or: brood has had many thoughts about the crows and lucanis for a long time now
While this meta is about Lucanis and Veilguard, I need to begin with Zevran.
In DAO, Zevran takes a job he knows he cannot do. But after the Warden unexpectedly spares him, he becomes a Crow on the run—and he stays a Crow on the run for the rest of his life. It is important to consider this, and to consider that Zevran is no one in particular, not politically. He is not important to the Crows' politics or to any politics outside of that organization. Essentially, he's one of many.
Despite this, the Crows hunt him.
There is no choice for anyone to stop being a Crow, ever. It is a lifelong commitment for even the most ordinary and unremarkable (again, speaking politically, although also in terms of skill) among them. For Lucanis Dellamorte, grandson of Caterina, the current First Talon? For Lucanis Dellamorte, who has been trained and groomed to succeed Caterina? For Lucanis Dellamorte, who is uniquely skilled amongst the Crows, so much so that he got his own unique moniker and was the immediate recommendation for Rook's team?
If there was no choice for Zevran, there is certainly no choice for Lucanis. His preferences are immaterial. His desires are immaterial. His duty is paramount—it is treated as paramount by those around him, and it has been drilled into him that it is paramount. And Lucanis is deeply bonded with all those he considers family, even when those relationships are deeply strained; this absolutely includes Caterina.
Caterina is abusive. We learn as much in game. It is treated as unremarkable by Lucanis, inevitable, and that tells us something that is repeatedly confirmed: the Crows, as an organization, are abusive. Their training is torture now, just as it was for Zevran.
If he had been able to make a choice, to step down, to say "no," that would have shown the Crows in a softened light. One could argue that it might only have shown Caterina in a softened light, but we have to remember that Veilguard is doing two things at once with their characters: they are showing them as individuals, and they are showing them as representatives. Caterina is one of the faces of the Crows, both in-world and within the narrative. The fact that she is abusive has a narrative parallel. The fact that she doesn't give Lucanis a choice has a narrative parallel. The fact that she announces his new role in public has a narrative parallel.
The Crows are an organization. Part of that is performance, as performances establish and formalize conceptual, abstract principles. There is a veneer of glamor and glory that is a thin coating over the force and demand, and that, too, has a narrative parallel.
If Lucanis could choose, could say no, that would undermine what the game had spent so long showing us. That underneath the witticisms and the flowery language of freedom and protection lay a violent demand. We see this even in the visuals of the Crows: they have ornate, elaborate outfits. But no amount of preening and presentation will change the knife in their hand or the blood on it.
It's not softening, it's a misdirect. And it's not even that much of a misdirect, as the game repeatedly reiterates that, yes, these are killers. Lucanis, for all his kindness, for all his warmth, for all his sweet care for others, is himself a cold-blooded killer. He will take contracts and he will fulfill them. It seems that in his story he leaves some people alive and leaves innocents alive, which reflects favorably on his personal morals, but it does not make him other than what he is.
It is also a mercy that is permissible under the guise of precision and skill. He kills only who he must! That is skillful! Even if there is mercy in it—and to be clear, I think there is—the mercy can be ignored when other Crows are interpreting what he's done. That, imo, shows a deep political savviness as well, which makes sense to me, as Lucanis has been navigating the upper echelons of the Crows for so long.
So there is no way, narratively, for Lucanis to turn down the role of First Talon. A Crow has no real options… but a wily Crow can find routes within the limits, and Lucanis is a wily Crow. He will not be Caterina. Nor is it realistic to assume the Crows will be completely transformed under his leadership, especially considering the inter-organizational tensions and the very real possibly that a league of trained assassins could—and probably will—try to assassinate the First Talon, especially if he immediately starts making drastic changes that are counter to their established identity.
Even saying yes to an offer he cannot say no to will not save him, but it will limit the risk. And, notably, it will all but eliminate the risk to those he cares about. But a Lucanis who turns against the Crows? Who denies the title that is seen as his birthright, his destiny, Caterina's true legacy? That Lucanis will be a target not just of political opportunists within the Crows, but of the Crows themselves. And that Lucanis becomes a free-for-all, protected by none; and the Crows, brutal as they are, may well seek out those he cares about. Illario, possibly, but I'm thinking more of a Rook he is friends with or partnered with, or Neve. They might also go after others from the Veilguard, perhaps viewing them all as potential allies of their deserter leader.
Because the thing is… the Crows, as an organization, cannot abide someone, anyone, leaving. But they especially cannot abide a would-be-leader leaving. If Lucanis can turn his back on the Crows, can sever his ties to the organization, and can live, then who else may? The organization itself cannot tolerate that.
I speak of "the organization" as an abstract but thinking-feeling entity, which I think is fairly accurate. No one Crow embodies the entirety of the organizations' self-concept, but rather, all Crows embody elements of it, propaganda and performance and promise, suave words laid over cutting edges, all aware of the violence just beneath. And, as is always the case with such organizations, organizations that could easily and accurately be compared to cults, (I am not making light of cults/authoritarian control groups by saying that, mind. I am utilizing the BITE model) the inter-community elements are meant to create an internal narrative that is constantly reinforced, until it becomes second-nature and largely unquestioned. For instance, I fully believe that Viago believes that the Crows are protecting Antiva. That the Crows are the thin line between safety and annihilation. That Treviso, under the rule of the Crows, is free.
But Viago is and has been part of the Crows. He is and has been influenced by their concepts through constant exposure. And I think that he, as an individual, wants that to be the case. He wants the Crows to be defending Treviso, to be defending Antiva, even if, at the organizational level, it is more accurate to say that they are defending themselves.
We are seeing inside the cult. Thus, we are unlikely to see significant deviation away from the prevailing ideology. But the fact that recruits are tortured, the fact that the Crows are a league of assassins, the fact that they hold so much power over Treviso, these are things we are shown and these are things we are meant to know. None of it is made secret to us. None of it is subtle. And this, coming from a videogame franchise that has represented organizations based on authoritarian control multiple times: the Chantry, the Templars, the Circles, and yes, the Crows…
What's more, we see that in Thedas, assassin leagues are largely accepted so long as they are considered part of the area they operate in. Orlais' House of Repose, for instance. Even Josephine insists that the House of Repose must follow their contracts, that they are obligated to abide by their own rules.
Of course, anything could be different. Veilguard might have chosen a different message and, with it, a different route to support that message. The Crows might have been changed. Many things might have happened, and I'm not criticizing anyone who wanted those different things to happen. But within the narrative we got, I think that all elements make a lot of sense and cohere very effectively.
The Crows, the Wardens, the Templars, the Legion of the Dead
i think people sometimes lump those who join these various organizations together, like they all join for the same reason or they all have the same moral center
but the thing is, all of these organizations provide upward social mobility. yes, even the legion of the dead! those who join are considered dead to the rest of orzammar, but their families receive money - that's why renn joined!
now, of course, not everyone willingly joins. the crows and the templars both recruit children. the wardens sometimes offer the joining as an alternative to execution
but it the kind of world thedas is. it's decidedly not easy to make ends meet unless you're born into wealth. every professional can only take on a limited number of apprentices. we see in da2, through aveline, that even organizations like the city guard can disqualify people without good cause (i love her, but that happened - she took one of carver's only opportunities away from him)
there are always going to be people who exist on the fringes of society. and yes, these organizations prey upon them. but, again, dragon age isn't about depicting a Moral and Just Society That Does Everything Right: we are meant to recognize that these are flawed organizations
further, we are meant to recognize that all organizations are flawed; or are fallible
(and jic we didn't, solas says it outright. but also how can we not? finding out that the seekers of truth are corrupt in dai... knowing how corrupt the chantry is... seeing time and again how corrupt the templar order is... but there are individuals caught within these systems who are also victims - because that's how these things work!)
they're flawed, but they're reasonable. i mean this in the sense of their existence, their presence, is narratively sound. we have so much real world evidence of these kinds of flawed, predatory organizations cropping up, so much evidence of how those who work for them are also victimized by them
you're born in denerim, to a poor family. you can't find anyone willing to apprentice you. you're strong and you're devout. so you think: i should join the templars. and you do, and the indoctrination that started at birth - because, really, the chantry is the indoctrinating force here - continues and doubles down
but you're making money. and maybe you're even good at it! and people look at you with respect. and whatever else, it's better than starving on the streets when your coin runs out
that's the world of thedas. that's the kind of things random civilians are dealing with. so, no, not all templars are morally bankrupt corrupt monsters; not all crows are, either. not all wardens are power- or glory-hungry. not all legion members want to kill darkspawn
but you have to acknowledge that for them, it's very often: this, or dying. this, or watching their family die. and they gain respect! that matters to people! no one wants to be an object of pity! everyone wants to control their own life, their own destiny, their own fate! and if they can't (and lbr, they can't, none of us can) they want the feeling that they are
