Over both dragon age games Flemeth plays a large part but is she good in da:o she saved the warden however this may have only been done to train Morrigan so what are your thoughta--Halisme (talk) 20:02, July 13, 2012 (UTC)
- It's difficult to be absolutely certain, but I think you left out an interesting possibility that she is neither. While there's certainly an air of evil surrounding her, it must be noted that our only experiences with her so far have been neutral, or (more notably) she saved our lives. I recall a similar character in the Shining Force series (called Galm) who had the exact same mysterious qualities, I believe Flemeth is similar - immensely powerful, a force to be feared and respected, but one that is also caught up with the fate of the world. While neither the instigator or the solution, she seems to aid the player's party because she stands to benefit in some way from their success. Bioware could admittedly go either way in the future - the events of the games could see her become the instigator of a future war, but more than likely she knows that by manipulating events behind the scenes she can prepare the world for a major future calamity - which would be disastrous for her if whatever this 'great evil' is remains undefeated. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:58, July 13, 2012 (UTC)
If you're going by D&D terms, Flemeth is clearly evil. She raises children so she can posses them and live forever. That is clearly an evil act. As of yet, I don't believe she is a villain per se, but she definitely is evil aligned. Wataru14 (talk) 22:04, July 13, 2012 (UTC)
- ^ The key thing here would be your definition of 'evil'. In human culture such things as you describe would indeed be evil. The problem with Flemeth is that she lives by a completely different moral compass to you or I. She has much more power, a much longer life, knowledge of the past and amazing foresight into the future. She's living by different rules.
- While we know that Flemeth did indeed possess the bodies of her 'children', we don't know the whole story. All we know are tales, the rest is gleaned from Morrigan's reaction to reading the Dark Grimoire - but since it was never Morrigan's intended role (she was intended for a different fate, the Ritual), we really don't know the truth. It could be that her children wilfully gave their bodies as it was their sole reason for existing. Flemeth expected Morrigan to find the grimoire, in fact it might have been part of a deliberate plan to goad her into getting a warden to kill her before the Blight consumes her. That way she could store part of herself in the amulet and 'sleep' until the Blight is over.
- The stereotypical 'evil' would do anything and everything to destroy 'good', yet all we have actually seen is Flemeth saving our lives on TWO (potentially THREE) occasions. Yes, she always has her own reasons, and she's certainly a dark presence that can be dangerous if given reason - but Flemmeth would not actively hinder the progress of anyone who's destiny is bound to the fate of the world, indeed she always acts to maintain that balance.
- Even the Maker himself (the ephemeral 'good' in the DA universe) is said to be responsible for some pretty dark acts. I guess, if you're in that sort of position, you have a much broader view of how things are and what's at stake. Things must be done - sometimes not the obvious - and sacrifices must be made to ensure that balance remains for the good of the entire world. All indications, to me at least, paint her as this sort of character. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 03:21, July 14, 2012 (UTC)
She would probably think of herself as distinctly amoral. She doesn't really care about "good" or "evil", and would probably laugh if someone tried to define her as one or the other. She has goals that she's working towards, and she's willing to do anything, good or evil, to accomplish them. Since we don't know what they are, we don't yet know whether or not the things she's doing to accomplish them can be argued to be "worth it" in the long run - if she's trying to save the world from some great calamity, you could argue that sacrificing her "children" to ensure she stays alive long enough to prevent it would be justifiable. On the other hand, her goals could be entirely selfish and reprehensible, or even simply incomprehensible (she might turn out to be just as insane as she seems). That said, she's done far too much evil, and seems to enjoy it too much, to ever be considered "good". Neutral at best, really. --UrLeingod (talk) 01:05, July 14, 2012 (UTC)
- ^Interestingly, I recall her saying something about 'the power behind the Blight' being much greater than anyone can imagine. I really doubt that she's referring to the Archdaemon here because they've been fought before and Grey Wardens are aware of their strength due to their inate 'link' that they have. No doubt this is but a small crumb that will play into the bigger picture in a few games time - so much of what you're saying is probably going to be very accurate. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 03:21, July 14, 2012 (UTC)
I think we've seen enough at this point to know she is neither. If she turns out to be evil I'm actually afraid they will ruin her as a character. And if she is good....well, that makes no sense. She's....complicated. The Grey Unknown (talk) 13:55, July 14, 2012 (UTC)
Her true intentions remain to be seen, but from what was shown in both games, I'd say she's more evil than good. She just saved the Warden to have a grandson with the soul of an old god and only saved Hawke to spare her own life. But that's just the impression she left, her true agenda still has to be better explained.User:Franciscoamell