The only thing that makes me mad, is that Ebony mail is only achieved through evil means. It is the best looking armor in the game.

It bugs me to no end that they allow iron and steel armor to have two different versions, but not Ebony. WTH (and then I find out that I have to a do an evil act in order to get ebony version without pauldrons... lame)


Other than this, I agree with the argument, that you don't have to do the quest.

You're mad that you can't just get EVERYTHING without doing anything you don't want?

No, I am only disapointed in the lack of customization to Ebony Armor.

Wanting everything for nothing is absurd, and you are warping what I have said....

If I really want it, then I may just have to find an "evil" companion that deserves death. Does anyone know of any?

You have the choice to walk away. When Molag Bal tells you to kill that follower of Stendarr you can choose to do it or just walk out of the home.

Sure, but how do you get out of having to kill the first guy? Molag Bal is not a nice guy, that's for sure, but compared to Alduin he's a cute, little puppy. So why is it that the entire purpose of the game is for us to rebel against Alduin when we can't even say, "No," to a Daedric prince?

That still doesn't justify the fact that we're given quests that we can either complete only by doing something we dislike or simply ignore. It doesn't matter whether or not we can ignore them - the problem is that Bethesda created completely linear quests that have only one line of reasoning and one path to completion, rendering every choice you've ever made in-game obsolete. Like I said before, Skyrim is supposed to be an RPG. The features are supposed to revolve around role-playing, meaning the quest in question should have both a way to abide by Molag Bal's wishes (which there is) and a way to deny or reject them (which there isn't).

Molag Bal wants you to kill someone. Do it or, don't... what other options could there be!?

you cant choose not to kill the first guy in the abandoned house because the door is locked and you cannot leave unless you kill him

Uhhhh not kill him and stay locked in there forever? Sounds much like Cidna Mine. You're given a choice, if you choose to kill someone, then you have chosen to kill someone. Tough choices are a part of life and apparently they are also a part of Skyrim. This is not a bad thing. If every choice was an easy choice, THEN you'd have less choice.

They disnt go the populair way with this idea,they want the more realistic way.
You arent gonna be able to complete the Dark Brotherhood quest chain by NOT killing anyone.
They murder for a living,and even in their own twisted way,they see nothing wrong with their line of work.

A Good and Evil side to each quest is ludicrous.
You will never be able to complete every single quest if you want to hold on to moral values.
You cant even if you don't,since there are quest lines that make you choose between sides,barring you from achieving the other faction's ending.
You want full completion,play the game several times,with different playstyles and moral concepts.

This is just more Goody-two shoes Completionist ranting.

Its funny to see there never are any Evil players who complain about the 'Good' quests they cant complete...

There are no "good" & "Evil" options in this game, there are choices. Good & Evil are defined by your intentions when you make those choices.

Wait a minute, you're complaining that you are "forced to be evil" on the house of Horrors quest?! I just finished that quest and...

Having completed nearly all of the Daedra quests in Oblivion and not having to feel guilty over any of them, I figured I would pick out a few to do in Skyrim. My favorite is the Skeleton Key. Then I found out I have to do a thieves quest to get it.

My choice: learn the lockpicking skill. It's not worth it to me to betray my morals.

"This is just more Goody-two shoes Completionist ranting.

Its funny to see there never are any Evil players who complain about the 'Good' quests they cant complete."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


it takes less effort to be evil and more too be nice... i guess thats why evil players think its cool..


there are quite alot of instances in this game that you HAVE to kill someone you rather you didnt. Then what happens ,is you bump into a quest giver thats just feeling remorseful after killing someone and in the dialogue from the player is " oh my why have you killed someone you bad man you" talk about The pot calling the kettle black...

Sure, because the slayer of dragons whom Akatosh favors couldn't possibly just open the door and leave, right?

So if you and some stranger you wanted to help were locked in a room and told to kill each other before you could leave, you'd simply stand there and wait for the guy to attack you rather than bashing down the door?

Bethesda wants you to be conqueror of the gods and, at the same time, plaything of the gods. It doesn't make sense. They were able to give us a choice in Dawnstar, so why not Markarth as well? You say it's because we're trapped in the room and have some guy attacking us -- but who designed that quest to begin with? Bethesda.

No, there are "good" and "evil" options in this game. They just aren't labeled. Going to Markarth and opting to help some guy rid the world of evil = good. Becoming trapped in the house until you kill him should not be the sole result of choosing to do something good, especially if you're the main character in a TES game.

No way should the player-character be more powerful than Molag Bal. Period. If Mogal Bal wants you locked in a room, you're locked in a room.


You're not ridding the world of "evil" you're ridding the world of "Daedra", which aren't entirely evil, they're manifestations of change. They're doing what they were created to do.

You're not forced to be evil, you're forced to defend yourself which is the epitome of good.

More options would be good, of course, but expecting EVERY POSSIBLE character personality to be able to have an appropriate solution to EVERY quest is highly unrealistic. Even if they make a "goody" and "baddie" resolution to every quest, any reasonably well realized character is still going to have problems finishing them all. Lawful Stupid and Stupid Evil aren't the only two psychological types out there.

The best approach is to do what they have done: provide one or more options to proceed, and always provide the option to walk away (i.e. not act out of character). If your character would not do a quest, then for god's sake, have a little role-playing courage and freaking walk away.

As for being locked in a room with an innocent man who is homicidally possessed, you actually still have a choice: defend yourself like any reasonable person would, or (if your character really is a complete saint) stand still and let him kill you rather than compromise your values. That is a fantastic ending to a story about the nicest guy in the world, but if you want to be that nice, you have to pay the price. How committed are you to that character's purity of action? What would that character actually do in that situation?

Obviously your character doesn't want to kill the guy ... that's the point. You walked right into Molag Bal's trap (the priest even warned you about how the place was evil - what did you expect?) and now you have to decide whether you're willing to kill to get out. If not, it's game over for the Dovahkiin, and congratulations on not letting the Prince corrupt you. Maybe your next character will be a little less stupid and/or more flexible.

In good fiction, though, the hero would defend himself, and agonize forever about what he'd been forced to do. This is called character development and it's a good thing. Having to make a choice that breaks your character's code only makes him more interesting and rewarding to role-play, not less.

The only way Bethesda screwed up is in not allowing us to drop or sort quests in our log. Personally, I wish I had a folder where I could file "Quests I Don't Want to Do", basically like a Windows Recycle Bin. So they would still be available if I changed my mind later, but they wouldn't clutter up the interface the rest of the time.

When you try to say no he tells you that a man is imprisoned and will die if you don't save him. When you save him the rest of the quest continues and you're forced to either leave him in a cage or murder him.

Actually, all you have to do to free the guy (who is an evil Daedra worshiper himself, by the way, which you are told long before you go to the cave) is kill his captors. He can leave any time after that. You don't have to persuade him to go back to the altar. Again, just walk away, you saved him, good job! But if you do talk him into going back, it's a fact that Molag Bal isn't going to let him go. What the hell do you expect? You want an option to go to Oblivion and kill Molag Bal so you can break his supernatural cage? Sorry dude, you did everything the bad guy told you to do. Don't complain that there were unpleasant consequences.

This lady gets it.

For some reason I thought I was going to be able to help him out. Oh well, beating an old man to death with a mace was probably a good plot twist for my night in shining armor character.

Very good post. Well said.

Speaking of doing bad things, I broke into the temple of Dibella just to see if they were actually having some kind of lisbian orgy in the back room...turns out the priestess in the main temple room were telling the truth and they were just talking, guess they aren't all of them total six-crazed nymphos like that chick in Riften.

Then I stole all their stuff.

Hahaha, you didn't have to do that either. Molag Bal had the guy in his clutches and there was no way to save him at that point. You still could have walked away, but instead chose torture and murder. Yes, you chose it.

It seems to me that the real problem is your gamer OCD. It doesn't matter whether you did what you did to serve Molag Bal's glory or to serve the almighty quest arrow - either way, you chose to be a tool.

Well, I get what everybody is saying. It's just that if the only choice is to leave the quest undone, it doesn't feel very complete for me. There should be a choice to do another thing.

Like those cannibals in Markath, you can decide to kill them all at the final feast. That I really liked.

I agree; I have some gamer OCD myself and I like checking off every box. The bottom line though is that if you're really committed to role-playing, you have to be willing to tell the quest arrow to go [censored] itself. This will remain true even if they write 10 different endings for every quest.