduced the new story in trespasser, as that gave some impression that they would play it with the inquisitor. I'm guessing the reason they did is because they wanted their scaled down shadow inquisition doing stuff in DAD, but perhaps they should have left revealing that the inquisitor knows about Solas and inquisition agents still exist because they're trying to stop him until DAD!tagonist met some of them in Dreadwolf. They probably wanted to show the cool thing, show don't tell y'know? And to tease the next game. That may have been a mistake.

I've always felt they could write a good story with either a new pc or a returning inq (and that they could write a bad one with either too), and that which would be better would depend on what story they're writing. Since i haven't seen the story yet, and there's so many different things they could write, I don't know whether I'll feel they've chosen correctly. I know some already feel they've chosen wrong because they only want to stop Solas with the inquisitor. I do get wanting the inquisitor to be the protagonist while fighting Solas because of the personal connection, how it might make some feel more emotionally involved in the plot, I just don't think that's the only way it can be good. And I think the amount that connection would be used if they were the protagonist would be limited. Moreso than if they were an npc. Since Solas can just as easily hate the inquisitor as care for them and that 'killing you would cause too much chaos' excuse to not go after a hated inq only lasts so long once you no longer run a huge organisation and actually start interfering with his plans. Ultimately he'd have to do the same things regardless of whether you're hated or loved with only some dialogue variation. So that the main plot can happen.

Since we are getting a new pc, I'd personally like to see the inquisitor get a cool Aragorn moment, distracting the bad guy so the hero he didn't see coming can stop him. A character doesn't have to be the protagonist to be a hero, against Solas or anyone else. I don't feel like my inquisitor's story has been ruined just cause they're not the POV character in DAD.

Last Edit: Jun 21, 2023 2:40:55 GMT by Absafraginlootly

"You are required to do nothing, least of all believe. Shut one's eye tight or open one's arms wider, either way one's a fool." - Flemeth

gervaise21
N7

∯ Oh Loredy...

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 13,101 Likes: 31,186

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 7:46:27 GMT

Quote

Post by gervaise21 on Jun 21, 2023 7:46:27 GMT

Nov 28, 2021 5:29:36 GMT Absafraginlootly said:

Trespasser does wrap up what's left dangling from DAI's storyline in that sense.

Yes, I absolutely agree, which is why I say that had they left out that final confrontation with Solas (and got rid of the anchor by some other means), it would have nicely wrapped up the Inquisitor/Herald's involvement in events. The only one left hanging would have been a female Lavellan who romanced Solas but she would just have to accept he wasn't coming back, which would be far better than have him stalking her dreams, in addition to knowing what he had planned for the world, having left her a second time.

Nov 28, 2021 5:29:36 GMT Absafraginlootly said:

Stopping Solas is a new story, one that they've decided will be played by a new protagonist, perhaps they should not have introduced the new story in trespasser, as that gave some impression that they would play it with the inquisitor.

I would agree with this assessment. That final confrontation with Solas felt very much like a teaser for the next game in which the Inquisitor would be involved to a greater or lesser extent, even if the majority of the story was covered by a new PC. Without that conversation they could have started with a new PC and no expectation of seeing the previous one.

The comic series the Missing would then make sense. Charter, Varric and Harding have heard rumours of a Fen'Harel cult and expectations of some world changing event that is going to restore the elves to power. Based off our discoveries in Trespasser, they think Solas could be connected, so they go in search of him. They don't mention this to the Inquisitor because they are enjoying a quite retirement, particularly a romanced Lavellan as they know she has only just succeeded in getting over him. As they progress around Thedas, they discover weird stuff in Arlathan that could again point to Solas but also a message from him warning them off. By the end they conclude that he knows them too well, so they need to find someone else to track him down.

Actually, now I think about it, is the Inquisitor ever referenced in the Missing? At least so far as being the person driving the search? May be the Missing was intended to do for the Inquisitor what Asunder did with respect to Hawke's importance in the mage/Templar rebellion. Asunder essentially disconnected Hawke from that plot line, making the chief instigators Fiona and Lambert. So, the Missing essentially is intended to disconnect the Inquisitor from the narrative and substitute Varric/Harding as the instigators of the search for Solas going forward. Hence, also, Varric playing such a prominent voice over role in the 2020 trailer and 2022 cinematic.

Nov 28, 2021 5:29:36 GMT Absafraginlootly said:

I don't feel like my inquisitor's story has been ruined just cause they're not the POV character in DAD.

I don't feel their story is ruined but I do think that Trespasser raised an expectation that they would be involved in some way. Hence, this thread and the speculation that perhaps they are going to have dual protagonists at some point in the game. However, having had my epiphany over the purpose of the Missing, I think this is less likely. Varric and Harding will be the ones driving the search in game and likely there will be a codex to explain our previous hero's absence for the benefit of those who haven't read the comics but did play Trespasser.

Last Edit: Jun 21, 2023 7:57:36 GMT by gervaise21

Hanako Ikezawa
N7

Scribbles

Posts: 22,991 Likes: 31,578

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 8:21:13 GMT via mobile

Quote

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 21, 2023 8:21:13 GMT

Jun 21, 2023 7:46:27 GMT gervaise21 said:

Actually, now I think about it, is the Inquisitor ever referenced in the Missing? At least so far as being the person driving the search? May be the Missing was intended to do for the Inquisitor what Asunder did with respect to Hawke's importance in the mage/Templar rebellion. Asunder essentially disconnected Hawke from that plot line, making the chief instigators Fiona and Lambert. So, the Missing essentially is intended to disconnect the Inquisitor from the narrative and substitute Varric/Harding as the instigators of the search for Solas going forward. Hence, also, Varric playing such a prominent voice over role in the 2020 trailer and 2022 cinematic.

The Inquisitor is referenced, yes. In Issue 1 for example when Charter is giving Varric the mission she says he was chosen because she and the Inquisitor trust nobody more than him (oh how the bastardization has already started).

If that was the purpose of that pointless comic, then I loathe Varric even more now and hate Harding as well.

Last Edit: Jun 21, 2023 8:21:34 GMT by Hanako Ikezawa

gervaise21
N7

∯ Oh Loredy...

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 13,101 Likes: 31,186

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 8:43:17 GMT

Quote

Post by gervaise21 on Jun 21, 2023 8:43:17 GMT

If that was the purpose of that pointless comic, then I loathe Varric even more now and hate Harding as well.

I could be entirely wrong about this but I did start getting a sense of this back with the 2020 trailer and the pair of them did represent the two options offered over what to do with Solas when you catch up with him.

The Inquisitor is referenced, yes. In Issue 1 for example when Charter is giving Varric the mission she says he was chosen because she and the Inquisitor trust nobody more than him

Unfortunately, I would say that this seems to lend weight to my theory rather than the contrary. Still, since he and Harding concluded that they were too well known to Solas, I take comfort from the fact that this means they won't be party members, just quest setters. If the Inquisitor is going to be entirely side-lined then I don't want members of their team forced on me as party members either, particularly Varric. However, I appreciate we are likely the minority on this one, as plenty of people seem to be enthusiastic about the prospect of his return again.

Hanako Ikezawa
N7

Scribbles

Posts: 22,991 Likes: 31,578

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 8:54:51 GMT via mobile

Quote

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 21, 2023 8:54:51 GMT

Jun 21, 2023 8:43:17 GMT gervaise21 said:

If that was the purpose of that pointless comic, then I loathe Varric even more now and hate Harding as well.

I could be entirely wrong about this but I did start getting a sense of this back with the 2020 trailer and the pair of them did represent the two options offered over what to do with Solas when you catch up with him.

The Inquisitor is referenced, yes. In Issue 1 for example when Charter is giving Varric the mission she says he was chosen because she and the Inquisitor trust nobody more than him

Unfortunately, I would say that this seems to lend weight to my theory rather than the contrary. Still, since he and Harding concluded that they were too well known to Solas, I take comfort from the fact that this means they won't be party members, just quest setters. If the Inquisitor is going to be entirely side-lined then I don't want members of their team forced on me as party members either, particularly Varric. However, I appreciate we are likely the minority on this one, as plenty of people seem to be enthusiastic about the prospect of his return again.

Good to know the two options from an intelligent character are going to be represented by two dumbasses. Can’t wait to see how else they butcher the Inquisitor and Inquisition.

Oh they’ll absolutely be party members. Can’t have a Dragon Age game without fucking Varric apparently(Can’t wait until DAO Remaster when they put him in somewhere for whatever reason). He’s the real main character. Maybe not squadmates but definitely equivalent to like the advisors or non-squad Mass Effect crew. And they’ll probably continue to bastardize his relationship with the Inquisitor forcing him to be our best friend despite my characters not trusting him as far as you can throw him. Better be able to actually kill them off, but doubt we’ll even be able to be antagonistic towards them.

Gileadan
N5

Agent 46

Clearance Level Ultra

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Origin: ALoneGretchin
Posts: 2,919 Likes: 7,494
Member is Online

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 8:55:23 GMT

Quote

Post by Gileadan on Jun 21, 2023 8:55:23 GMT

If Varric returns again as a companion there can be no doubt who the true protagonist of Dragon Age is.

"Give me a fully loaded Hornet and I'll shake the gates of heaven." -Aria Reilly

colfoley
N7

Posts: 19,292 Likes: 37,526
Member is Online

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 11:33:00 GMT

Quote

Post by colfoley on Jun 21, 2023 11:33:00 GMT

Jun 20, 2023 17:45:16 GMT gervaise21 said:

As I have stressed before Tresspasser felt like the perfect tie off for my Inquisitor's storyline.

Please explain why you think this? Are you saying that your Inquisitor is just happily relaxing and not the slightest bit troubled by the implications of that conversation with Solas?

I am not just speaking for my own reaction. When discussing Trespasser with casual players, back just after we had all played it, they were looking forward to playing the Inquisitor again next game. Unlike me, they had never visited these boards or knew that the team at Bioware had previously declared there would be a new protagonist each game. No doubt, particularly after this length of time, if they are still interested in Dragon Age, they will play it with a new protagonist, but it was quite clear to me that had the turn around on the game been a lot shorter, they would have been surprised to be presented with this. This is entirely due to that final scene with Solas. Omit that from the narrative and I agree that Trespasser was a pretty good tie off to the Inquisitor's story.

However, allowing an aggressive disband with the words "I'm off to save the world again" and having that final map stabbing scene where the Inquisitor declares either we are going to stop Solas by any means necessary or "save our friend from himself", does not suggest a closed book where the Inquisitor is concerned. Yes, they declared they needed to find new team members that Solas didn't know but they were still going to be part of our Inquisitor's team. In Tevinter Nights, PW even has Solas still addressing the Inquisitor through Charter and continuing to apologise for his actions. (This in fact only works if you were on good terms with him). If the Inquisitor was happily taking a back seat, why does Solas keep drawing them back in? Why does he assume they are still running the Inquisition, when that should either be the responsibility of the Divine or no one, because you disbanded the organisation?

For that matter, if the writers thought that they had done such a good job with Trespasser, why did they authorise a comic series that had Harding and Varric go "all around the houses", to arrive back at exactly the same conclusion we reached at the end of Trepasser?

We can like or disagree with it but to say that BioWare made the situation worse when that was exactly what they set out to do, sounds maybe a little arrogant.

I would suggest they know it didn't do what they intended, based on the examples I have given above, but, as you say, this is merely my opinion and clearly other people like yourself disagree. They have even admitted that having their arm chopped off was not sufficient reason for them to be retired, somewhat borne out by the fact that Neve has an artificial leg and yet that doesn't hold her back, plus in the Sera epilogue the Inquisitor can be seen with a crossbow attached to what remains of that arm and actively engaged in activities with the Jennies.

Similarly the storyline in Inquisition, the main plot which was to command the Inquisition and defeat the forces behind the Breech, was solved during Inquisition. That story was wrapped up. Any of its DLC was just side stories, expansions, or set up for the next storeline, the type of bridge that BioWare has been known for. 

As Hanako has said, I agree that story wrapped up nicely at the end of the main game. However, Trespasser setting up the next story line is not in keeping with previous games. Legacy should have been tied into the Exalted March expansion and, so far as I can tell, would have tied up Hawke's story in that game, since it ends with them, or their sibling, getting married (with Varric dead). It was the cancellation of Exalted March that necessitated involving Hawke and some of the plot threads set up in the main game and DLC in DAI. That was not the case with DAO. Whilst many people have wanted to see their Warden again, their story was wrapped up at the conclusion to either the main game or the associated DLC, although owing to the introduction of a Warden plot in DAI, they had to come up with a reason why that wouldn't involve them because they could see that otherwise they should have made an appearance. Also, if they stated that Trespasser was meant to tie off the Inquisitor's story, then even the writers considered that their story wasn't wrapped up in the main game. In fact, it was the Inquisition still being an active force when that original aim had been dealt with that lay behind the national powers calling for an Exalted Council to discuss the future of the organisation. I am also happy to concede that Trespasser tied off their story as Lord Inquisitor of Thedas and even the title Herald of Andraste (as that was linked to the anchor) but not their involvement as an individual in future events connected with Solas.

So, whilst I am prepared not to see the Inquisitor at all in the next game, I do not accept that Trespasser finished their story as a PC, despite what they claimed was the aim of that DLC, because the writers have made it abundantly clear both in Trespasser and subsequent associated media that their story is tied to that of Solas.

No. My Inquisitor is pretty concerned about the situation. But the situation also doesn't demand that she go to Tevinter or Antiva or the Anderfels and lead a team out in the field engaging in personal combat with yet another god. She can quite easily coordinate efforts for sending other agents out into the field tracking Solas or any artifacts which he may be interested in or may stop him. From there the rest of her time is being taken up enjoying her time with her husband and helping to support Divine Cassandra's reform efforts.

From there the same logic largely applies from a narrative and story perspective, authorial intent and the rest. If the Inquisitor does not need to be involved then we must come up with a good reason, narratively speaking, to involve them. And if it was a matter of just loosing the arm then I would agree with you...or at least the argument for leaving her at home would lose much of its support. But its the loss of the anchor, which is a powerful weapon which could've been used against Solas and the entire thing which made the Inquisitor the Inquisitor in the first place...from a narrative standpoint...representing a depowering of them. Plus the depowering of the Inquisition. And then the repeated narrative fact that they are operating from that Solas knowing the Inquisitor makes her a liability in the coming struggle.

Which then forms a base contradiction in your argument because if you can accept and see all of this happening and recognize why they structured the Missing the way they do then that would suggest that the Inquisitor's story is not being tied into Solas at all. Yes, Solas is concerned about the Inquisition at this point but that means jack squat and could easily be used as a means of defeating him. So worried and obssessed about the Inquisition he just does not see the new protagonist coming till the last minute. But regardless everything that BioWare has done has been to disentangle the Inquisitor and to some extent the Inquisition from Solas. They keep on hammering the point home because they surely must realize there are still people out there who miss what they were trying to do in Tresspasser, or strongly disagree with it, its certainly a popular enough opinion out on Social Media for them to be aware of it. So one of the big points of the marketing is to show why this isn't such a good idea. Sure, not always perfectly, but the basic logical point remains a sound one.

Patreon
(for my writing, posting chapters of my novel)

gervaise21
N7

∯ Oh Loredy...

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 13,101 Likes: 31,186

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 17:52:24 GMT

Quote

Post by gervaise21 on Jun 21, 2023 17:52:24 GMT

Jun 21, 2023 15:35:17 GMT Gileadan said:

If Varric returns again as a companion there can be no doubt who the true protagonist of Dragon Age is.

Even if he isn't a party member, he has definitely become the constant since DA2 or, if you like, the unofficial Shepard of the series, which is ironic considering originally they were planning to kill him off in the cancelled Exalted March. I was saying this after the 2020 trailer when Varric did the voice over and we were told it was time for a new hero (except where Varric is concerned). At the time people said I was over reacting, although quite a lot of people were celebrating at the idea Varric would be back.

Still, I suppose I can see why they decided to make Varric the constant in the series. He is generally a popular character and thanks to the cancelled expansion to DA2, he always survives events there and those in DAI and its associated DLC. He has never been a romance. He likes to chronicle the events we are involved in, even if his stories may exaggerate what really happened or gloss over more questionable acts by the PC. He has now had a novel credited to him in the real world and has also appeared in two comic series as a major character. He also narrates the Keep. By contrast the Warden, Hawke and the Inquisitor have merely been given a passing reference in any associated works. This is understandable because of the variations in world states that can exist but it still tends to create the impression that Varric is the real hero and constant in the narrative. Also, according to the Missing, Solas is also on to him and has politely requested that he isn't made the villain in another of Varric's stories, which probably means Varric will produce another book at the end DA:D. :lol:

Last Edit: Jun 21, 2023 17:53:54 GMT by gervaise21

gervaise21
N7

∯ Oh Loredy...

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 13,101 Likes: 31,186

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 18:06:40 GMT

Quote

Post by gervaise21 on Jun 21, 2023 18:06:40 GMT

Which then forms a base contradiction in your argument because if you can accept and see all of this happening and recognize why they structured the Missing the way they do then that would suggest that the Inquisitor's story is not being tied into Solas at all.

Like I said, I only reached this epiphany today and as a result, I agree that the Inquisitor is likely not to appear at all and will only be referenced in codices or conversations with others. However, my original point still stands with regard to the conclusion to Trespasser being misleading and, without that power point presentation by the team stating what the aim of Trespasser had been, many people were still assuming the Inquisitor was returning in the next game because it hadn't been clear to them from the ending to Trespasser that the Inquisitor's story as an individual was over. It appeared as though their story was tied to Solas, even though that hadn't been the writers' intent.

As I say above, I have concluded the Missing was intended to reset the narrative in much the same way as Asunder did in advance of DAI, because the writers had realised that Trespasser (and Charter's conversation with Solas in TN) had left things somewhat ambiguous with regard to the Inquisitor's future involvement. I had sort of reached this conclusion after the 2020 trailer but other people felt it didn't entirely rule out a dual protagonist set up, hence this thread, so the Missing was likely intended to quash any expectations on that front as well.

Last Edit: Jun 21, 2023 18:10:18 GMT by gervaise21

Hanako Ikezawa
N7

Scribbles

Posts: 22,991 Likes: 31,578

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 18:17:42 GMT via mobile

Quote

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 21, 2023 18:17:42 GMT

Jun 21, 2023 8:55:23 GMT Gileadan said:

If Varric returns again as a companion there can be no doubt who the true protagonist of Dragon Age is.

Yeah, it’s obvious BioWare is treating him as a self-insert of themselves at this point. It’s why he never faces any consequences for his actions. Wouldn’t be surprised if they get him together with their other darling Harding.

Hanako Ikezawa
N7

Scribbles

Posts: 22,991 Likes: 31,578

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 18:22:47 GMT via mobile

Quote

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 21, 2023 18:22:47 GMT

Jun 21, 2023 18:06:40 GMT gervaise21 said:

Which then forms a base contradiction in your argument because if you can accept and see all of this happening and recognize why they structured the Missing the way they do then that would suggest that the Inquisitor's story is not being tied into Solas at all.

Like I said, I only reached this epiphany today and as a result, I agree that the Inquisitor is likely not to appear at all and will only be referenced in codices or conversations with others. However, my original point still stands with regard to the conclusion to Trespasser being misleading and, without that power point presentation by the team stating what the aim of Trespasser had been, many people were still assuming the Inquisitor was returning in the next game because it hadn't been clear to them from the ending to Trespasser that the Inquisitor's story as an individual was over. It appeared as though their story was tied to Solas, even though that hadn't been the writers' intent.

As I say above, I have concluded the Missing was intended to reset the narrative in much the same way as Asunder did in advance of DAI, because the writers had realised that Trespasser (and Charter's conversation with Solas in TN) had left things somewhat ambiguous with regard to the Inquisitor's future involvement. I had sort of reached this conclusion after the 2020 trailer but other people felt it didn't entirely rule out a dual protagonist set up, hence this thread, so the Missing was likely intended to quash any expectations on that front as well.

And they still failed if that was the intention of the Missing. Not a good sign of the writing quality in Dreadwolf if that was what they were trying to do with it. Throw away an unique connection between hero and villain for a repeat of the last game where someone with no connection has to stop a crazy old mage who wants to destroy the world to remake his. All the Missing did was prove the Inquisitor needs people actually good at their jobs instead of people like Varric and Harding. Or what, on their word they just give up and become a useless bum as Solas commences his genocide plan?

gervaise21
N7

∯ Oh Loredy...

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 13,101 Likes: 31,186

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 18:23:48 GMT

Quote

Post by gervaise21 on Jun 21, 2023 18:23:48 GMT

But its the loss of the anchor, which is a powerful weapon which could've been used against Solas and the entire thing which made the Inquisitor the Inquisitor in the first place...from a narrative standpoint...representing a depowering of them. Plus the depowering of the Inquisition. And then the repeated narrative fact that they are operating from that Solas knowing the Inquisitor makes her a liability in the coming struggle.

I agree that the anchor was a problem that needed to be removed from the narrative because it could have represented a danger to him that people would constantly be referencing. Getting rid of the Inquisition as a Thedas wide power was also necessary for other plot lines to develop as well. After all, once we had survived the Viddasala's plot to remove the southern leaders, it would have been far harder to justify a plot with the Antaam breaking the Llomerryn Accord, by invading and overrunning Antiva, and successfully advancing down the entire eastern side of Tevinter without much resistance, if the old Inquisition had still been operational. I still think it comical that Teagan seemed more upset at the idea we might antagonise the Qun through our association with Solas than the fact they had would have succeeded in their plan without his, and our, intervention. I imagine he must have felt really stupid insisting on disbanding the Inquisition when the Qun started their advance into Antiva. He'd feel even worse when Qunari dreadnoughts start sailing into Denerim harbour but I dare say our new hero will prevent that from happening.

gervaise21
N7

∯ Oh Loredy...

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 13,101 Likes: 31,186

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 18:26:36 GMT

Quote

Post by gervaise21 on Jun 21, 2023 18:26:36 GMT

Jun 21, 2023 18:22:47 GMT Hanako Ikezawa said:

And they still failed if that was the intention of the Missing.

I said I thought it was probably their plan. I didn't say it was necessarily a good plan. I think I was paraphrasing Solas there. :lol:

Incidentally, I never really liked the reset of the plot in Asunder, particularly as it was Fiona and not Reece or Evangeline who ended up leading the mage rebellion. Then they made her an absolute idiot and traitor to Ferelden, when that nation's leader had offered them sanctuary in their most defensible castle, by selling out to the first Tevinter Magister that came her way. To make matters worse, we were't allowed to judge her for her actions and had to continue with her in post as their leader if we choose to save the mages. I prefer the Templar path because we learn a lot more about Corypheus on that branch and Calpernia is a better antagonist than Samson, but being able to remove Fiona from my world state was also a considerable inducement.

Last Edit: Jun 21, 2023 18:34:56 GMT by gervaise21

Hanako Ikezawa
N7

Scribbles

Posts: 22,991 Likes: 31,578

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 18:31:14 GMT via mobile hafgerdingar likes this

Quote

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 21, 2023 18:31:14 GMT

But its the loss of the anchor, which is a powerful weapon which could've been used against Solas and the entire thing which made the Inquisitor the Inquisitor in the first place...from a narrative standpoint...representing a depowering of them. Plus the depowering of the Inquisition. And then the repeated narrative fact that they are operating from that Solas knowing the Inquisitor makes her a liability in the coming struggle.

Except we have multiple points in the game where it is hammered in that it is not the Anchor that makes the Inquisitor the Inquisitor. It is them themselves. We don’t use the Anchor to end the Mage-Templar War. We don’t use the Anchor to end the Orlesian Civil War. We don’t even really use it to save the Grey Wardens. And so on.

Also how is the Inquisition depowered if it becomes part of the Chantry? If anything that actually makes it even stronger since we have far more influence and resources with that. It’s not like the Divine is going to oppose us wanting to stop Solas since they are one of our main people involved in doing so.

gervaise21
N7

∯ Oh Loredy...

Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 13,101 Likes: 31,186

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 18:46:58 GMT colfoley likes this

Quote

Post by gervaise21 on Jun 21, 2023 18:46:58 GMT

Except we have multiple points in the game where it is hammered in that it is not the Anchor that makes the Inquisitor the Inquisitor. It is them themselves. We don’t use the Anchor to end the Mage-Templar War. We don’t use the Anchor to end the Orlesian Civil War. We don’t even really use it to save the Grey Wardens. And so on.

You have to admit that the answer to "how do we solve a problem like Solas", would be a lot simpler with the anchor. Forget the Veil Jumpers and whatever powers they turn out to possess, we can enter and leave the Fade at will, suck him into it or open a rift inside him. That is clearly what they wanted to avoid; a protagonist who already had a weapon that could be used against him.

Also how is the Inquisition depowered if it becomes part of the Chantry? If anything that actually makes it even stronger since we have far more influence and resources with that.

Most of our forces were disbanded at the end of Trespasser, even if we do hand over the Inquisition to the Divine. It is now just her private army, which is a starting point when dealing with threats but not nearly so extensive as it was when it was our responsibility. Anyway, we still continue to work from the shadows regardless of our decision, which is what a Divine Leliana actually recommends, probably because she is more comfortable working with a secretive, clandestine organisation rather than an openly powerful, martial one.

Hanako Ikezawa
N7

Scribbles

Posts: 22,991 Likes: 31,578

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 18:53:21 GMT via mobile

Quote

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 21, 2023 18:53:21 GMT

Jun 21, 2023 18:26:36 GMT gervaise21 said:

Jun 21, 2023 18:22:47 GMT Hanako Ikezawa said:

And they still failed if that was the intention of the Missing.

I said I thought it was probably their plan. I didn't say it was necessarily a good plan. I think I was paraphrasing Solas there. :lol:

Incidentally, I never really liked the reset of the plot in Asunder, particularly as it was Fiona and not Reece or Evangeline who ended up leading the mage rebellion. Then they made her an absolute idiot and traitor to Ferelden, when that nation's leader had offered them sanctuary in their most defensible castle, by selling out to the first Tevinter Magister that came her way. To make matters worse, we were't allowed to judge her for her actions and had to continue with her in post as their leader if we choose to save the mages. I prefer the Templar path because we learn a lot more about Corypheus on that branch and Calpernia is a better antagonist than Samson, but being able to remove Fiona from my world state was also a considerable inducement.

And as I said, if they think they did a good job with that then I have no hopes that Dreadwolf will have quality writing.

And I agree I hate how they butchered some things. It’s another example of why I dread the Inquisitor and Inquisition becoming NPCs since I have no doubt that BioWare is absolutely going to bludgeon them with the Idiot Stick just to make the new PC look better and “be the best choice to defeat Solas”.
I still always side with the Mages simply because I like how seeing the dark future gives you a sense or stakes and urgency since this is what will happen if we fail where in the Templar route we don’t get that. Plus don’t want to punish every mage for Fiona’s stupid choices.

Hanako Ikezawa
N7

Scribbles

Posts: 22,991 Likes: 31,578

Dual Protagonists in Dreadwolf? Jun 21, 2023 18:58:37 GMT via mobile

Quote

Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jun 21, 2023 18:58:37 GMT

Jun 21, 2023 18:46:58 GMT gervaise21 said:

Except we have multiple points in the game where it is hammered in that it is not the Anchor that makes the Inquisitor the Inquisitor. It is them themselves. We don’t use the Anchor to end the Mage-Templar War. We don’t use the Anchor to end the Orlesian Civil War. We don’t even really use it to save the Grey Wardens. And so on.

You have to admit that the answer to "how do we solve a problem like Solas", would be a lot simpler with the anchor. Forget the Veil Jumpers and whatever powers they turn out to possess, we can enter and leave the Fade at will, suck him into it or open a rift inside him. That is clearly what they wanted to avoid; a protagonist who already had a weapon that could be used against him.