FANDOM


This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Quests (Inquisition) article.
  • General discussions not pertaining to the improvement of the article should be on the forums instead.
  • Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
  • Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes! (~~~~)
  • Do not edit another editor's comment.

Purpose of article Edit

Before more info is added I would like to point out that this page should be reserved solely for listing links to all of the quests in Inquisition, similar to how we have Quests (Origins). All of the individual quests should have their own separate pages, such as the one just created, The Wrath of Heaven. --Kelcat Talk 23:39, November 18, 2014 (UTC)


I moved all the Wrath quest content to a separate page and setup a link to it on the new "Quests" page --AnuChemicalCo (talk) 00:18, November 19, 2014 (UTC)

Any idea how to add the quest page to the walkthrough drop down at the top of the page? I see one for the previous two games.--AnuChemicalCo (talk) 00:19, November 19, 2014 (UTC)

I have started to add a few quests. Regarding the categories, I'm not sure but I think the first 2 quests belong to the main plot, not sure if its worth typing here that they are prologue - might as well write it directly on the specific quest page? Have also started adding Haven quests.

Forgot to sign the previous post Kewpies (talk) 10:46, November 19, 2014 (UTC)

Split Edit

Added a split nomination to move the list of the companion quests to their own page, like we do with the other games. Personally, I like the table layout of Companion quests (Dragon Age II) (without the acts), over the Companion quests (Origins) list format. --Kelcat Talk 01:20, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

I quite like the quest list of how it looks in Quests (Origins), where all the quests are listed on one page, including companion quests. With that said, surely they can have a separate page as well, if there's any specific information that should be added there. That's how it looks on the Origins pages at least.

Having a table is best if you need an overview of many quests with different locations, time points, requirements and outcomes. If you have one quest per companion, the table does not add (or take away) anything useful. I haven't completed the game yet and don't know how many total quests we end up with :) Kewpies (talk) 11:03, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

I'm new to editing Wikia, usually I just use it for information vs adding, so apologies for mistakes. But I agree with a split, I also think there should be a new category added for Missions at the War Room. --Korlia (talk) 21:03, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

I don't have the game, so I'm not familiar with the War Room missions, but I don't see a problem with separating them from main quests and side quests. Looking at how we have other games set up, this article should actually have all the quests on it, and then create separate Companion quests, Quests (which would be main quests), and Side quests articles. So I'm going to remove the split nomination, and make a companions quest article. I'll start it as a list for now, and then if it winds up being more complex we can change it into a table. --Kelcat Talk 00:22, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Companion quests Edit

The big majority (or all) companion quests should now be added and the pages are created. There are a couple of pages where help would be much appreciated:

  • Romance quests
  • Cole
  • Sera
  • Iron Bull
  • Advisors, most specifically Josephine

Kewpies (talk) 17:32, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Categories? Edit

I noticed there is a red link category at the bottom of this page called "Empire du Lion", but it doesn't show up when editing the page. I'm pretty sure it should be removed. Anybody know why it's showing up to begin with?--N00bKing (talk) 23:30, January 6, 2015 (UTC)

Requisitons Edit

Editors feel free to add to the description that these are repeatable side quests. Regarding obtaining all of these I wonder if it's random, or if there's any pattern there. Possibly the ones you get when entering the area for the first time are defined, but others..? Hmm. Kewpies (talk) 15:12, January 11, 2015 (UTC)

Advice needed - the "main quests" of the areas Edit

Some of the areas have a specific quest (or two), which, when completed will have a certain impact on the area, reveal a dark secret, trigger Mother Giselle's comments, open Judgment/operation quests and so on. Such is Still Waters in Crestwood, after which you learn of the grim secret of the village and the gloomy weather of Crestwood suddenly changes to sunny! The Venatori quest line in Western Approach, Take Back the Lion in Emprise du Lion and Sand and Ruin in Hissing Wastes are in my opinion also such quests.

How can I best formulate this in the quest article? I'd like to somehow give a little credit to these quests over other, mindless grinding side quests... Kewpies (talk) 21:37, January 7, 2015 (UTC)

I think your point is valid. Under Crestwood I've put the, what I feel are important, Still Waters and Capturing Caer Bronach at the top with a gap before the "other" side quests. Is this an acceptable solution? -- Ness csr (talk) 04:40, January 22, 2015 (UTC)
Yes, absolutely. I attempted something similar in Hissing Wastes, and in the Sand & Ruin quest article I wrote "... serves both as an introduction to the Hissing Wastes and as a significant quest plot in that area." Maybe something similar could be written on the other respective pages at some point? Feel free to make suggestions on respective pages, if you have time! :) Kewpies (talk) 14:29, January 22, 2015 (UTC)
That's a good idea. -- Ness csr (talk) 20:34, January 22, 2015 (UTC)
One possibility may be to make said quests bold or color-coded somehow, with a general note on the page briefly explaining the why/whats. Just throwing ideas around. --N00bKing (talk) 13:03, January 23, 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea if this is even possible but, similar to the above idea, to have, for example, Still Waters* where the asterisk refers back to wherever the explanation is. I know what I'm trying to say, not sure I'm making sense though! -- Ness csr (talk) 13:41, January 23, 2015 (UTC)
I second this approach. The quests page should just be a listing of the quests. Distinguishing somehow those that have a side-effect is interesting, but I don't think there are enough of this type of quests (and they don't have the same type of impact) to make them a category of their own. So, the highlighting should be marginal in nature.
An asterisk after the name seems reasonable. I'm thinking a specially crafted icon could also work, but then we'd have to make sure we properly handle the interaction of this new icon with the one displayed when transcluding the quest transformer info. If possible, it could be nice. FR (talk) 16:33, January 30, 2015 (UTC)

These are all good ideas and thank you for the replies, but I need to clarify that I was actually mostly thinking about writing/mentioning it in the individual quest articles, and was mainly wondering how to formulate/write the respective sentences. Plus, that I wanted to inform other editors about my thoughts. Apologies if my replies have been a bit unclear! Anyhow, perhaps icons and so are a little bit too much work? The asterisk does sound good, but I'm not sure how to do that. <-Kewpies (talk) 17:30, January 30, 2015 (UTC)

Collection Quests Edit

Should the collection quests (shards, landmarks etc) be listed here or should there be some kind of reference to the Collections page? -- Ness csr (talk) 10:31, January 14, 2015 (UTC)

i dont see these as quests such as the ones on this page. regarding the collections page, yeah thats the place, but we should possibly consider creating individual pages for different collections, cause imo that page is quite huge now 😊Kewpies (talk) 12:50, January 14, 2015 (UTC)

Rifts and Requisitions Edit

I put all the Rifts and Requisition side quests into subsections in an effort to avoid cluttering up the lists of side quests, since there are so many of those in this game. It might not be a bad idea to move those off onto separate pages, though, the way we've done with the collections and so forth. (Especially requisitions, since that way there could be an explanation of what they're for, the fact that they're repeatable, etc. I thought I was stuck for a long time because I couldn't find Fereldan Locks, until I realized I would never be "done" with the requisitions for a given zone.)

--Bneuensc (talk) 18:48, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

Subsections are fine, regarding separate page, possibly, altho I dont know if its actually needed. Right now I've added to these quests' intro lines that they are "repeatable side quest" rather than just "side quest", which I believe is appropriate. Kewpies (talk) 14:33, January 22, 2015 (UTC)
Requisitions feel to me like a separate category of thing from actual quests, even if they get listed alongside normal quests in your log. But I'll admit that reaction is partly driven by going "oh holy GOD" when I see how huge this page is: to my eye, the requisitions are just getting in the way of finding the non-repeatable quests. I've gone ahead and made a page for Requisitions, so the logistics of them can be described in one central place, but I haven't removed them from this page. --Bneuensc (talk) 19:23, January 22, 2015 (UTC)
Just looking at that page now and it looks great. But the quests should stay here as well since this is meant to be a complete list. The headings clean it up a bit, I like them. -- Ness csr (talk) 20:34, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

Placeholders? Edit

What's with the placeholder lines (eg: <!-- ****** This is a placeholder. Please do not move ******-->) in the page? Are they still needed by anyone or just left overs? FR (talk) 14:05, January 30, 2015 (UTC)

This was implemented to address Kewpies suggestion for the above talk topic "Advice needed - the "main quests" of the areas." The placeholders aren't a perfect solution, if people even want to support the idea. Would like your input -- Ness csr (talk) 14:14, January 30, 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I only now noticed the placeholders. While they havent bothered me, I'm not against removing them if it appears misleading or wrong to anyone. I think it's well enough to use a short clarifying sentence or two in those quests' articles instead (as I think we already have done for most of them, yes?). My main point with the above topic was just to share the information I noticed with others. Kewpies (talk) 14:52, January 30, 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the info.. Further chat on the placeholders should go to that thread now. FR (talk) 16:35, January 30, 2015 (UTC)