Who's your favorite villain? *spoilers*

Some of these arn`t villains though. They become enemies, given the right choices by the PC, but they arn`t really villains\badguys. Jowan, The Lady of the wood...very grey characters. As for Flemmeth...well we don`t know if she is a villain or not. Her motivations are very very obscure. She might even turn out to be more heroic in future games, once we find out more about her.

 

Brood Mother for me, too. Not terribly difficult to defeat in battle, but such a creative approach to a "boss." Nice lead-up, really creepy visuals, and honestly I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like it in a game. Definitely the most original on the list.

 

Its Uldred... not Ulrech

for me Ive gone for Logain, I personally like the idea of one on one duels, and there isnt enough dueling in games, It would be nice for a game to have an honour system where a player can chose to duel baddies rather then fight a larger battle, and a skill tree which revolves solely around the art of dueling, whether that be spells to that extent or masterful sword play or simple agility... it would be nice to have that option.

 

I didn't think much of the darkspawn. They were just mindless and not characters at all. Ditto the dragons.

The demons were very good in many ways but I had a serious problem with the way every demon was completely homogenous once they were put into one of the five groups. That seemed nonsensical to me, they were supposed to be individuals with their own personalities.

I can't think of Flemeth as being a villain of this story. She may very well be a villain but not to the PC, not right now. And it's too hard to tell what her real motives are.

I voted for Teyrn Loghain. I loved the political machinations and considered that to be the true plot of the game. And Loghain was at the centre of these. He was a very gray character. He was truly motivated by what he thought best for Ferelden. His "Son of the Land/Country" surname is far from villainy. But I think some of the actions he takes (all the lives lost at Ostagar, the elves sold into slavery) can't be justified by pragmatism. The road to hell is paved with good intentions indeed.

 

Fair points Deise


On Loghain.... thankfully I think that many people with good intentions wouldn't take the murderous and enslaving route he does.

Was the Lady of the Wood even a villain?

She does not seem eager to wipe out innocents. I cannot remember my discussion with her but she doesn't seem especially eager to kill elves-focusing her concerns mainly on the individual responsible for the situation.

Bhelen is a frustrating one. Maybe my view would change more if I saw finished a dwarf commoner campaign but he is so ruthless politically they really make it hard to see how he brings dwarves to a better society.

 

Pick any of the desire demons. The one in the mage tower or the one in the dream where you save Connor. Both of those are good well thought out evil characters.

My favorite DA character is Logain. He is not evil just has a dark shade of gray.

 

based on some of the characters in that list, I think that Zevran should definitely be in there, but you could also consider Sten and shale in there too.

 

Yeah, I think this should have been something like "quest-ending boss-level adversary" rather than "villain," but that's pretty long to type out.

The High Dragon and Kolgrim: final boss adversaries for Urn
The Broodmother and Branka: final boss adversaries for Orzammar
Bhelen: possible boss adversary in Orzammar
Sloth Demon and Uldred: final boss adversaries in the Circle
Zathrian and Lady of the Wood: possible final boss adversaries in the Brecilian Forest
Jowan?
Desire Demon possessing Connor: final (boss?) adversary in Redcliffe Castle
Teyrn Loghain: boss adversary in Landsmeet
Arl Howe: boss adversary in Denerim
Flemeth: final boss adversary for Morrigan's quest
Marjolaine: final (boss?) adversary for Leliana's quest
Archdemon: final overall boss adversary

Maybe Taliesin needs to be added? It depends on whether 1) he's a boss-level and/or 2) if we're including non-boss-level final adversaries of companion quests (i.e. if Marjolaine IS a boss and Taliesin is NOT, then we wouldn't include him).

I'm just now in Redcliffe, so it's been awhile, but I don't remember fighting Jowan as a final adversary, and I don't imagine he'd be boss-level, but I could be wrong. That's also why I'm not sure about the level of the Desire Demon.

Zevran, Sten, and Shale are clearly not final adversaries for a particular quest, though, so I can see why they weren't included. Also, I don't think you ever fight Sten -- you either leave him to die or take him with you. Shale? Do you fight her? I know you do fight Zevran--I don't think he's boss-level, though.

 

Zevran could be considered a boss, you get ambushed by his party as part of the story and he is the boss of that battle.
yes you can fight Sten, if he dislikes you and you have him in your party he will question your leadership and attack you, I personally can't stand the arrogant git so I always put him down in conversation so if he's part of my party this usually happens during the quest for the urn.

 

True, but if we're including ALL battle bosses, then the list would be impossibly long. Trickster Whim, Beyha Joam, various Ogres . . . Zevran is the boss of a random encounter, but not one at the very end of a big quest. That said, when I said "boss-level", I meant having a red name. I can't remember if he does, but I'd personally be surprised. Of course, I'm also not sure about Jowan. And I just fought the Desire Demon, and she's not, so I guess that wasn't part of Beren's decision-making process.

You're right. I had forgotten about that. But I think that, too, is very different from a fight with an adversary at the end of a major quest or any boss-level (red-named) fight. Personally, I like Sten. I find him very interesting even though I don't agree with him all the time. He's not my favorite character by any means, though.

 

well, I suppose that would really depend on your definition of villain. I don't consider a demon a villain, they're open books, you know where they stand. To me, Zevran and Sten are worse, they've both done their evil deeds, both murderers, both swear allegiance to you and both are happy to turn on you when it suits them, that is a villain.

 

Yes. That's why I said that probably "villain" wasn't the most appropriate term for the original list of characters. Something like "end-of-quest adversary" would be more appropriate. Many of the characters on the list aren't villains at all, but if you make certain choices, you still have to have a big battle with them. And I completely agree about the demon. It's just their nature. They can't be true villains because they're not human. They don't have the will to choose good or evil; they're just evil because that's what they are.

 

Actually I'll go so far as to question the idea all the demons are evil. Most decidedly are.

The one possessing Connor has the blood of how many villagers and castlefolk on her hands?

On the other hand the one possessing a Templar simply wants to see the world and is quite willing to talk rather than kill others. More importantly she doesn't seem to be harming anyone. Sure the Templar who wants a family is being tricked in a huge way but he isn't going to get a family and would likely live the rest of his days in misery because of it. At least with that demon he gets some happiness even if it is based on a fascade. It doesn't seem like she will eat his soul or use him to harm others. She just wants to see the world and if nobody gets hurt it is hard to call her actions evil.

The rage demons in the alienage orphanage are decidedly evil. The main one may not be actively plotting or chasing down elves but he will hurt anyone who enters the building so that puts him as evil.

Of the 3 I mentioned 2 are evil. But 1 is seriously questionable.


As for Bhelen. He is a murderer and, perhaps, an example of how ruthless and authoritarian dwarf (and real world medieval) politics could get.

Yet, like Richard the 3rd (if this CNN article is correct) he has some good points. Remarkable good points if one considers how messed up dwarf society is.

Harrowmont may be like Robert E. Lee, himself a remarkably honest and kind gentleman to people who met him. Yet Robert E. Lee took part in the killing of thousands (US Civil War) to defend the continued existence of slavery (and I'm glad his side lost the war).

Both potential dwarven kings have good and bad points. Plus it may show that just because someone seems good to you or honorable in 1 way (Harrowmount doesn't strike as one who would kill siblings for control) that same person could be ruthless and cruel in other ways (he could care less about those living in dust town but the game doesn't advertise it as much as it does Bhelen's faults).

 

It really depends on how you define "evil" and "demon", and who named these beings "demons". If the game itself named them demons, and if demon means "being of evil," then they are obviously all evil. But if the Chantry or other group within the game named them demons, then they could be just transferring a bias, in which case, they might not be evil.

I think, too, that it depends on how you define "evil". If you only look at the actions, then yes, some of the demons might not be "evil." But I think that the game was going with the 7 deadly sins here, in which case the demon wouldn't necessarily do anything evil him/herself, but would drive humans to give into their weaknesses and that would be "evil". The templar really shouldn't be just hanging out imagining he has a family, and the desire demon gets him to kill *her* opposition based on that fabrication.

As for Harrowmont and Bhelen, I completely agree. I think the reason Bhelen is on the list and Harrowmont isn't is that if you choose Bhelen, *he* immediately has Harrowmont killed. If you choose Harrowmont, you have to fight Bhelen. In other words, you never have a boss battle against Harrowmont, but you do against Bhelen.

 

Yes she did get him to attack you. But it wasn't just because she had him wrapped in a delusion.

It was because you opted not to let them be. If you do then they leave peacefully.

I don't like the fact that the Templar is under a delusion but he was stuck in misery with no family and at least with the delusion he is happier-still stuck in a situation with no family but happier.

He wasn't going to have a family either way.

If they don't opt to run around hurting or killing people it is hard to see it as evil..

 

I thought that the desire demon in the tower quite clearly shows that she its consuming the life force of the templar in order to sustain itself and that he will die and she would move onto another. I may be wrong but that's how I read it and the main reason I attack her.

 

The thing is: the Templar doesn't ask you to leave them be--he can't because he's under her thrall. So, he has no choice in the matter. So you have to ask: would a Templar, assuming he had free will, attack someone trying to free him from a demon? The answer is pretty clear. She forces him to do something that he would, under other circumstances, consider appalling. And she's doing it for her own benefit, and the action itself is violence. Yes, she's not necessarily as destructive as some of the other demons, but I think a case can be made that she's still evil.

I don't remember about the life force, but that makes sense, too.

 

I may have to replay it but I don't remember the demon saying she was draining his life force at all.

If she was slowly killing him that would be cause to call her evil but neither I nor Vorona recall hearing that (at the moment). So I'm not sure she is.



Would the a Templar be happy that he was in her thrall? Perhaps not. But he is already stuck in an unhappy place and there is no indication he'd be leaving it even if she wasn't there.

I have a preference for straight up truth. Usually knowing more about a situation lets one improve it. But if the person has no chance of improving it and doing so isn't hurting anyone (draining his life force would count as hurting but we don't know that is happening) then is being in a thrall really bad? If the demon was breaking up a real family or using him to attack others then I could see it. Maybe even keeping him from some important goal. But that isn't the case.

While he is in her thrall she also has been keeping him safe from the rest of the demons in the tower. If she isn't draining him then she may, arguably, be one of the few things that keeps him alive (he could be killed by the other demons or used by them to attack your party-neither would be good for his lifespan).