#i have to tell you-- ameridan is such a cool character!!

[vaguely-concerned]

I understand and agree with a lot of the frustrations about the shortcomings of Inquisition as a story. but sometimes when I hear people complain about the chosen one narrative in it I do want to just be like... you know it's a deconstruction of the concept more than anything, right. the inquisitor isn't actually chosen by anything except stumbling into the wrong (right?) room at the right (wrong?) time because they like, heard a noise or whatever. or if you think they are chosen, as many do in-universe, that's something you have to take on faith, the maker-or-whoever moves in mysterious ways indeed-style. the Inquisitor isn't actually a Destined Chosen One, they're a Just Some Guy in a fancy hat, self-delusions of grandeur to taste as you'd prefer.

a running thread that goes through all of the personal quests of the companions is the concept of a comforting lie vs. an uncomfortable truth, upholding old corrupt structures vs. disrupting them, and the role of faith in navigating that. (blackwall the warden vs. thom rainier the liar and murderer. hissrad vs. the iron bull, or is that the other way around? cassandra and the seekers -- do we tell the truth about what we find, even if it means dismantling the old order of the world? and so on.) and your inquisitor IS at the same time a comforting lie (a necessary one, in dark times? the game seems to ask) and an uncomfortable truth (we are the result of random fickle chance, no protective hand is held over the universe, it's on us to make a better world because the maker sure as hell won't lift a divine finger to help anyone, should he against all odds exist). faith wielded for political power... where's the point that it crosses the line into ugliness? is it before it even begins? what's the alternative? will anyone listen to the truth, if you tell it?

interesting how you also get a mix of companion agency in this -- you have characters like dorian who ALWAYS choose one side of the comforting lie vs. uncomfortable truth dichotomy. he will always make up his own mind to go back to tevinter and try to dismantle the corruption of the old system no matter what you say, or how you try to influence him. meanwhile iron bull is on the complete opposite side of the spectrum -- so psychologically trapped and mangled, caught in an impossible spiritual catch-22, that his sense of identity is left entirely to you and your mercy. you cannot change dorian in any way that matters; you can be his friend or not, support him or not, but he is whole no matter what. you are given incredible and potentially destructive-to-him power over bull's soul. it's really cool (and heartbreaking) to think about.

this is a game about how history will eat you even while you're still alive, and shape you into whatever image it pleases to serve it, and for all your incredible power right now you are powerless in the face of the gravitational force of time -- of more than time, of History. you won't recognize yourself in what History will make of you, because you belong to it now. you don't belong to yourself anymore and you never will again. the further you were from what it needs from you to begin with, the more you will find yourself distorted in its funhouse mirror. (why hello there inquisitor ameridan, same hat!)

and to me this is so much the core of what Dragon Age is about right from the Origins days -- how and by whom history gets written, the inherent unreliable narration of it all. I hope you like stories, Inquisitor. You are one now.

I do think it's probably still the weakest of the games narratively, and it's hampered by its structure and bloated systems. but I also find it disingenous to say that there's nothing deeper or actually interesting going on with it, thematically. if you're willing to engage with it there is Some Real Shit going on under the high fantasy-tinted surface.

[crossdressingdeath]

The Inquisitor is in such a shitty position though?

Like, if you think about it, the Warden and Hawke both have a choice throughout the game (even though it doesn’t show up in gameplay for obvious reasons): they can walk away. If they want to, there is nothing stopping them from getting up and leaving except their own morality and common sense (aka “I live here and want to continue being able to do so”). You even see a bit of it at Redcliffe: the Warden can choose to leave the town to its fate. They can straight-up fuck off and abandon people because they want to, or they don’t see a way to win, or because they don’t think it’ll help, or whatever reason you can think of. They can decide “I’m not doing this”, and no matter what your companions say you don’t have to listen to them. They can try to convince you, but at the end of the day the choice is yours. Hawke doesn’t really get the same option to leave people to their fate (not counting just not doing side quests once they’re started), but 2 is on a much smaller scale; for the better part of each act, Hawke could conceivably argue that they aren’t abandoning anyone by leaving the city. They don’t have to stay; hell, if they wanted to they’ve probably got enough cash by Act 2 to bring all the companions to Ferelden with them!

The Inquisitor... doesn’t have that option. Right from the beginning, if you ask what happens if you refuse, you’re pretty much told that if you don’t play nice and help the Inquisition they’ll allow the Chantry to do what they like to you. And it is allow; the Inquisition is the only thing protecting you, so revoking that protection is basically saying “Here, take them”. You’re basically told outright “If you leave, you die”, and while the position they’re in isn’t really the advisors’ fault, the fact that they don’t offer any sort of assistance in getting somewhere safe is basically saying that they will let the Chantry have you if you try to leave. It’s not “We’ll help you find a safe place to stay until this is over with”, it’s “You will stay with us or else”. In any case, that’s a death sentence at best. The most the Inquisitor could hope for is a quick death (unlikely, since it’s, y’know, the Chantry), and everyone in that room knows it. Honestly, one of my biggest problems with the advisors in the early game is how little they seem to care about how they’re basically threatening to throw an innocent person to the wolves to get their way, world at stake or no. I get why they’re doing it, but... I feel like Josie at least should be just a little perturbed about their actions.

In the early game there are a couple more places where you can make it pretty clear the Inquisitor isn’t there willingly, too. Like, in your first conversation with Bull at Haven, he’ll bring up the Inquisition’s leadership (or lack thereof), and the Inquisitor can offer to lead because, and I quote, “I’m here whether I like it or not”. And then again, when Josie asks your opinion on whether you’re chosen or not, you can straight up ask if what you say will actually change what they tell people. It’s pretty telling that Josie doesn’t actually answer; saying that she can’t tell the Inquisitor because they haven’t decided on an official position makes sense at first, but it loses ground when you remember that if the “Herald of Andraste’s” belief in their status would even have an impact on the decision, she... could have said so. Her phrasing almost feels like it’s a case of “As long as your position matches ours, your opinion matters”, but she’s too nice to actually say it.

I mean, sure, it’s only a couple of lines, but... those are pretty fucking bitter lines. The Inquisitor is basically saying, more than once, “I’m well aware that I have no choice in this”. And everyone else just... kinda ignores it? Even Varric, the one person who bothers to ask how you’re doing pre-Skyhold (and that’s a topic for another post). But yeah, everyone either doesn’t know or doesn’t care that the Herald of Andraste, if they showed any hesitance, was basically threatened into playing along.

Then you get to Skyhold. And... yeah, you can probably all see where I’m going with this, but I’m gonna say it anyway: There is no way for the Inquisitor to say no here. The advisors bring you up in front of the whole Inquisition, name you leader, and give you a fancy sword. There’s no prior discussion, not so much as a word of warning. They just do it. You can even say you don’t want it straight out; it doesn’t change anything. They’ve decided you’re going to be the Inquisitor, so that’s what you’ll be. This entire scene reads like a trap, whether the advisors know what they’re doing or not (and Leliana, at least, almost certainly does). You don’t put someone (especially a mage or non-human character, especially especially a non-human mage) out in front of everyone like that if you want to give them a choice. No, the decision was made, and you’re just going to have to deal with it.

And what might be the worst part is, after that... you can’t complain anymore. There aren’t any other places where you can comment on not wanting to be doing this. It might be the devs assuming the Inquisitor would be cool with it after that, but... I don’t know, it feels more like giving up to me. Like, they know there’s no way out until this is done, so they give up on fighting it and just try to do the best they can to get this done quickly. And then even after Corepheus is dealt with, the Inquisition keeps going. For an unwilling Inquisitor, that would pretty much be hell: you’ve done the job, and you still can’t leave. Like, an argument could be made (again, especially if you’re playing a non-human/mage/both) that they’re too scared of what might happen to them (or their people, especially for a Dalish Inquisitor) to walk away. A lot of potential Inquisitors are from groups that have been oppressed by the Chantry, remember, and the Chantry isn’t known for its wonderful treatment of people who belong to said groups that have helped save people, even ones who have helped save all of Thedas (Ameridan was turned into a human noble by Chantry propaganda, Anders was hunted down by Templars post-Mother despite the Right of Conscription superseding Chantry law, Hawke and co. (if they sided with the mages) were forced to flee the city and scatter to the winds after saving it several times, etc.), and despite changes in leadership the risk would still be there; the Divine no longer wanting to oppress people doesn’t mean that the people under her aren’t going to go against her; the Templars have done this multiple times. Even outside the lore we’ve had multiple cases of Templars especially breaking the rules to attack people. It’s entirely possible that the Inquisitor stays on because they’re genuinely afraid of what’ll happen if they don’t, or (perhaps more likely) out of an unwilling acceptance that no matter what they’re always going to be the Inquisitor in the eyes of the people, and they might as well do whatever good they can with that.

I mean, at the end of the day, the Inquisitor has to lose an arm before they even get the chance to get out of the Inquisition. That says a lot.