Dragon Age: Origins?

[Giggling Ghast]

Well, all right then.

Hey, I just wanted to drop a note that you might notice some DA-related happenings this week because Dec. 4 is the Unofficial Dragon Age Day. (There's no special reason for Dec. 4 being Dragon Age Day except that 4 looks like an A in leetspeak.)

If you're active on the Tweeters or the Twitches or what-have-you, you might notice a spike in Dragon Age streams or DA fanart/fanfiction/cosplay/saucy puppets shows. BioWare has also indicated they might do ... something ... in connection with the event.

There is also an actual Dragon Age Day website. They're raising money for Able Gamers, if you feel like kicking in a few bucks.

https://www.dragon4geday.com/

[Valmark]

Ok, so I'm back to playing this, because I got a wild hair and decided to try to get through it again.

I am playing a Dwarven Noble Rogue, which is the only thing I have ever played in my 10-15 times trying to get through this game. I just so want to like this game, but, in so many ways, it sucks.

Like, you know what I *love* about Baldur's Gate? If you want a talky character... get a good charisma. That's it. There's a number of ways you can get and keep a good charisma, and you can get some really impressive charisma by the end of the series (I think a permanent 20 is achievable; maybe 21). I don't have to put points into a talking skill, taking away from my ability to do other things. I just... have a charisma. Lock picking? It's a thing you can do. But you have other options to open a lock, if you didn't put some of your limited skill points into lock picking.

I'm trying to hit all the skills I will need. I want to be able to do this. But the game just FIGHTS me.

Quoting the original post so no one thinks I'm answering them. How did I miss a thread on DAO for 10 whole pages?


Anyway, I don't get how you're having troubles getting the required skills with a rogue. You can easily get everything keyed on cunning.

Persuasion? Works off cunning. Lockpicking? Works off cunning. Worried about fighting? Get Assassin and Bard, you can stack the abilities to get three times bonuses from cunning to damage and the rest. I think I had 4 times actually, but it's been a lot of time so I'm not sure.

I had a dual wielder City elf Rogue and it murdered everything, had an hard time with boss fights 'cause it generated so much damage that the party warriors (always kept two) couldn't aggro effectively.

Also he had haste all the time, though I can't remember right now from what he got it, pretty sure it was a rogue's modal ability and not a mage buff.


On another note, if you can't manage to do everything while keeping a satisying character why not dump lockpicking and keep another rogue around?

Another alternative is to not go rogue, if you're having trouble with that class. For example you can take the warrior and go the intimidate route, since it works on strenght. And warriors are indestructible murder machines.

Tbh I'm fairly sure that once you get three or all four levels in the required skill the attribute becomes relatively inconsequential beyond having the required amount. At least, my mages could persuade with ease while still having a cunning of... 16 I think is the least to maximize the social skill? If I'm not wrong one persuasion check when you are doing the dalish recruitment mission requires a very high cunning check on top of the skill. And another check later on. Which my rogue easily met :v (my mages not so much, but I usually don't need to make the second one because I WANT to "fail" that mission. I think anything else would be spoiler)

(If a name of something seems strange it's because I've played it in italian, might have translated wrongly)

[LibraryOgre]

Well, the massive setback from the restart has me moving on... I just can't bring myself to play through to the Alienage, again, so soon, after a couple of restarts for personal reasons.

That said? I liked the Dwarven Commoner story a lot more than the Dwarven Noble story. The Dwarven Noble story left me feeling dirty, and when I got back to Orzamar, it felt like I might as well be human... there was more recognition of me having been a dwarf in human lands than me having been the daughter of the former king in dwarven lands. Harrowmont barely acknowledged it, and I barely saw Bhelen.

At least being mostly anonymous in the dwarven lands fits for a casteless.

[Giggling Ghast]

Dwarf Commoner does make it way easier to decide who should be King of Orzammar for spoiler-y reasons.

[Keltest]

Well, the massive setback from the restart has me moving on... I just can't bring myself to play through to the Alienage, again, so soon, after a couple of restarts for personal reasons.

That said? I liked the Dwarven Commoner story a lot more than the Dwarven Noble story. The Dwarven Noble story left me feeling dirty, and when I got back to Orzamar, it felt like I might as well be human... there was more recognition of me having been a dwarf in human lands than me having been the daughter of the former king in dwarven lands. Harrowmont barely acknowledged it, and I barely saw Bhelen.

At least being mostly anonymous in the dwarven lands fits for a casteless.

Orzamar politics are supposed to leave you feeling dirty on purpose. The dwarves are, in spite of what they would have you believe, incredibly backwards and self destructive in a lot of ways. In DA 2 and inquisition, most of the surface dwarves you speak to would be just as happy if Orzamar was finally destroyed by the Darkspawn, so that people would start treating the more populous surface dwarves as the "real" dwarven culture and community. And honestly, I don't blame them. Orzamar sucks.

[Valmark]

Honestly, I always felt like only the Human origins had any big consequence in the world, funny enough. But City Elf and Mage will always be my favorite.

Yes, the Alienage is kind of a drag to repeat after a while.

Although, for the Orzammar King I always thought it's easiest as a Noble Dwarf.

[LibraryOgre]

Dwarf Commoner does make it way easier to decide who should be King of Orzammar for spoiler-y reasons.

Spoil me, please. It'll likely be a while till I get back to it.

Orzamar politics are supposed to leave you feeling dirty on purpose. The dwarves are, in spite of what they would have you believe, incredibly backwards and self destructive in a lot of ways. In DA 2 and inquisition, most of the surface dwarves you speak to would be just as happy if Orzamar was finally destroyed by the Darkspawn, so that people would start treating the more populous surface dwarves as the "real" dwarven culture and community. And honestly, I don't blame them. Orzamar sucks.

Yeah. TBH, I kind of wanted to take a bunch of casteless, move to Aeducan Thaig (or something similar) and say "**** it, this is our new kingdom, and we're all part of House Newducan. Orzamaar can suck our butts."

[Giggling Ghast]

Spoil me, please. It'll likely be a while till I get back to it.

Your sister Rica marries Bhelen and bears him a son named Endrin. She and her mother get moved out of Dust Town and into the Royal Palace as a result. In fact, Rica greets you the moment you enter the Diamond Quarter.

The Wiki also informs me that they're still together in Dragon Age: Inquisition, assuming you don't make the extremely questionable move of allying with Harrowmont.

Bhelen also starts allowing casteless to serve in the military, BTW. If you return to Dust Town after Bhelen is crowned King, then you can come across a pair of casteless dwarves talking about it.

Yeah. TBH, I kind of wanted to take a bunch of casteless, move to Aeducan Thaig (or something similar) and say "**** it, this is our new kingdom, and we're all part of House Newducan. Orzamaar can suck our butts."

Virtually impossible, given the darkspawn control 95 per cent of the Deep Roads. Orzammar only survived because it had a single point of entry to the Deep Roads and was close to the surface so they could bring in supplies from topside.

Your better option would be to all go to the surface, but of course, most dwarves are reluctant to do that.

[LibraryOgre]

Your sister Rica marries Bhelen and bears him a son named Endrin. She and her mother get moved out of Dust Town and into the Royal Palace as a result. In fact, Rica greets you the moment you enter the Diamond Quarter.

The Wiki also informs me that they're still together in Dragon Age: Inquisition, assuming you don't make the extremely questionable move of allying with Harrowmont.

Bhelen also starts allowing casteless to serve in the military, BTW. If you return to Dust Town after Bhelen is crowned King, then you can come across a pair of casteless dwarves talking about it.

Almost makes me sad that, in the noble game, I killed him.

[Dienekes]

Almost makes me sad that, in the noble game, I killed him.

Bhelen and especially the Bhelen/Harrowmont divide is my favorite section of the game. Because in my mind it's the best constructed moral dilemma in the game. Bhelen is above all things an innovator and a voice for much needed cultural change. However, he is also a backstabbing self-centered murderer. Harrowmont is backward thinking and dogmatic. However, he's the greatest military commander in a country that is eternally under siege and an honorable man besides. And then the game makes you pick.

In my mind it's a bit unfortunate that after the decision the game decides to make Bhelen the "correct" choice. There doesn't really seem to be any benefits to Harrowmont. Which I don't think particularly makes sense. But then, that goes back to my qualms with the games claiming to be dark and edgy fantasy and instead just have some grim moments with the world still pretty much running on storytelling logic.

[Morty]

I think that the decision at Caridin's anvil is an underrated one. The morally upright choice doesn't get you anything, which is rare. Usually the results are either equal or doing the right thing is more beneficial. Here, stopping the process of fusing people's souls into golems means you do need to sacrifice a golem army. I like that.

[Psyren]

I think that the decision at Caridin's anvil is an underrated one. The morally upright choice doesn't get you anything, which is rare. Usually the results are either equal or doing the right thing is more beneficial. Here, stopping the process of fusing people's souls into golems means you do need to sacrifice a golem army. I like that.

Well, you do get to keep Shale with the morally upright choice, who imo is worth an army anyway.

[Morty]

Well, you do get to keep Shale with the morally upright choice, who imo is worth an army anyway.

You can lie to her about it if she's not there when you side with Branka, but otherwise true. Oh well. It's still above the usual fantasy RPG fare.

[Dienekes]

I think that the decision at Caridin's anvil is an underrated one. The morally upright choice doesn't get you anything, which is rare. Usually the results are either equal or doing the right thing is more beneficial. Here, stopping the process of fusing people's souls into golems means you do need to sacrifice a golem army. I like that.

Yeah, that was good too. The entire dwarf section is the most interesting to me, in the game. If only the deep roads weren’t so dull.

But yeah the golems were also an interesting choice. But I honestly don’t remember if their existence or destruction actually resulted in any real differences. I know golems or dwarves can aid in the last fight. But after that, I don’t think having the anvil actually changes too much for the dwarves. I think that if you have the anvil it just ends in a war either civil or with the surface. With no actual territory regained.

[Giggling Ghast]

Ultimately, the personal benefits aren't significantly better or worse no matter how you decide to resolve the crisis at the Anvil. Even Shale's continued loyalty isn't a huge concern, since you have other tanks in the party.

It really just comes down to whether or not you value the prosperity of the dwarves over their integrity. The Anvil certainly can help the dwarves rebuild their civilization, but at the cost of mass-producing slaves. And, as was the case before, the Anvil will absolutely be abused by either Bhelen or Branka and plenty of unwilling dwarves will be fed to the Anvil.

On the other hand, destroying the Anvil means condemning the dwarves to their slow decline. Without the ability to produce more golems, the darkspawn will inevitably destroy Orzammar, barring some major development in the future.

[LibraryOgre]

On the other hand, destroying the Anvil means condemning the dwarves to their slow decline. Without the ability to produce more golems, the darkspawn will inevitably destroy Orzammar, barring some major development in the future.

Though, that goes back to the dwarves partially being in decline because they refuse to abandon Orzamaar, or use all of her resources. The surface dwarves are thriving. Orzamaar has plenty of people, but many of them are casteless. Either solution will bolster the dwarves... but they're unwilling to take it.

[Dienekes]

Ultimately, the personal benefits aren't significantly better or worse no matter how you decide to resolve the crisis at the Anvil. Even Shale's continued loyalty isn't a huge concern, since you have other tanks in the party.

It really just comes down to whether or not you value the prosperity of the dwarves over their integrity. The Anvil certainly can help the dwarves rebuild their civilization, but at the cost of mass-producing slaves. And, as was the case before, the Anvil will absolutely be abused by either Bhelen or Branka and plenty of unwilling dwarves will be fed to the Anvil.

On the other hand, destroying the Anvil means condemning the dwarves to their slow decline. Without the ability to produce more golems, the darkspawn will inevitably destroy Orzammar, barring some major development in the future.

That’s kind of my point. Because I agree the question was set up as prosperity vs integrity. An interesting choice.

But unless I’m misremembering (and I definitely could be, I did not go back and reread the epilogues) choosing prosperity doesn’t actually provide prosperity. It ends up being integrity that leads to steady decline. And loss of integrity that leads to war and then decline.

Which doesn’t bother me as much as the Bhelen/Harrowmont choice or the possessed kid choice because the decline with each choice still makes sense, and is a bit foreshadowed. But like a few sentences that determines that the golems were doing something beneficial in defending the Deep Roads would have been nice.

[Giggling Ghast]

But unless I’m misremembering (and I definitely could be, I did not go back and reread the epilogues) choosing prosperity doesn’t actually provide prosperity. It ends up being integrity that leads to steady decline. And loss of integrity that leads to war and then decline.

According to the DAO epilogue screens, the partnership between Branka and Bhelen breaks down in short order and she ends up retreating to a fortress in the Deep Roads with the Anvil.

Meanwhile, Harrowmont ends up denying Branka more volunteers for the Anvil and Branka starts raiding the surface for more people to turn to golems.

Of course, the canonicity of these endings is now somewhat dubious, especially with what we now know. The Wiki says that if Branka survived, some dwarves at the Winter Palace mention contact with Branka has been lost since the King stopped providing her "volunteers."

Although the dwarves end up at roughly the same place they started regardless of whether or not the Anvil is destroyed, I think the choice still presents an interesting moral quandary.

Is allowing the creation of slaves acceptable if it means defeating the darkspawn? Or do you adhere to this old saying: "as soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy"?

[Keltest]

Is allowing the creation of slaves acceptable if it means defeating the darkspawn? Or do you adhere to this old saying: "as soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy"?

That's sort of the fundamental reality of being a Grey Warden, isn't it? Youre the one who has volunteered to cross every line so that others have the option of not doing so.

[Giggling Ghast]

True. Unfortunately, that “whatever it takes” mandate also means the Wardens sometimes end up creating problems. Here Lies the Abyss is probably the most obvious example.

[Keltest]

True. Unfortunately, that “whatever it takes” mandate also means the Wardens sometimes end up creating problems. Here Lies the Abyss is probably the most obvious example.

Honestly, it remains to be seen weather that plan would have actually worked if they hadn't been interfered with. Solas is distressed about it, suggesting there is something we don't know about it, but it may simply be that he doesn't like the Grey Wardens or demon binding on principle.

[Morty]

I'll put Inquisition commentary in a spoiler:

Spoiler

Show

Solas hates slavery and abuse of spirits, so that'd push his buttons very effectively on its own. He also seems to be incredulous about how the Wardens thought the Blight could be "tricked" like that, which to me suggests he knows something about the Blight we don't. He seems to disapprove of them killing Archdemons too, which... yeah, buddy, I didn't see you volunteering a better idea.

Either way, I don't think that plan was going to work, for a variety of practical and more esoteric reasons. It was just something desperate Wardens latched on.

[Giggling Ghast]

I think there’s more to it than Solas simply disliking the idea of binding spirits.

Spoiler

Show

It’s the idea of hunting down the Old Gods that spooks the hell out of him. Solas knows something about the Old Gods that he’s not letting on.

Some have speculated that the Old Gods are members of the Evanuris trapped in dragon forms, but I find that too simplistic of an answer. It also doesn’t match up with what Solas says, ie. there’s nothing in any lore connecting the elves to the Old Gods.

I think that the destruction of the Old Gods will unleash something far worse, and that is why the ancient elves were forced to retreat from the Deep Roads out of fear of accidentally waking them. I think that’s the destruction the Evanuris threatened to unleash.

[Dienekes]

Although the dwarves end up at roughly the same place they started regardless of whether or not the Anvil is destroyed, I think the choice still presents an interesting moral quandary.

Is allowing the creation of slaves acceptable if it means defeating the darkspawn? Or do you adhere to this old saying: "as soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy"?

It's still interesting. And I'm speaking here as a huge fan of the game. But I have a criticism of this type of moral quandary. Probably because I over-analyze things to a fault and have played through the game a few times, in ways the story probably wasn't meant to hold up to.

But the problem I see is best really described with the Mage Problem. At its surface the Mage Problem is the best, most interesting moral problem in the entire series. In theory. Mages are born with the innate ability to set people on fire, in a world where no one has fire extinguishers. That's a problem, but not one that can't be surmounted. However, in a pseudo feudal world where power is roughly equivalent to authority, this comes with a few problems. Say what you will are the problems of feudalism (and they are plenty), but a successful leader needed to at least get people to follow them. And their kingdom/duchy/holdings, whatever, were at their most profitable when wars were happening outside of their territory. The ideal isn't always realized, but that's the way the system is set up. So we see kings grab land and then attempt to strengthen it. Again gross generalizations here. But the rough trend exists, that kingdoms get bigger, populations become more powerful, and then we can get into the Early Modern Era and then Modern Era where the population gets more and more direct control over governance. I won't go so far to say it's inevitable, but it is a recurring pattern because that's the way the systems of government are set up to promote.

However, for the Mages, power is not gained by creating a strong kingdom. Power is obtained by making deals with demons and sacrificing people for their blood. This means the most powerful group of people will be those who are willing to mind control and/or sacrifice the largest amount of lives for their personal power. This makes the key question of the entire setting: how much control over the mages is justified to make certain that the Mageocracy does not come to pass? Because when mages are in charge, we see thousands of years of blood sacrifice and corruption. Be they elves or Tevinter. This is a fascinating and complex question. I really like it.

Unfortunately, the dangers of being too nice to mages in the game are... maybe a friendly NPC gets killed. One who probably was going to die anyway. The rise of the Mageocracy will never happen, because that's so big it will be it's own game. And in that case, even if you try to stop the rise of the Mageocracy, it will happen anyway, because that's the next game. You can't stop it or there will be no next game. So the big question of, "how much oppression of the mages is justifiable?" becomes 0. Because it will never make as big of a problem as it could be, right up until Bioware determines it's going to be the big problem.

Which is part of why I've ragged on the game as going by storytelling logic so much, instead of following the systems set up to their natural conclusion. But honestly, I think it's just the issue with having this be an entire series.

And this logic pretty much follows with every decision made along the way. When both paths lead basically to the same place, the useful but morally questionable action is not actually useful. The mages are not allowed to create their blood dominated slave empire. The dwarves are not allowed to push too far back against the Darkspawn with their golems. The demons are not allowed to destroy entire cities when left unchecked.

Again, I still love this game and this series. Hopefully will continue for many years to come. But this limitation I feel hinders what the games are trying to do.

True. Unfortunately, that “whatever it takes” mandate also means the Wardens sometimes end up creating problems. Here Lies the Abyss is probably the most obvious example.

To get in on this.

Spoiler

Show

I get why Solas is mad and annoyed, at everything. But I'm also firmly on the side of the Wardens here. In their mind they are the only hope for the world when the Archdemon's wake up. Now, they are all going to die. Hell, I'd be on the same ship to take one last desperate, probably stupid, stab at saving the world before my end comes. I mean, Hell, even if they're wrong or they fail. They haven't really made the world worse. Because when the next Archdemon wakes up the world's doomed anyway.

[Psyren]

Though, that goes back to the dwarves partially being in decline because they refuse to abandon Orzamaar, or use all of her resources. The surface dwarves are thriving. Orzamaar has plenty of people, but many of them are casteless. Either solution will bolster the dwarves... but they're unwilling to take it.

This, and they're also isolationist to a fault. As we clearly saw in DA2, the Deep Roads are loaded - Orzammar should be packed to the gills with fighters (and even mages!) who are willing to put their lives on the line to make a fortune, and that would allow them to reclaim greater and greater swathes of ancient holdings and access to valuable metals and lyrium. So not only are they spurning the fighting resources of their own people, they're also spurning those of the surface, which is ludicrous when their alternative is slavery.

On the other hand, destroying the Anvil means condemning the dwarves to their slow decline. Without the ability to produce more golems, the darkspawn will inevitably destroy Orzammar, barring some major development in the future.

Well I mean, the first anvil was made by a skilled dwarf and a bucketload of lyrium. Who's to say that another one can't be?

What they should do is research a way to keep the next one from being abused, e.g. you can only make golems out of the willing, or the terminally ill or something, and they have to retain their free will with no control rods.

To get in on this.

Spoiler

Show

I get why Solas is mad and annoyed, at everything. But I'm also firmly on the side of the Wardens here. In their mind they are the only hope for the world when the Archdemon's wake up. Now, they are all going to die. Hell, I'd be on the same ship to take one last desperate, probably stupid, stab at saving the world before my end comes. I mean, Hell, even if they're wrong or they fail. They haven't really made the world worse. Because when the next Archdemon wakes up the world's doomed anyway.

It's still beyond stupid to

Spoiler

Show

(a) not tell any of your political allies what's happening, (b) not tell them about your plan to summon a horde of demons to stop it, (c) think any solution that starts with "hey, let's summon a horde of demons!" is a good one, and (d) not even consider the idea that the signal could be faked, especially when something out there is causing demon holes to appear in the sky all over the place right around the time the signal appears in the first place.

Worst of all, when the Inquisitor finally confronts them and says "hey idiots, Corypheus is behind it!" they still take too long to listen.

[Morty]

I think there’s more to it than Solas simply disliking the idea of binding spirits.

Spoiler

Show

It’s the idea of hunting down the Old Gods that spooks the hell out of him. Solas knows something about the Old Gods that he’s not letting on.

Some have speculated that the Old Gods are members of the Evanuris trapped in dragon forms, but I find that too simplistic of an answer. It also doesn’t match up with what Solas says, ie. there’s nothing in any lore connecting the elves to the Old Gods.

I think that the destruction of the Old Gods will unleash something far worse, and that is why the ancient elves were forced to retreat from the Deep Roads out of fear of accidentally waking them. I think that’s the destruction the Evanuris threatened to unleash.

Spoiler

Show

I really hope the Old Gods aren't the Evanuris because there needs to be some mystery in this damn setting that doesn't boil down to "ancient elven mages". But I agree that Solas knows more about the Old Gods than he's willing to tell and that he fears the consequences of destroying their souls.

It's also my pet theory that the Evanuris are responsible for the Blight and that they unleashed it when they smote the Titans and started mining their bodies for lyrium.

This, and they're also isolationist to a fault. As we clearly saw in DA2, the Deep Roads are loaded - Orzammar should be packed to the gills with fighters (and even mages!) who are willing to put their lives on the line to make a fortune, and that would allow them to reclaim greater and greater swathes of ancient holdings and access to valuable metals and lyrium. So not only are they spurning the fighting resources of their own people, they're also spurning those of the surface, which is ludicrous when their alternative is slavery.

I don't think we ought to extrapolate the games' RPG mechanics to mean much in the setting. Reconciling gameplay and story was never the series' strong suit. Just because the player characters can go into the Deep Roads and come back with loot doesn't mean it's easy. Besides, going in and living long enough to carry out some riches isn't quite the same as being able to take and hold territory against endless onslaught of Darkspawn. That being said, dwarves certainly are isolationist and their adherence to tradition is noted as holding them back more than once, so maybe there's something to it. We see in Origins that they refuse to arm Casteless despite the Warrior caste being very hard-pressed to field enough fighters. Until Bhelen finally does do it.

[Giggling Ghast]

Unfortunately, the dangers of being too nice to mages in the game are... maybe a friendly NPC gets killed. One who probably was going to die anyway. The rise of the Mageocracy will never happen, because that's so big it will be it's own game. And in that case, even if you try to stop the rise of the Mageocracy, it will happen anyway, because that's the next game. You can't stop it or there will be no next game. So the big question of, "how much oppression of the mages is justifiable?" becomes 0. Because it will never make as big of a problem as it could be, right up until Bioware determines it's going to be the big problem.

But the rise of the Mageocracy already happened with the Tevinter Imperium. Through aggressive expansionism, they ended up ruling over virtually all of Thedas for centuries, save for the underground empire that was ruled by the dwarves (who were resistant to magic and provided said mageocracy with lyrium, so they were more valuable as trading partners).

Their domination of the continent was so complete that it took a near-apocalypse (the First Blight) and the formation of a new anti-blood magic religion (Andrasteism) to finally topple Tevinter's reign, and even then, they mostly surrendered on their terms.

It was partly because the Tevinter Imperium was so tyrannical that the restrictions on mages were placed, as no one wanted to see the rise of another mage-dominated empire.

Of course, the mages did sort of regain control of the Tevinter Imperium, but now the introduction of the technologically-advanced anti-magic Qunari basically ensures another continent-spanning mageocracy is unlikely to happen.

Tevinter is locked in a hopeless war with the qunari they will never win, which is why so many Tevinters threw their support behind Corypheus — if he made good on his promises, he could have risen to godhood and restored the Tevinter of old.

Could a mageocracy now arise in the south? It's possible, but doubtful barring some major world-changing event. Having won at least a measure of freedom, I predict the new Circle of Magi/College of Enchanters/Bright Hand will become a more politically powerful entity, but they're never going to ever form a new empire.

[Giggling Ghast]

To get in on this.

Spoiler

Show

I get why Solas is mad and annoyed, at everything. But I'm also firmly on the side of the Wardens here. In their mind they are the only hope for the world when the Archdemon's wake up. Now, they are all going to die. Hell, I'd be on the same ship to take one last desperate, probably stupid, stab at saving the world before my end comes. I mean, Hell, even if they're wrong or they fail. They haven't really made the world worse. Because when the next Archdemon wakes up the world's doomed anyway.

I certainly understand the reasons for why the Wardens did what they did in Here Lies the Abyss, which is why I'm willing to keep them as allies after that quest. But it doesn't change the fact that ...

Spoiler

Show

... they nearly handed over a demon army to a darkspawn magister, who would have used it to conquer the whole ****ing world. That was a direct result of the "anything it takes" mandate. The southern Wardens didn't even seek help from their compatriots in the north - they just charged ahead with a plan that nearly brought untold disaster.

Well I mean, the first anvil was made by a skilled dwarf and a bucketload of lyrium. Who's to say that another one can't be?

What they should do is research a way to keep the next one from being abused, e.g. you can only make golems out of the willing, or the terminally ill or something, and they have to retain their free will with no control rods.

That would be great, but don't forget that attempting to replicate Caridin's research is how we got the Harvester.

[Morty]

Dragon Age has always been a series that tries to marry a "mature" grim setting where magic is dangerous and social inequity is ripe with a very generic fantasy RPG gameplay. As well as its developers' particular style, such as giving players very clear-cut binary choices and asking them to "pick a side". The clash is quite visible sometimes.

[Dienekes]

But the rise of the Mageocracy already happened with the Tevinter Imperium. Through aggressive expansionism, they ended up ruling over virtually all of Thedas for centuries, save for the underground empire that was ruled by the dwarves (who were resistant to magic and provided said mageocracy with lyrium, so they were more valuable as trading partners).

Their domination of the continent was so complete that it took a near-apocalypse (the First Blight) and the formation of a new anti-blood magic religion (Andrasteism) to finally topple Tevinter's reign, and even then, they mostly surrendered on their terms.

It was partly because the Tevinter Imperium was so tyrannical that the restrictions on mages were placed, as no one wanted to see the rise of another mage-dominated empire.

Of course, the mages did sort of regain control of the Tevinter Imperium, but now the introduction of the technologically-advanced anti-magic Qunari basically ensures another continent-spanning mageocracy is unlikely to happen.

Tevinter is locked in a hopeless war with the qunari they will never win, which is why so many Tevinters threw their support behind Corypheus — if he made good on his promises, he could have risen to godhood and restored the Tevinter of old.

Could a mageocracy now arise in the south? It's possible, but doubtful barring some major world-changing event. Having won at least a measure of freedom, I predict the new Circle of Magi/College of Enchanters/Bright Hand will become a more politically powerful entity, but they're never going to ever form a new empire.

Yes, and the Mageocracy's domination for the elves was so complete it took a literal apocalypse to shake up their power structure. Only for another mageocracy to rise among the Tevinter. Thankfully this second mageocracy was much easier to defeat. It only took the first and longest Blight to weaken their political power and absolutely ruin their population (i.e. the shlubs they were sacrificing for power), and then a mage who happens to just be born the most powerful person in the world who happens to want to defeat them OR the will of actual God, depending on which side you want to believe.

And even despite these events, the mageocracy has already taken hold in Tevinter again.

Just one mage making one stupid pact with a demon was able to essentially take down one of the most important cities in the south.

I just am not as optimistic about the world as you seem to be. I mean sure, more free mages tomorrow will be fine. The next day as well. And the next. Were this an actual world with an actual history, it might take decades or even a century for power to be consolidated to form another mageocracy. Hell it took the eunuch system about a hundred years to start dominating China. But I have no doubt that it would, eventually, happen. The power system set up by the magic should be continuously pushing the setting toward that conclusion.

But, this is a game, written by people who want to keep making people play these games. That was kind of my core thesis. The mageocracy will happen when and if Bioware thinks it'd be a cool idea to explore the concept.