Redcliffe village is only part of Eamon's territory and has nothing to do with his ability to call the Landsmeet, so I still see no reason why its survival is so paramount for the Landsmeet or against the Blight.
I would argue that it is common sense to defend a village right at the base of the fortress so the threat won't spread. It's location makes it quite important. What is there to win by not helping the villagers? You're not getting to Eamon any faster and leaving the place behind likely means that you have spent time travelling for nothing. Is that pragmatic?
Because it eliminates the reality that people are complex and not cardboard cutout cartoon characters. To call Morrigan evil because she won't save a village of people intolerant to people like her and gives her focus to the apocolypse threatening the entire country and every nation in Thedas makes no sense. It puts white and black hats on people with no regard to the complexity that life is more complicated than good and evil narratives.
What eliminates the reality that people are complex? Calling someone evil? This would then apply to anyone so no one could be called evil. What then would be the use of the word evil? If an attack on innocents like in Redcliffe is allowed I call this evil. Simple golden rule stuff. Now, Morrigan allows such death and destruction so that is evil unless there are good reasons. The argument you give is that the people are intolerant and there is a strategic dispute. The first is just an explanation for her errors, but not an actual argument. The latter is just a matter of opinion. They are just not good enough reasons to leave people to die. You say that I don't allow for complexity but this doesn't follow from the things I have said. Please show to me an explanation behind your reasoning if you can because I don't understand how you reach your conclusion.
Your theory that she will use the Old God to enpower her has no basis in the storyline. Morrigan flat out tells you she wants to preserve the Old God, and Flemeth's ritual to body snatch is unique to her because she is a unique abomination. Morrigan's disgust alone with Flemeth's plan illustrates that she isn't going to do this, and her own pragmatist views and her desire to be left alone gives good reason to know that she won't bring about some apocolypse.
Her argument makes no sense. The wish to preserve something means that a certain value is ascribed to it. This is all the more clear when Morrigan wishes this soul for herself as she means to take it away. Given Morrigan's philosophies we can assume that there will be a certain use for this soul for her. Given her focus on power and survival we may even assume that it is to empower herself. This does not necessarily mean that this is done by body snatching and I did not say so. The apocalypse is also something I have not spoken of. I don't know how to respond to that.
Wynne doesn't do anythng to get that freedom, though. She doesn't even oppose culling the Circle when you advocate it to Gregior. That "leash" is what Morrigan despises, and openly says as much. Given that the Circle conditions people to get as much power as possible to survive against templars as blood mages, I'm not surprised it's full of tragic instances of abominations while Kolgrim's group and the Dalish seem to have none of these problems with no Harrowing and no templars.
Wynne tries to take opportunities for adventure to get freedom. You make a very good point regarding Wynne not opposing the culling, but in her defence she is really in a fatalistic mood there which can be seen in the fade as well and is later explained further in the camp conversations. Morrigan is right to not like the leash, but it is a leash that is laid out by the Chantry. The role of the Circle itself is much more ambiguous. Here too you come with allegations against the Circle that are actually the result of Chantry policies.
Because I see Vaughan at the black end of this black and grey world, and as a vile person who would fit the description of evil. Morrigan's hatred for a Circle that's nothing more than a prison to mages and her desire to be free, not to mention her pragmatic views that focus on enpowering the player against the Blight - not her - show she isn't the black hat character you try to make her out to be. She doesn't try to use the blood ritual to enpower herself now, does she? No, she doesn't.
I still don't see the point about the questions regarding Vaughan. Then there is a long sentence where you start off by claiming the Circle is nothing more than a prison. This is just wrong. It is also an orphanage of sorts. A home, a place of nourishment. Morrigan may not view it that way, but it just means she is not understanding the complexity of the situation. Maybe she does understand, but then she is just being vengeful. Also, pragmatism fails here. What purpose does it serve to destroy the Circle? It does not make mages any more free. It makes mages more dead. We can expect death to be lacking in freedom I assume. It also doesn't empower the Warden. Mages are powerful, Morrigan should know this. You should wish for their support against the blight. They need to survive for that.
I’ve never seen Alistair has a fool. He’s trained as a templar and travelling with someone he’s been conditioned to hunt down and see only as evil. He’s totally unprepared for someone like Morrigan. In regards to these characters, it’s the bigger picture that gives you insight into them. Alistair is often distained as whiny, but he’s someone who is compassionate, bonds with the Warden because he is the first friend Alistair has ever had or the first woman his own age he’s been around, and regardless of the race of the Warden gives the Dalish a homeland and improves the lot of the city elves in spite of the controversy it stirs with humans while Anora can’t even understand why the city elves would be upset in an alienage despite living in the same city for the past five years. I think anyone playing an elf would see that Alistair is not a fool, and it’s often the argument made against Anora as sole ruler when people ask about who should be the ruler of the country. He’s viewed by many as the better choice for this alone, and by this time many don’t remember the early dialogues of Alistair and Morrigan bantering with one another.
I am not going to move towards a discussion on Alistair here, surely you understand. I do have something short to say. The comment about the stigma was about the impression when he first meets Morrigan. You give reasons for his foolishness. There are many reasons for Alistair's foolishness, but he is still a fool. He is friendly and nice though and you can push him to work harder and be smarter. At first, Alistair is a fool though. You may not agree, but I think the progression Alistair makes is clear so I hope you do agree that he is at least relatively foolish in the beginning.
Morrigan disregards suffering? I guess you missed where she asks you to release Sten and Jowan from captivity regardless of whether they aid you or not.
What you would have to prove is that Morrigan generally seriously takes suffering into account. What you have done now is prove my point that Morrigan indeed is capable of understanding suffering. She is fully aware of the fact that she is leaving the villagers in Redcliffe to die. She simply doesn't care enough.
Morrigan aids the Warden to save a nation and you keep bringing up one village that Morrigan figures should defend itself. Every one of the companions has their reasons for aiding you. No one is wearing a white or black hat in this game, and it’s something I credit the creators for. Morrigan is the pragmatist to Alistair’s idealism. Her line of reasoning is the same as Sten’s, and brokenergy articulated why Morrigan sees no value to Redcliffe. You’re tasked with making hard choices and saving the nation, not playing hero to every kitten in a tree or every village facing turmoil. Aiding Redcliffe doesn’t stop the Archdemon, doesn’t defeat Loghain, doesn’t amount to dealing with the bigger picture. Saving Redcliffe is about defending the helpless, and isn’t a pragmatic choice when nobody realizes when the horde might overrun the entire country. One could even argue that the two days spent saving Redcliffe village is the reason why the city of Denerim fell to the darkspawn because they are two days late in getting ready to attack the horde.
Morrigan figures the village should defend itself, yes, but it is an evil opinion because she leaves people to die. I get the same response all the time: Redcliffe isn't important, it's pragmatic and so on, but I have given arguments against this. It is finalistic to say that Redcliffe isn't important. The way the narrative develops the player is led to believe that Redcliffe *is* important. And even then, I would definitely argue that the strategic value of Redcliffe is worth investing a night in. Then there is also still the problem that pragmatism is not an excuse for evil behaviour. The last sentence about being late in Denerim I think is a bit absurd, but then again I don't think you meant it seriously. It seems highly likely that the darkspawn did a timed attack *because* your armies are in the wrong location. If you had arrived earlier or later the attack would have taken place earlier or later. We can only speculate about these things.
You again talk about black hats and I don't understand why you do this. I see Morrigan as a survivalist, she is interested in progressing her own goals. They coincide with those of the Warden so she helps. Her attitude leads to her making evil decisions though. This doesn't mean she is the enemy of the Warden and because she is fairly loyal she usually ends up being a force for goodness regardless. She is not a black hat then I feel. But she is still basically an evil person.
Follow Us on Twitter
Like Us on Facebook
Subscribe on Youtube
Sign In
Create Account
Back to top
