Biggest plot hole in the main quest (spoiler warning)

[Vlka-Fenryka-7th]

One of the dumbest things with DD2's story is the fact pawns are banned from entering Vernworth Castle, which ends up creating a massive plot hole because Disa doesn't actually have the Godsway Crystal when you arrive in Vernworth. This basically means there's nothing stopping you from marching into the castle with pawns in tow to throw her and her puppet out of what's effectively your castle.

Waiting until the coronation to oust Disa was a massive mistake because it allowed her to gain enough time to acquire the one item that prevented you from ousting her.

The Dragon is far too passive about this plot because he should have known about the attempt to prevent the Arisen from fulfilling their duty and doesn't do anything when Disa has the Arisen abducted.

I'd also like to point out that Disa doesn't seem to be too concerned by the Dragon based on what she say's in one of the few lines of dialogue she has when you talk to her, which might be the main reason she thought it was safe to enact a plot against the Arisen and she should have been punished for her error in judgement by having the Dragon attack Vernworth to reduce her petty ambitions to ash.

On a related note the most disappointing thing about DD1's story is the fact Duke Edmund doesn't try to stop you from facing the Dragon by either having your character thrown into an oubliette or sending you on a quest that'll result in your characters death and then having the Dragon attack Gran Soren to put Edmund in his place.

[babobaka]

Pawns don't enter the castle because of Godsway crystal.

They don't enter the castle because they are not allowed by the guards.

As for DD1, Duke met the dragon. He thought no one can kill the dragon, so he didn't bother with it. Seeing how Grigori looks like, I can't blame Duke for thinking that.

[Vlka-Fenryka-7th]

Originally posted by babobaka:

Pawns don't enter the castle because of Godsway crystal.

They don't enter the castle because they are not allowed by the guards.

As for DD1, Duke met the dragon. He thought no one can kill the dragon, so he didn't bother with it. Seeing how Grigori looks like, I can't blame Duke for thinking that.

As I said in my original post Disa doesn't have the Godsway Crystal when you first enter Vernworth and acquires it just before the coronation, why else would she wait several months to have the coronation.

There is a reason for the Duke to stop the Arisen from meeting the Dragon because there's the chance that the Arisen could make the same deal that he did and oust him.

[Lavian]

What makes you think Edmund thought you were going to survive the the quests he puts you through?

I was under the impression that he has you do a bunch of dangerous quests that benefit the realm, which you may or may not succeed at, but that really bring you no closer to facing down the Dragon (other than maybe the slates). Only to then have you sent off on some long, pointless, expedition (that never happens because the Dragon shows up).

Like, ostensibly the quests you're sent on are related to the Dragon, but are they really? Salvation is a Dragon cult, but the Dragon doesn't at all care for them. The Shadow Fort is supposedly supposed to protect against the Dragon, but it's a dragon, it can fly. Hunting down a griffin quite bluntly has nothing to do with the Dragon at all. I'm pretty sure the entire Wyrm Hunt was a farce put on by the Duke because it would be suspicious if he didn't do anything about the Dragon.

What's he going to do really? Everyone knows you're the Arisen, so keeping you jailed probably doesn't look great, and you're constantly murderizing every large monster you stumble across and taking down some of the most dangerous people in the realm.


DD1 aside, Why would the Dragon care about Disa's plot? As long as the Arisen isn't dead, the Arisen can do what it's supposed to do, and even if the Arisen dies, a new Arisen can be found and selected. Vermund having a political structure centered around the Arisen has really got nothing to do with the Arisen and the Dragon and their place in the world.

As for Disa not being concerned with the Dragon: She probably believes whatever nonsense plot Phaseus has cooked up will stop it. Even though his plot apparently boiled down to summoning a lesser dragon, as if that was going to accomplish anything.

Also, pawns not being allowed on castle grounds is simply them not being allowed on castle grounds. Godsway or no. Godsway wasn't even a thing in DD1, and they didn't come to the Duke's Demesne there either.

[Ignis Imperia]

Originally posted by Lavian:

DD1 aside, Why would the Dragon care about Disa's plot? As long as the Arisen isn't dead, the Arisen can do what it's supposed to do, and even if the Arisen dies, a new Arisen can be found and selected. Vermund having a political structure centered around the Arisen has really got nothing to do with the Arisen and the Dragon and their place in the world.

Honestly I was more under the impression that the Dragon genuinely didn't care because unlike DD1 Dragon, DD2 Dragon seems very annoyed with the cycle, actively trying to break and end it, constantly guiding you to not follow it, the game already starts with him telling you how to break the cycle. I think reason why he didn't do anything isn't because he wasn't necessarily supposed to based on Greater Will, but because it was very well going along his agenda.

He was not interested in continuing endless cycle of death and rebirth he was bound to, I think it's even safe to say when Gigantus rose, it was to force the Dragon into doing something. Because Phaesus seemed to actually break the cycle in his own way by not allowing the natural order to continue, sure he failed at the end, but it really seemed like reason Dragon actually fights you in the end is he really has to. He delayed it as much as he could, he wanted to believe Phaesus's plan might have worked perhaps even, then he saw what a dumb plan it was and went like "Okay, you had your chance", and went to fight the Arisen, who then has the final chance to break the cycle.

Though I am not that well versed in the story and I didn't play enough of DD1 to know if what I understood from it is in any way relevant, so take it with a grain of salt.

[Zaris]

Like others said the pawns are just forbidden by GUARDS to enter the castle like it was already the case in DD1.

I think the main problem of DD2 story is like DD1 again a rushed development sadly. The game makes you think that you somehow overthrow the queen because Vermounds king is always the current Arisen but before any of that happens you get pushed to Batthal and then to the endboss.

On the other hand the main quest for the Arisen is killing the dragon in the first place and not the politicial stuff around it. We even learn that Phaesos himself tried to destroy the cycle himself (with good reason looking back at the duke of DD1) but failed because he hadn't had the real godsbane. The queens of Batthal and Vermound are just side quest stuff (in the true ending you even can get friendly with the queen).

[Ignis Imperia]

Originally posted by Zaris:

(in the true ending you even can get friendly with the queen).

That for me as probably the most jarring moment in entire game. "Yeah she literally abducted you and done her absolute best to get rid of you, ideally kill you, though that seems impossible, but now you need to be supportive towards her and be nice!" like, wtf, she never done anything to earn forgiveness, let alone sympathy. After everything she done she just says "I done it for my son" like, cool story, still a murder.

[Mu'Ammar of Carthus]

Originally posted by Ignis Imperia:

Originally posted by Zaris:

(in the true ending you even can get friendly with the queen).

That for me as probably the most jarring moment in entire game. "Yeah she literally abducted you and done her absolute best to get rid of you, ideally kill you, though that seems impossible, but now you need to be supportive towards her and be nice!" like, wtf, she never done anything to earn forgiveness, let alone sympathy. After everything she done she just says "I done it for my son" like, cool story, still a murder.

Nothing stops you from killing her, though. Not sure why you're complaining about your own choice not to, as if the game forced you.
She even tells you to go ahead and do it when you enter her chambers.

[Ignis Imperia]

Originally posted by Mu'Ammar of Carthus:

Originally posted by Ignis Imperia:

That for me as probably the most jarring moment in entire game. "Yeah she literally abducted you and done her absolute best to get rid of you, ideally kill you, though that seems impossible, but now you need to be supportive towards her and be nice!" like, wtf, she never done anything to earn forgiveness, let alone sympathy. After everything she done she just says "I done it for my son" like, cool story, still a murder.

Nothing stops you from killing her, though. Not sure why you're complaining about your own choice not to, as if the game forced you.
She even tells you to go ahead and do it when you enter her chambers.

Well, the only issue is to finish the main plot in the endgame, you have to "comfort" her for some reason. Yeah you can kill her after probably, I doubt devs paid attention to detail enough to have Sven mind it, but for some reason you gotta be nice to her to advance main quest there, which makes no reason, since she has absolutely no grounds for anything she done.

All she's done was steal your throne, completely mess up Vernsworth through her terrible rule, enable Phaesus, hire criminals as advisors, all so that she would remain in power that she never earned in any way. She was not entitled to anything she ever got in the entire story, yet for some reason, I, to save my own kingdom, the one I rightfully should have ruled for the duration of the plot, have to comfort her for that she's not as smart as she thought she was and messed everything up? Why do we even need Sven to evacuate Vernsworth honestly? Like, we are playing Sovran. We got the world rid of the Dragon already. Sovran rules with absolute authority. What Sven or Disa want should have absolutely no impact.

EDIT: Just to answer your question therefore. I am absolutely complaining about the fact it is posed as a choice, but proves to not be a choice as you need to, for some unknown reason, make that choice, to evacuate your own city. A task she has absolutely nothing to do, if there was a choice to leave her there, I'd take it, but there isn't. She deserves no sympathy at all. But you have to grant her that sympathy if you want to advance the evacuation quest.

[D. Flame]

Originally posted by Vlka-Fenryka-7th:

One of the dumbest things with DD2's story is the fact pawns are banned from entering Vernworth Castle, which ends up creating a massive plot hole because Disa doesn't actually have the Godsway Crystal when you arrive in Vernworth. This basically means there's nothing stopping you from marching into the castle with pawns in tow to throw her and her puppet out of what's effectively your castle.

Waiting until the coronation to oust Disa was a massive mistake because it allowed her to gain enough time to acquire the one item that prevented you from ousting her.

The Dragon is far too passive about this plot because he should have known about the attempt to prevent the Arisen from fulfilling their duty and doesn't do anything when Disa has the Arisen abducted.

I'd also like to point out that Disa doesn't seem to be too concerned by the Dragon based on what she say's in one of the few lines of dialogue she has when you talk to her, which might be the main reason she thought it was safe to enact a plot against the Arisen and she should have been punished for her error in judgement by having the Dragon attack Vernworth to reduce her petty ambitions to ash.

On a related note the most disappointing thing about DD1's story is the fact Duke Edmund doesn't try to stop you from facing the Dragon by either having your character thrown into an oubliette or sending you on a quest that'll result in your characters death and then having the Dragon attack Gran Soren to put Edmund in his place.

The Duke in DD1 didn’t try to stop you because he convinced himself that the dragon is unbeatable by mortals. He expects the arisen to make the same decision that he did, and misery loves company.

[Takk]

DD1 and DD2 deal with a good amount of court / political intrigues. Just openly doing things such as outright killing the Arisen (the one chosen by the dragon to save the world, basically) would be a REALLY bad idea, even for a Queen Regent or Duke.
In DD1, you were sent on quests that were meant to kill you (instead, they made you stronger). When you then eventually killed Grigori and opened the Everfall, Edmund aged, as his heart returned. As an old man, he clung to his title and couldn't believe someone actually killed the dragon he failed to kill. So he thinks you made the same deal with the dragon and have come to usurp him. That is why he sends his guards out to kill you, making the noble quarters a hostile area (and even before that, Pawns were not allowed to enter in general - chances are, they reminded Edmund of his beloved Pawn, whom he sacrificed to Grigori)

So DD1 has a ruler that is concerned about losing his courtly position to the new Arisen.

In DD2, we have Regent Queen Disa, who wants nothing more than to see her son, Regentkin Sven, on the throne as ruler of Vermund. For that, she comes up with a scheme to make the real Arisen disappear, install a fake Arisen who then "tragically" dies and, with the help of her Lover, Lord Phaesus, gets the cycle to end via the use of the Godsway and "fake" dragon (because no cycle means no dragon, means no Arisen, means no randomly selected Sovran by means of Arisen... so the throne would be for Sven and his bloodline). However, she can't just kill the one person who can very well prove they are the Arisen, even just the suspicion there may be foul play at work can destabilise her position (as we know that she is unpopular with the people as noted by Pawns when comparing her to Battahl's Empress). So we are left with trying to get the people on our side, gathering evidence of her misdeeds all while she sends out spies and assassins after us and continuing her own plans with Phaesus and other behind-the-scenes schemes.

So DD2 has a ruler concerned with her son losing his courtly position to the new Arisen... just like in DD1.
And yet in both games, the title of Sovran/Duke means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things, as the only important ones are the Dragon, the Arisen and their confrontation ("The rantings of an upjumped zealot make for tedious listening. His ilk serves no role in what is to come." - Grigori)

Not to spoil actual endgame/true ending content, let me just say that there is a very good reason why the games are about CYCLES and FREE WILL and why so many essential plotpoints and characters are basically the SAME throughout both games... and why the title on your first playthrough in the main menu reads "Dragon's Dogma"...
Also, remember the lyrics to DD1's Coils of Light:

"Oh! How I have seen the Dragon's Dogma!
Unbound by time, all-binding, grand design.
Land and skies and seas yearn,
finish the Cycle of Eternal Return."

[Shift]

In DD1, the Duke does try to have you killed or at least out of the picture for a long period of time, under the pretense of helping you.

IMO, they picked the wrong premise for this game. If it were me, I would do a more open ended story about the Arisen hunting down the dragon and learning about the truths of the cycle through exploration and side quests, without the political bs and such.

Originally posted by Takk:

DD1 and DD2 deal with a good amount of court / political intrigues. Just openly doing things such as outright killing the Arisen (the one chosen by the dragon to save the world, basically) would be a REALLY bad idea, even for a Queen Regent or Duke.

She doesn't kill the arisen because the arisen CAN'T be killed by mortal hands, it's impossible, even if she wanted to. And on the first game, no one cares about this "Arisen", considering how everyone treats you like a clown on that game.

[justfaded]

Originally posted by Shift:

In DD1, the Duke does try to have you killed or at least out of the picture for a long period of time, under the pretense of helping you.

IMO, they picked the wrong premise for this game. If it were me, I would do a more open ended story about the Arisen hunting down the dragon and learning about the truths of the cycle through exploration and side quests, without the political bs and such.

Yeah they basically remade the first game rather than expanding upon the first story.

[IchigoMait]

Originally posted by babobaka:

Pawns don't enter the castle because of Godsway crystal.

They don't enter the castle because they are not allowed by the guards.

As for DD1, Duke met the dragon. He thought no one can kill the dragon, so he didn't bother with it. Seeing how Grigori looks like, I can't blame Duke for thinking that.

Duke was a previous arisen, he was a failed arisen because he gave up his will to fight the dragon. Common human logic does not apply to immortal beings.
He just took the dragons offer and accepted being a weak minded fool.

[SlugHead]

Originally posted by Vlka-Fenryka-7th:

One of the dumbest things with DD2's story is the fact pawns are banned from entering Vernworth Castle, which ends up creating a massive plot hole because Disa doesn't actually have the Godsway Crystal when you arrive in Vernworth. This basically means there's nothing stopping you from marching into the castle with pawns in tow to throw her and her puppet out of what's effectively your castle.

Waiting until the coronation to oust Disa was a massive mistake because it allowed her to gain enough time to acquire the one item that prevented you from ousting her.

The Dragon is far too passive about this plot because he should have known about the attempt to prevent the Arisen from fulfilling their duty and doesn't do anything when Disa has the Arisen abducted.

I'd also like to point out that Disa doesn't seem to be too concerned by the Dragon based on what she say's in one of the few lines of dialogue she has when you talk to her, which might be the main reason she thought it was safe to enact a plot against the Arisen and she should have been punished for her error in judgement by having the Dragon attack Vernworth to reduce her petty ambitions to ash.

On a related note the most disappointing thing about DD1's story is the fact Duke Edmund doesn't try to stop you from facing the Dragon by either having your character thrown into an oubliette or sending you on a quest that'll result in your characters death and then having the Dragon attack Gran Soren to put Edmund in his place.

Pretty sure pawns not entering certain areas is both a social and a security thing. Having "vessels" enter areas where the nobility are seems taboo i.e., castle, cat temple, etc. There's clearly prejudice based on fear of having unkillable warriors that only one person can command wandering about. Guards are stopping your pawns from entering the castle. Brant reminds you a couple of times iirc that you're doing everything for the people. If you go in and start to murder guards and take the town by force they civilians and other nobles that you're trying to save aren't going to be too pleased.

You've lost your memory and were previously, from the cut scene where you regain your memory of attacking the dragon, a guard in Melve. Brant is a guard captain trying to outwit a group of nobles trying to maintain power. Who do you think is going to have better plans and the greater ability to adapt to carry them out?

There are a bunch of other Arisen that have already failed to kill the dragon in the game. There doesn't seem to be a massive rush for the cycle to renew itself. Dragon's just going around making new Arisen trying to find one that can do the job properly. One fails, make a new one. It's compelled by a greater will to make beings capable of killing it; can't say I'd be going out of my way to do a great job either.

Again, Disa is trying to keep power and pass it on to her son. The Dragon is making Arisen that don't seem to be able to kill it and a transition of power each time a new one shows up only to fail would no doubt bring total chaos to society. A smart, kind and outgoing kid would bring better stability than some rando bumpkin that suddenly got power. Can't say I disagree with her choices.

As for the last point. I don't know. Haven't played the OG in years and I can't recall the intricacies of the plot.

[saice]

I am sorry for this kind of sarcastic replay but

Image playing Dragon's Dogma for the plot... I remember playing the first game and trying to take the plot seriously but then the jester thing happens and you auto romance the princess because you got within 5 feet of her and then the dragon asks you to sacrifice your beloved who on my first playthrough was a shop keeper.

And that is when I stopped caring about the plot of Dragon's Dogma. Now the lore it is cool I've watched every video about the lore I can get my hands on the world is cool and some of the ideas are great. But the over all plot? na