spoiler What are people's opinions on Morrigan?

[brokenergy]

It is impressive that you post this with what seems to be a lot of arrogance when in fact it consists of a collection of fallacies. What Duncan may have done is of no consequence. Duncan dies at Ostagar and we are left with the Warden and the subjective experience that accompanies it. You say that Morrigan is doing what a Grey Warden would do, well, so is the Warden. Things work out for the Warden so who's to say that Duncan's approach would have been better? Duncan isn't a paragon of virtue, he is the cold murderer of Sir Jory for one. :tongue:

 

Well then, what does RedCliffe give you? Knights, Eamon. What do the elves at the alienage give you? Support at the Landsmeet. These things are not nothing. They add up. Then you call me left-minded, but that is just asinine. I have given arguments for my opinion, respond to those instead of trying to act superior. And then you follow up with a nice ad populum that means nothing to me.

 

You really starting to get under my skin, you know that? :dry:

 

Yes the warden is going to act differently as you are the one who is in control and are willing to do things differently. Why did I make a comparison to Duncan? People romanticise him, portray him as something a good guy when Gaider shot it down from the sky. So is Duncan a good guy, who kills a coward for the good of the order and dies honourably? No, he is not. The question to you (and all who give the whole 'evil' thing) is why should Morrigan be considered evil? Why should she be stigmatized because of the impression in first minute you meet her? Why should her actions be considered evil, when other companions do exactly the same thing? Sounds like some people let the first impressions get in the way of logic.

 

Let consider two things here, 1. Morrigan's behavior and 2. motives for disapproval.

 

1. Morrigan was born and raised in isolation from the society. She doesn't understand the culture and the whole notion of helping others. Why should she? She was on the run ever since she was born from the Templars, her mother basically had abused her from an early age and her only friends were the animals in the wild. She is a realist, she never had hopes or dreams, her only concern was survival. She detaches herself from others and focuses on the task at hand (stopping whatever BW decides to be the main antagonist in DA2). I could site plenty of evidence but all you need is to look back of some of the posts from the start of this thread (as well as other topics both here and in the official forums where the link is already provided).

 

2.Taking all of that to focus lets discuss her motives for disapproval. You were tasked to stop the Blight by any means necessary. Saving one village isn't going to help you from saving an entire nation; there existence is insignificant and no matter what you do Eamon is going to live in the end and all his knights are going to be at your disposal. Both Morrigan and Sten know this, it is difficult but they both know that your task is to stop the blight, not to help every single village and that is the reason that you get disapproval from both of them. The 'cat' from Shale's recruitment quest, why did disapprove? Simple, out of everyone in this group, Morrigan is the most honest (sad, but true) and when you betray your word, she will disapprove.

 

I could go on but I'll just finish with the elves and mages as they are most similar in terms of her opinion (the anvil is again has to deal with stopping the Blight at any cost, the cultist has to deal with Morrigan's belief of religious freedom [see in game dialogue for more info] ). Morrigan disapproval towards the mages/elves is because she see them as weak and doesn't understand why they can't rise up and fight (we know why they can't), therefore she sees you as weak as you are not allowing them to fight for themselves (we know we must). The only difference between the mages and elves is that you can convince her that she could have had a better life. As for points for the landsmeet, again you can win either way and city elves are going to fight in the final battle.

 

Yes this is simplistic and all conjecture but the will of just repeating this argument all over again is just wilted away. Again check the Morrigan's Discussion thread in the official forum as it explains all my points in more detail and not a site of fan fanatics. Now if you excuse me, arrogant friends and I are going to our little rock dens and kneeling before our little shrine dedicated to Morrigan. :rolleyes:

 

Edit: BTW- my favourite character is Shale, not Morrigan. So call me a fan fanatic is totally unwarranted.

[Utotri]

 

 

The cases are entirely different so the argument has an entirely different context. The food dispute is mundane and inconsequential. Redcliffe is not. Alistair has by then typically made clear that Redcliffe is quite important. In Lothering Morrigan has a point, in Redcliffe she is wrong.

 

How is Redcliffe so vital when weighed against the fate of the entire country? It's destruction changes nothing about the fate of Ferelden. Morrigan is correct in stating that it won't affect the Blight. Personally, I wouldn't advocate leaving the people to die, but I also don't consider Morrigan evil for stating her opinion, either. Nobody in game knows that this distraction won’t mean failure. As the Warden, you know the game mechanics and can take the high road or simply restart. From a story standpoint, no one knows that the Blight won’t overcome the entire country tomorrow.

 

We are going to go in circles. I don't understand why you still say Redcliffe is not important. It is made quite clear in the early narrative that Eamon is important. Your point about haste being necessary does not have any value. It would be an argument against almost anything you do in the game.

Even Sten, who you say is noble, disagrees with saving Redcliffe, but you don’t refer to him as evil. Sten’s disagreement even matches Morrigan’s: they think you need to focus on the Blight, with no distractions, except that Sten tries to kill me in Haven when he gets fed up and Morrigan simply honors her word and stays at my side regardless of how many times she disagrees with me. She thinks the Warden should make choices to further his or her goal to ending the Blight - the Anvil, for instance, and the blood ritual - none of which enpower her in any way.

 

I have called Sten honorable in a certain situation. If you want to hear me call Sten evil I can do that, but it really is just the Qun that is evil. Morrigan does not honour you when you decline her ritual. Morrigan does not honour your word if you decline her absurd request. Morrigan leaves. It speaks volumes about her real intentions. Ending the blight is not her goal, the Old God is, and right up to the very end ending the blight is entirely concordant with her personal quest (which does empower her very much I envisage), but when a dichotomy appears she is gone with the wind that very instant.

 

You make two points here. One is that I should be more understanding of Morrigan because of her past and that a lack of empathy shown to her has led to her showing a lack of sympathy to others. The second point is that no one is really good or evil, but all grey. The second point does not have any bearing I think. It is completely acceptable to speak of evil even though it is not absolute. I can call Morrigan evil because her actions and dispositions show many evil aspects, and then I can compare it to Wynne and call Wynn good.

 

It's the first point that is interesting though. There is nothing stopping Morrigan from empathizing with the villagers but herself. An outcast would be in a perfect position to understand the need for acceptance and sympathy. I see the point you are getting at, but Morrigan's disposition smells too much like revenge in that case. Why would she not reach the simple conclusion that these people are all just the victims of their upbringing just like Morrigan? Also, the argument does not run counter to mine. It is understandable to act according to past experiences, but it can at times be evil and it lends itself for capriciousness just fine.

 

Doing someone you disagree with doesn't make her evil. Having secrets doesn't make Morrigan any more evil than Alistair keeping his heritage from you or Leliana actually lying to you does. Everyone has secrets, everyone has opinions.

 

I never said the secrets made her evil, they made her intellectually dishonest. If you wish to hear from me that Leliana and Al do it too, I can comply.

 

Considering that Wynne supports the Circle - including its culling of mages if you support Cullen, the daily life of templars killing mages who flee out of fear like her former apprentice, ripping out a person's soul and making them a virtual slave to craft items for the wealth of the Circle like Owain - I'd hardly call her good. Complacent, perhaps, but for someone who values independence, Wynne is hardly good for any mage wanting self-determination and free will: the very reasons Morrigan hates the Circle and initially doesn't see why it should be saved, but will help you regardless without trying to kill you (like some characters).

 

The Circle is not monolithic and the Circle is not Wynne. The Circle is just there regardless of Wynne and most of the evil of the Circle is imposed by the Chantry. Wynne seeks freedom within the confines that are given. This may be complacency as you say, but it is unclear. The fact remains that while she may not rebel against those confines she does rebel against injustices on the road out of a wish to simply help others. That is goodness right there. Also, we have to understand that the Circle is not really arbitrary as far as we can see. There is an internal pattern of justice that basically revolves around using blood magic or not. This begs the question if blood magic is evil or not. I don't think it is necessarily so, but the common position in Ferelden is that the risk is too great and it should be deemed evil by default. That position is harsh, but it isn't irrational and it certainly isn't all that evil as blood magic is a choice.

[LobselVith66]

 

 

We are going to go in circles. I don't understand why you still say Redcliffe is not important. It is made quite clear in the early narrative that Eamon is important. Your point about haste being necessary does not have any value. It would be an argument against almost anything you do in the game.

 

I agree, Eamon is important, but Redcliffe has nothing to do with Eamon's ability to help call the Landsmeet. Save it or allow the villagers to defend themselves, Eamon calls it either way.

 

I have called Sten honorable in a certain situation. If you want to hear me call Sten evil I can do that, but it really is just the Qun that is evil. Morrigan does not honour you when you decline her ritual. Morrigan does not honour your word if you decline her absurd request. Morrigan leaves. It speaks volumes about her real intentions. Ending the blight is not her goal, the Old God is, and right up to the very end ending the blight is entirely concordant with her personal quest (which does empower her very much I envisage), but when a dichotomy appears she is gone with the wind that very instant.

 

Nothing is black and white. Sten, Wynne, and Morrigan are given dimension. To call any evil belittles the fact that the writers fleshed them out to be realistic, flawed people. And Morrigan is not at the black end of this very grey world. You can call her argument to abandon Redcliffe wrong, but I don't see why you think I should consider her evil for it. Regarding the ritual, Morrigan is upfront when she says the ritual is important to her. Preserving one of the last mysteries of Ferelden against certain death is important to her. The same way Alistair leaves your party if you spare Loghain, you're doing something that neither can abide by. If you're in a romance with Morrigan, this ritual will save you from death. If you're a dear friend, it does the same. And you're inferring her quest enpowers her, but the truth is we see no change in her power. Her pragmatic arguments tend to focus on enpowering you - after all, she never asks the blood ritual to enpower her, after all.

 

I never said the secrets made her evil, they made her intellectually dishonest. If you wish to hear from me that Leliana and Al do it too, I can comply.

 

Everyone has secrets, even in real life. You're basically saying all of humanity is intellectually dishonest by that line of arguing.

 

The Circle is not monolithic and the Circle is not Wynne. The Circle is just there regardless of Wynne and most of the evil of the Circle is imposed by the Chantry. Wynne seeks freedom within the confines that are given. This may be complacency as you say, but it is unclear. The fact remains that while she may not rebel against those confines she does rebel against injustices on the road out of a wish to simply help others. That is goodness right there. Also, we have to understand that the Circle is not really arbitrary as far as we can see. There is an internal pattern of justice that basically revolves around using blood magic or not. This begs the question if blood magic is evil or not. I don't think it is necessarily so, but the common position in Ferelden is that the risk is too great and it should be deemed evil by default. That position is harsh, but it isn't irrational and it certainly isn't all that evil as blood magic is a choice.

 

I don't see why you keep using evil. People misuse power. Mages have misused power, so have royalty. Does Vaughan's actions mean the elves should murder every human throughout Ferelden? Or lock them all in a tower to be abused and mentally tortured? IIn theory, the Circle should only be a place to instruct mages, but it's a place of fear, where you can lose your soul for not getting in line with the Chantry and templar way of thinking. There's nothing honorable about getting someone made tranquil, or hunting down a kid for being scared of grown ups and running away like Wynne's apprentice. This kind of institution conditions blood magic. You don't see all of Kolgrim's followers dead because of an abomination, or all the Dalish elves deceased because of abominations. Apparently, they have no Harrowing, no templars or chantry, and do much better than the Circle ever has.

[Utotri]

It is impressive that you post this with what seems to be a lot of arrogance when in fact it consists of a collection of fallacies. What Duncan may have done is of no consequence. Duncan dies at Ostagar and we are left with the Warden and the subjective experience that accompanies it. You say that Morrigan is doing what a Grey Warden would do, well, so is the Warden. Things work out for the Warden so who's to say that Duncan's approach would have been better? Duncan isn't a paragon of virtue, he is the cold murderer of Sir Jory for one. :tongue:

 

Well then, what does RedCliffe give you? Knights, Eamon. What do the elves at the alienage give you? Support at the Landsmeet. These things are not nothing. They add up. Then you call me left-minded, but that is just asinine. I have given arguments for my opinion, respond to those instead of trying to act superior. And then you follow up with a nice ad populum that means nothing to me.

 

You really starting to get under my skin, you know that? :dry:

 

Yes the warden is going to act differently as you are the one who is in control and are willing to do things differently. Why did I make a comparison to Duncan? People romanticise him, portray him as something a good guy when Gaider shot it down from the sky. So is Duncan a good guy, who kills a coward for the good of the order and dies honourably? No, he is not. The question to you (and all who give the whole 'evil' thing) is why should Morrigan be considered evil? Why should she be stigmatized because of the impression in first minute you meet her? Why should her actions be considered evil, when other companions do exactly the same thing? Sounds like some people let the first impressions get in the way of logic.

 

I am glad that you have taken the time to put forth a more articulate argument. Now, why should Morrigan be considered evil, you ask. First then, let me tell you that she is not stigmatized. The stigma is on Alistair who seems like a total fool when interacting with Morrigan. Morrigan should be considered evil because of two interlocking things, her philosophies and the actions that result from them. The argument is rather complex when worked out because it would need a proper definition of evil for instance, but basically the train of thought is that Morrigan's philosophies do not really allow for any other disposition than the one she deems best for herself. She disregards suffering in others for this. She knows suffering, so she is not incapable of understanding what she is disregarding. Her philosophy then is a matter of self-deception. She can work like that for herself in the Wilds where survival is the common core value, but in a society this is different.

 

Let consider two things here, 1. Morrigan's behavior and 2. motives for disapproval.

 

1. Morrigan was born and raised in isolation from the society. She doesn't understand the culture and the whole notion of helping others. Why should she? She was on the run ever since she was born from the Templars, her mother basically had abused her from an early age and her only friends were the animals in the wild. She is a realist, she never had hopes or dreams, her only concern was survival. She detaches herself from others and focuses on the task at hand (stopping whatever BW decides to be the main antagonist in DA2). I could site plenty of evidence but all you need is to look back of some of the posts from the start of this thread (as well as other topics both here and in the official forums where the link is already provided).

 

Morrigan *does* know the notion of helping others. It is common everywhere, even among animals. Morrigan was never on the receiving end, that's all. She doesn't understand the culture, okay. Now, why should I care? Morality may be relative, but it is not all relative. There is no excuse for her lack of understanding in a number of instances, Redcliffe being a rather clear one. If you don't help the village you are basically the accessory of the sacking of the village. They did nothing to deserve that. Realism is an explanation, but it is not an excuse.

 

2.Taking all of that to focus lets discuss her motives for disapproval. You were tasked to stop the Blight by any means necessary. Saving one village isn't going to help you from saving an entire nation; there existence is insignificant and no matter what you do Eamon is going to live in the end and all his knights are going to be at your disposal. Both Morrigan and Sten know this, it is difficult but they both know that your task is to stop the blight, not to help every single village and that is the reason that you get disapproval from both of them. The 'cat' from Shale's recruitment quest, why did disapprove? Simple, out of everyone in this group, Morrigan is the most honest (sad, but true) and when you betray your word, she will disapprove.

 

Saving the village *is* going to help you save an entire nation. Did you not play the game? Perhaps you would say that this is in hindsight, but it is clear before as well that Redcliffe is worth the effort. There are only a few arls in Ferelden and Eamon is one of the more powerful ones as Alistair makes clear. He also has Teagan with him, a bann. Perhaps Morrigan is unable to understand their importance, but that would not be concordant with Morrigan's own statement that she has studied history. Also, this is again an explanation, not an excuse.

 

Abou the cat: There are myraid reasons why Morrigan disapproves. The conclusion that she does not like your dishonesty seems the most likely one, I agree. Then there are myriad reasons why Morrigan disapproves of dishonesty. It says nothing at all about her own honesty or lack thereof. That said, I would not say Morrigan is particularly dishonest. She is intellectually dishonest. She is not a liar, although it is difficult to judge. Alistair and Leliana are far worse in that department. I do not see them as evil though because of their various redeeming qualities. Those are lacking with Morrigan, who is only interested in her own progress.

 

I could go on but I'll just finish with the elves and mages as they are most similar in terms of her opinion (the anvil is again has to deal with stopping the Blight at any cost, the cultist has to deal with Morrigan's belief of religious freedom [see in game dialogue for more info] ). Morrigan disapproval towards the mages/elves is because she see them as weak and doesn't understand why they can't rise up and fight (we know why they can't), therefore she sees you as weak as you are not allowing them to fight for themselves (we know we must). The only difference between the mages and elves is that you can convince her that she could have had a better life. As for points for the landsmeet, again you can win either way and city elves are going to fight in the final battle.

 

What is your point here? That Morrigan doesn't understand things properly? That is exactly my point. She doesn't understand things or she is deceiving herself and it leads to evil decisions involving innocent deaths and the like. She should be able to understand the value of survival, no? Then she should understand very well why the Circle is what it is. She should then also understand why the elves need help. She wishes for them to earn their survival, but the thought is indistinguishable from the idea that they deserve their deaths should they die, which is just an errant way of thinking. She should be thinking about why their survival is under threat and if this is just or not. Her disregard for the potential suffering of innocents is evil.

 

Yes this is simplistic and all conjecture but the will of just repeating this argument all over again is just wilted away. Again check the Morrigan's Discussion thread in the official forum as it explains all my points in more detail and not a site of fan fanatics. Now if you excuse me, arrogant friends and I are going to our little rock dens and kneeling before our little shrine dedicated to Morrigan. :rolleyes:

 

Edit: BTW- my favourite character is Shale, not Morrigan. So call me a fan fanatic is totally unwarranted.

 

I did not call you a fan fanatic, so I suppose this is aimed at someone else. I am not going to check the forum you pointed out. It is up to you to prove me wrong, I am not going to do your work and I can't say I'm expecting much from that thread either so there is little incentive for me to do as you advise. If you are unable or unwilling to lay down the arguments yourself it is better to agree to disagree.

[Utotri]

 

I agree, Eamon is important, but Redcliffe has nothing to do with Eamon's ability to help call the Landsmeet. Save it or allow the villagers to defend themselves, Eamon calls it either way.

 

I disagree that Redcliffe and Eamon should be seen as separate. Maybe in the game it plays out like that, but would it be a valid expectation beforehand? I don't think so.

 

I have called Sten honorable in a certain situation. If you want to hear me call Sten evil I can do that, but it really is just the Qun that is evil. Morrigan does not honour you when you decline her ritual. Morrigan does not honour your word if you decline her absurd request. Morrigan leaves. It speaks volumes about her real intentions. Ending the blight is not her goal, the Old God is, and right up to the very end ending the blight is entirely concordant with her personal quest (which does empower her very much I envisage), but when a dichotomy appears she is gone with the wind that very instant.

 

Nothing is black and white. Sten, Wynne, and Morrigan are given dimension. To call any evil belittles the fact that the writers fleshed them out to be realistic, flawed people. And Morrigan is not at the black end of this very grey world. You can call her argument to abandon Redcliffe wrong, but I don't see why you think I should consider her evil for it. Regarding the ritual, Morrigan is upfront when she says the ritual is important to her. Preserving one of the last mysteries of Ferelden against certain death is important to her. The same way Alistair leaves your party if you spare Loghain, you're doing something that neither can abide by. If you're in a romance with Morrigan, this ritual will save you from death. If you're a dear friend, it does the same. And you're inferring her quest enpowers her, but the truth is we see no change in her power. Her pragmatic arguments tend to focus on enpowering you - after all, she never asks the blood ritual to enpower her, after all.

 

I can call Bush evil. I can call Bin Laden evil. To call them evil belittles the fact that they are real, flawed people? No. To not call them evil belittles the fact that they are responsible for much pain and suffering. That part of your argument makes no sense to me then. You say Morrigan is not at the black end of a grey world. Sure, that is definitely true. So where do the dark shades that can be called black end?

 

Then about the ritual. The preservation of the Old God may be important to Morrigan but it isn't made clear why and there is no reason why she kept this from you for so long. Is she upfront? About some things, yes. About some things, no. Yo compare it with Alistair. It can't be done. Alistair is surprised on the spot and reacts emotional and idiotic. This is not the case with Morrigan who had ample time to prepare for a negative response. Her arguments focus on how the ritual is good for the Warden, yes. What is your point? It is only more proof of Morrigan's dishonesty. *She* wants the soul of the Old God. If she wouldn't want it, she wouldn't even do the ritual I'd reckon. You seem to doubt that the Old God's soul will empower Morrigan. I think that is just very naieve.

 

I never said the secrets made her evil, they made her intellectually dishonest. If you wish to hear from me that Leliana and Al do it too, I can comply.

 

Everyone has secrets, even in real life. You're basically saying all of humanity is intellectually dishonest by that line of arguing.

 

Pretty much, yes. The difference is that most people are aware of it and try not to do it and excuse themselves for it, while others actively use it and propagate it. Morrigan does the latter, Alistair the first.

 

The Circle is not monolithic and the Circle is not Wynne. The Circle is just there regardless of Wynne and most of the evil of the Circle is imposed by the Chantry. Wynne seeks freedom within the confines that are given. This may be complacency as you say, but it is unclear. The fact remains that while she may not rebel against those confines she does rebel against injustices on the road out of a wish to simply help others. That is goodness right there. Also, we have to understand that the Circle is not really arbitrary as far as we can see. There is an internal pattern of justice that basically revolves around using blood magic or not. This begs the question if blood magic is evil or not. I don't think it is necessarily so, but the common position in Ferelden is that the risk is too great and it should be deemed evil by default. That position is harsh, but it isn't irrational and it certainly isn't all that evil as blood magic is a choice.

 

I don't see why you keep using evil. People misuse power. Mages have misused power, so have royalty. Does Vaughan's actions mean the elves should murder every human throughout Ferelden? Or lock them all in a tower to be abused and mentally tortured? IIn theory, the Circle should only be a place to instruct mages, but it's a place of fear, where you can lose your soul for not getting in line with the Chantry and templar way of thinking. There's nothing honorable about getting someone made tranquil, or hunting down a kid for being scared of grown ups and running away like Wynne's apprentice. This kind of institution conditions blood magic. You don't see all of Kolgrim's followers dead because of an abomination, or all the Dalish elves deceased because of abominations. Apparently, they have no Harrowing, no templars or chantry, and do much better than the Circle ever has.

 

I use evil because it is being used. Now, I don't know why you start of with ridiculous questions regarding the punishment of Vaughan, but I think he should simply be killed or locked away for good. Not all humans, because it was just Vaughan and a few henchmen and they are the ones deserving punishment. If you meant it as an analogy to the Circle Tower it is a strange analogy. The Chantry places a punishment on magic, of course that is wrong. The Circle is the only lifeline for magic users. It is a necessary evil because of the Chantry. It is not the Circle's fault. There are enough mages opposing the Chantry as well.

[LobselVith66]

 

I disagree that Redcliffe and Eamon should be seen as separate. Maybe in the game it plays out like that, but would it be a valid expectation beforehand? I don't think so.

 

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 can call Bush evil. I can call Bin Laden evil. To call them evil belittles the fact that they are real, flawed people? No. To not call them evil belittles the fact that they are responsible for much pain and suffering. That part of your argument makes no sense to me then. You say Morrigan is not at the black end of a grey world. Sure, that is definitely true. So where do the dark shades that can be called black end?

 

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.

 

Then about the ritual. The preservation of the Old God may be important to Morrigan but it isn't made clear why and there is no reason why she kept this from you for so long. Is she upfront? About some things, yes. About some things, no. Yo compare it with Alistair. It can't be done. Alistair is surprised on the spot and reacts emotional and idiotic. This is not the case with Morrigan who had ample time to prepare for a negative response. Her arguments focus on how the ritual is good for the Warden, yes. What is your point? It is only more proof of Morrigan's dishonesty. *She* wants the soul of the Old God. If she wouldn't want it, she wouldn't even do the ritual I'd reckon. You seem to doubt that the Old God's soul will empower Morrigan. I think that is just very naieve.

 

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.

 

The Circle is not monolithic and the Circle is not Wynne. The Circle is just there regardless of Wynne and most of the evil of the Circle is imposed by the Chantry. Wynne seeks freedom within the confines that are given. This may be complacency as you say, but it is unclear. The fact remains that while she may not rebel against those confines she does rebel against injustices on the road out of a wish to simply help others. That is goodness right there. Also, we have to understand that the Circle is not really arbitrary as far as we can see. There is an internal pattern of justice that basically revolves around using blood magic or not. This begs the question if blood magic is evil or not. I don't think it is necessarily so, but the common position in Ferelden is that the risk is too great and it should be deemed evil by default. That position is harsh, but it isn't irrational and it certainly isn't all that evil as blood magic is a choice.

 

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.

 

I use evil because it is being used. Now, I don't know why you start of with ridiculous questions regarding the punishment of Vaughan, but I think he should simply be killed or locked away for good. Not all humans, because it was just Vaughan and a few henchmen and they are the ones deserving punishment. If you meant it as an analogy to the Circle Tower it is a strange analogy. The Chantry places a punishment on magic, of course that is wrong. The Circle is the only lifeline for magic users. It is a necessary evil because of the Chantry. It is not the Circle's fault. There are enough mages opposing the Chantry as well.

 

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.

 

Now, why should Morrigan be considered evil, you ask. First then, let me tell you that she is not stigmatized. The stigma is on Alistair who seems like a total fool when interacting with Morrigan. Morrigan should be considered evil because of two interlocking things, her philosophies and the actions that result from them. The argument is rather complex when worked out because it would need a proper definition of evil for instance, but basically the train of thought is that Morrigan's philosophies do not really allow for any other disposition than the one she deems best for herself. She disregards suffering in others for this. She knows suffering, so she is not incapable of understanding what she is disregarding. Her philosophy then is a matter of self-deception. She can work like that for herself in the Wilds where survival is the common core value, but in a society this is different.

 

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.

 

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.

 

Morrigan *does* know the notion of helping others. It is common everywhere, even among animals. Morrigan was never on the receiving end, that's all. She doesn't understand the culture, okay. Now, why should I care? Morality may be relative, but it is not all relative. There is no excuse for her lack of understanding in a number of instances, Redcliffe being a rather clear one. If you don't help the village you are basically the accessory of the sacking of the village. They did nothing to deserve that. Realism is an explanation, but it is not an excuse.

 

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.

[CrapsterZ]

The preservation of the Old God may be important to Morrigan but it isn't made clear why and there is no reason why she kept this from you for so long.

 

There is a reason, and it adds on to her pragmatic nature - she presents the truth to you on the eve of the battle when you fully realise the price of ending the blight. She has known the Warden who slays the archdemon dies the whole time she was traveling with you. She specifically mentions these two points in regards to not telling you sooner:

 

a) Credibility, you would not have believed her - and hearing it from Riordan is much more reliable. Now, you can argue that she had no idea Riordan would be there, but we can't know for sure that Flemeth didn't already foresee his presence, or at least instructed Morrigan to withhold it to the last minute.

 

b) It was one burden the Warden didn't need while having to gather the armies as well as survive being hunted by Loghain.

 

She lets you know at the crucial moment, when everything is placed in perspective for you - when you make the most rational decision instead of jumping at shadows over something she could have told you on the first day. That way, you make the decision knowing all the facts and being in that exact situation where you would seriously consider the circumstances surrounding you and make a choice with complete knowledge. It's obvious enough that giving you that information too early would cause you to lose focus on gathering the armies and focusing on the blight, but instead pondering your death after slaying the archdemon the entire way and the ritual as well. Imagine the conditions you're already under - labeled a traitor and hunted, having to lead a ragtag group of companions to gather the different armies and having to battle the blight. Not to mention the mental toll the Warden is already under from the dreams.

 

She IS doing you a favor by not letting you know early, because you'd be less focused on the mission and more on a) your possible death and b) the implications of the ritual. As opposed to letting you find out from Riordan on the eve of battle and gaining a full perspective on what needs to be done to end the blight - your life or a god-child? Regardless of the decision the Warden makes, it has to be at the moment when they are faced with the full magnitude of the blight and have to make a difficult decision that she offers you an alternative - when you can weigh for yourself the full cost of either option. It's like being told you have a year to live and a day, you'd be more prepared to do what is necessary to set things right if the repercussion and implications of the situation are fully realised.

 

Her departure, as she said, is the result of not wanting to watch you die and being told you would not take the "best case scenario" way to end the blight (you survive and the archdemon dies).

[brokenergy]

Utotri, you twist people's words and use them against them before even considering the other possibilities. Now while I don't care if Morrigan is not your favourite character, I do however care that you seem to judge her in a simplistic manner and I would like to show you why (like I have done with others in the past) by giving you clear explanations. Many people have given examples of why Morrigan isn't evil but you still press with your cast-iron judgment when it wasn't really the writers intentions. The main themes of DA are sacrifice and tough choices, something that the writers took great consideration when they made the characters of the story. Like I said before Morrigan is the most honest member of the party, there is no reason for her to lie, even before the DR. Gaider (the writer who wrote Morrigan, Zevran and several other characters) has confirmed that Morrigan has no plans for the OGB, so that blows the whole notion that 'Morrigan is going to use the OGB for herself' out of the water. The real reason of why she didn't tell you about the ritual is given in the DA comic depicting the cut scene that was suppose to be in the game but was cut due to timing issues. She saw no need of telling you about the ritual as it was a last resort for her and thought that the Orlesian wardens would come in time and she wouldn't need to perform the act.

 

Also while I'm here, I have given the reason why Morrigan can't perform Flemeth's ritual here.

 

http://thenexusforums.com/index.php?showtopic=177892&st=0

 

I could go a lot deeper but that's all for now. Thanks people who adding to this conversation.

[Lehcar]

Still doesn't understand why she just HAS HAS HAS to run off with that damned baby. Poor Lord Aeducan.

[Utotri]

 

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.