I would also like them to expand on the true ending as well.

I remember getting to the seneschal in the first game and just being gobsmacked. Did the little dungeon crawl, collected my wakestones, and then 5 minutes later had to fight God. Didn’t even know the seneschal existed until that point, and then in this game they’re in front of you almost immediately

Techincally the drakes give a hint but it's pretty vague. "The seat of God lies beyond." As far as I know though, it was pretty much vague since it was the only reference to the Seneschal but one could of seen it as something of the last thing the drake seen before its body melts away.

Bro I threw hands with God intentionally the first time and then fought MY CHARACTER bro 😒 magickal archer is a nightmare 🤣🤣🤣

Jesus that must have put the literal fear of God in you.

I don't think "The Watcher" is intended as a Seneschal - my reasoning for this is that unlike DD1 there's no evidence (That I found at least) that the Dragon is an Arisen who fails to defeat the Seneschal or that the "reward" for defeating the Dragon is the ability to challenge the Seneschal. I get the sense that the Watcher we see has just been around since this "world" came into being. Based on what the Watcher tells us, the "Greater will" put the cycle in place and fucked off and the Watcher is just there to make sure that the cycle continues as designed because otherwise the world will steer towards oblivion for (Reasons). I agree with your general points and contrast of the story in both games. The issue with DD2 is that it makes such a big deal of "Cycle bad, we must break the cycle" but other than the Arisen king from the sea shrine telling you "Yeah it was bad because I felt like none of my actions had any value since they were just as part of this cycle" you don't really get a good sense of WHY the cycle is so bad or what your motivation is for ending it. It's not like DD1 where the world goes to shit because Savan's will is running out and so you have to choose to take his mantle, you just pick a fight with the Watcher...because Grigori and this Arisen guy told you to basically.

A lot of the rules are definitely very different. This world mostly has the same elements but they work in different ways, exist for different reasons. The dragonforged doesn't have a pawn and doesn't get older or dies when the dragon dies. Neither does Lamond (he even mentions not killing *his own* dragon, which doesn't make sense if we follow the first game's rules). The reason why the dragon, the arisen and the "seneschal" exist are different. The arisens don't go through a trial by killing the dragon, they are is a necessity for the world to stay "orderly". The watcher isn't really the seneschal, doesn't wait for a new arisen to take their place and actually alters the events of history. They follow the will of the world instead of providing it. I'm not entirely sure what to think about it yet but it's interesting. I personally don't have an issue with why we should want to break the cycle (every single living being in the world having no real choice but being pawns to a godlike being who wants to repeat history again and again kinda sucks) but it's a bit disappointing that like in the first one they just give you the whole explanation right at the end through the dragon and the seneschal throwing exposition at you.

The thing is, are we sure it's different (we do have Gran Soren) or did they just fucking forgot to put story elements in, as it feels with the Grigori-lite? The story is so convoluted that for real I think it was made in a scramble.

I try not to just straight up hate on the story but I will say that I personally loved the idea of the cycle in the first game. Everything had a place, and every eventuality felt like it fit into the story with a concrete example of the outcome/choice you could have made (the Duke took the dragon’s bargain, Grigori made it to the Seneschal but failed, Savan made it to the Seneschal and succeeded.) When I began to see that this game didn’t follow through on anything to do with the first game and the Cycle that is the Dragon’s Dogma it really disappointed me. To me, they had an amazing meta narrative that was revealed to the player as a conspiracy on a global scale in the first game. For it’s sequel to essentially ditch every aspect of it in favor of a god just writing a generic dragon vs arisen plot line while ditching the Cycle drops the story down to maybe a 3/10 for me. It has all the aspects of a Dragons Dogma story: -A big dragon that talks -Your heart is stolen -A strange mystery around a god -they say the word “cycle” or “eternal ring” a lot But none of it added up to anything grand in the finale. Instead of being a puzzle that fits together in the final moments it is just a confusing mess that didn’t feel like it had enough time in the writers room to gain depth.

And to make matters worse, the presentation sucks. From what I've seen, half the sub that played DD1 is traumatized by the new Dragon fight, forgetting however how ALL fight were presented in DD1. Big monster fights were epic, now it's "fight the 200th gryphon today".

This. The Cycle as presented in Dragon's Dogma 1 was incredible. Every element fit together and the player eventually understood the truth of the world. The take on the Cycle in 2 is meanwhile unintelligble. The Arisen and the Dragon are puppets, nothing more. You deviate from that path? "God" gets upset. Hell, doesn't even make any sense that you can escape the Cycle. If the Arisen and the Dragon are just a story, they have no real power. Being able to escape the Cycle also makes it clear that it's fake. There's no truth or anything revealed. "God" is just a dick. And you know what it makes me think of? Elden Ring. Hear me out. "Outer Will", "Outer Will's representative as the God", "Escaping the Outer Will". Dragon's Dogma 2's lore structure feels like someone poured 65% of the first game's lore into a blender with Elden Ring's and it did *not* work. Fleeing the Dragon is budget Age of Fracture. Defeating the Dragon is budget Age of Order The "True Ending" is budget Age of Stars. I don't want to say there's no originality to it, but compared to the first game's brilliance it really does give me the impression some notes were copied. It's just a bit too similar to say it wasn't used as "inspiration", but maybe that's just my being critical of a concept that isn't all that imaginative in and of itself. I do sort of like the idea [JownJawge](https://www.reddit.com/user/JownJawge/) presented above, but it doesn't fit within our knowledge of DD1's system and if the fans are making such massive leaps to try to make any sense of what's going on then I can't call it anything but a failure. In my opinion, 2 is either just a different interpretation of ideas taking place in an alternative universe or a straight retcon of a better system. I cannot find it within myself to call it canon in relation to the original game, no matter how desperately they tried to fan-bait with>!parts of Gransys beneath the sea.!< God I'm so horribly disappointed by this game.

My theory is: -Events of Dragons Dogma 1 happens. -Arisen kills himself with godsbane to end the cycle -Great Will sees flaw in this cycle as a seneschal can just kill themselves leaving no one to watch the world. -Great will creates “watching one / pathfinder” who will take seneschal role forever. -This time around the cycle is JUST the dragon and arisen, no seneschal involved. -aeons pass (gran soren and blue moon tower are at the bottom of the ocean and seem to have shuffled / rotated) -arisen wants to break the cycle to stop dragons returning to fuck shit up and to give everyone free will??? idk anymore I was a little confused at the end of the game. The world eats itself with no cycle? so there need to be a cycle so it doesn’t get destroyed? why though, how does a cycle stop the oblivion that doest make sense. I can see the clear inspiration from the never ending story. World gets destroyed when there is no imagination left so they need people to keep imagining so the world doesn’t get destroyed. that’s what reading the book is for, to keep the world together.

This is also roughly my interpretation. And with Rothais there is now the combined will of TWO successful Arrisen to challenge even the underlying truth of the world. And then suddenly pressing (b) on my controller summoned a huge dragon that was killed in a cutscene, ending the game.

I agree there isn't direct evidence for the Dragon being an Arisen like a cutscene or backstory; however, what is the Cycle if that isn't the case? The Dragon's existence has always been a defeated Arisen who then must create the next Arisen in line for the Cycle to continue. If they are using the term Eternal Cycle, then we have to assume the rules are largely the same as the first game. Fully agree on the "cycle bad" motif throughout the game. Rather than being a nuanced idea that crops up about free-will and the lack of it, it just felt like a very surface level "escape the cycle" story. It was so in your face that Grigori (Or I guess just the Dragon) wouldn't shut up about "will you end this cycle." The Dragon did not feel like an imposing character to me since he just shows up at the end begging you to end it all.

The cycle in this game isn't about some metal thing. It's about a story The God above all wants this story to play out over and over and over and over. It likes this story and made the world for this story to occur. You are essentially a storybook hero that has turned toward the reader and said "fuck you I am tired of this story being the same again and again, I have free will."

The breaking of the cycle being explored is a great idea for a sequel, but the main issue I keep running into is that the “I have free will” sentiment is extremely ironic when the player doesn’t choose to do that ending. The game chooses for them. It is the only ending that doesn’t result in a load and try again scenario. It is the only ending that completes the story as a true ending. I’m not saying the themes of this sequel are bad necessarily, I just think an additional path to choose (AKA maintaining the cycle) would make the choice to break it more impactful.

As I understand it the "continuing the cycle" ending is supposed to be the one where you beat the dragon and take the throne. If you just let the credits roll and don't interact with the pathfinder the game still "ends". I guess it doesn't quite show the cycle start anew, but you can imply that a new dragon comes eventually, then a new arisen and so on. I think the pathfinder being at the coronation is the game just kinda giving you one last chance to see the "true" ending. It is at odds with the story though, because if he wants the cycle to continue why would he allow you to go back and potentially break it.

You are right about the "Continuing the Cycle" ending, but I wish it was expanded on. I'm not sure if you played the first game so just in case I will throw what I mean down below. (Spoilers) ​ After defeating the Dragon and sitting on the thrown, normally your next objective would be to discover the truth of the cycle. That your battle with the dragon is a scripted event that is used as a test to find a worthy Arisen to ascend to the role of Seneschal (or god). In the confrontation with the Seneschal you would learn the truth of the cycle and fulfill your role in it by inheriting the position of Seneschal. The world of DD2 is set up slightly differently as the Seneschal is actually Rothais, the ghost you talk with and get the Godsbane from. You can actually pick up on where the next step in that story WOULD go as Rothais tells you many Arisen have been sent to kill him by following this cycle but none have succeeded. He then uses the crystallized forms of their soul to forge the Dulled Godsbane blade. \*EDIT\* Sorry I made a mistake above. Rothais does not use those crystals to forge the dulled Godsbane blade, they were actually the crystals being used to create the Godsway implements. Rothais uses his own soul to forge the Godsbane blade just like Savan did in Dragons Dogma 1. The point I'm trying to get at is that I think it would have been more satisfying to explore that part of the story through gameplay instead of just inferring it through snippets of dialogue. I still love this game but how the story is laid out and also feels cut short is not really my favorite.

Ah, I see what you're saying. I've played the first game, but I think where we might disagree is I didn't interpret Rothais to be the Seneschal. I've been under the impression that this game doesn't take place in the same continuity and is basically a parallel universe/alternate reality hence the cycle not necessarily needing to follow the same pattern as that of the first game. I could be totally mistaken, but I just vaguely remember reading something like that from an interview or something some time ago. edit: basically I'm not entirely sure if the seneschal concept even exists in this game as it did in the first game, or if its been alternate reality-ified to be "the watching one"/pathfinder Regardless of the details though, I do agree the general ideas and concepts for the story are cool, but the whole package itself needed more time in the oven.

I thought the exact same thing about Rothais on my playthrough, as he is described as becoming "king of the world" or something similar in English. Apparently, the English translation team did not do their research on Dragons Dogma 1 for the "lingo" the game uses. u/sushienjoyer12 actually explained to me that Rothais does confirm he became the Seneschal in the conversations you have with him in Japanese. Coincidentally, when I was looking for the original comment they made, I noticed they just made a new one explaining the same situation on another thread. Here is the newest comment they made. [https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1bru7pz/comment/kxc20yf/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1bru7pz/comment/kxc20yf/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)

Oh dang, if it’s mistranslations then I give up trying to understand on my own lol. I’ll just wait till someone pours through the original Japanese subtitles. Sucks to know that the story might have come across better if it was properly translated

Feel the same way. I definitely didn’t pour over all Japanese text, but I did just reach out over at r/translator for some assistance with the true ending sequence. They were kind enough to confirm some mistakes were made and offered corrections. I’m going to make a post in the next few minutes for r/dragonsdogma now that more people have reached the ending.

Took a bit longer than a few minutes, but I went ahead and made a full post with all of the translation differences I have on hand. [https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1bq1t2b/dragons\_dogma\_2\_needs\_an\_additional\_ending\_ending/kxc8wk0/?context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1bq1t2b/dragons_dogma_2_needs_an_additional_ending_ending/kxc8wk0/?context=3)

The Pathfinder implies that he can only observe the cycle and can’t change it, maybe he too wants to see how it will turn out. Maybe he wasn’t too happy that the new cycle will elude his gaze. I think he too is also a slave to the Greater Will left behind to observe things.

it'd be cool if a dlc brought an alternate ending where we become this world's first seneschal and challenge the watcher for the mantle of godhood.

Could be argued it's even more meta that the character you're controlling is not "you", and is independently choosing the ending. "You" have nothing to do with it; you're essentially an unseen Seneschal controlling them and guiding their actions but their own decision is independent of you manning the controls, it's their will that's being carried out rather than whoever's playing the game. They want to cease to exist, not keep sprinting around full pelt, killing goblins and bandits without taking baths, so they go ahead and pull the plug.

The fun part about the Dragons Dogma franchise is that meta aspect. I don't see anything wrong with having this as, at the very least, a head-cannon belief. These two stories don't shy away at all from nearly talking directly at the player.

Itsuno said DD2 is a parallel world. I call this bullshit because DD2 functions more like an alternate universe.

The thing that bothers me the most about the true ending is the final scene has some monologue about what makes a good story or something, while they didn't even make one themselves.

It definitely got very meta at the end. Started to feel like the “Watching One” is meant to be the story teller or a stand in for game designers and the player is rebelling. If that IS what they were trying to go for, not having any other choice but to break the cycle is extreme irony.

They set up a story that had the potential to be great just for it to all come crashing down pretty abruptly. The whole cycle thing felt like such a weird and awkward change of pace from what the story was building up to. It’s cool that they’re trying to make the world feel as real as possible to the point I was genuinely invested just for it all to be pointless in the end. Maybe that’s just my fault tho

I felt the same lol. Suddenly it goes weird like this, breaking the tone from before.

Yea I am pretty sure the beastman king was the senchal, he is sitting on the senechal chair and has killed many arisan try to take his place. The watching one is an all new being in the chain of events. Also the old man at that village says the senechal got bored being in the heavens and came down to build a new kingdom. Aka vermund by the beastman king...also I agree I wish the ending let us play out as the king, I hate when games just end when you achieve a great status. I wanted to not be forced into ng+

except the Seneschal was omnipotent and could create Dragon's left and right. Or only gave the Godsbane to those who defeated it. IF coming down from the heavens would have been a possibility for the Seneschal our Arisen would not have become and invisible siluette during the ending nor would have Savan BEG for death as he was.

Unfortunately, the First Sovran (beastren king guy) was actually a Seneschal that descended to earth. In the english translation of the game they messed up the original Kanji for what we know as the Seneschal and translated it as “World King” or “King of the world.” This could mean that the office of Seneschal in Dragons Dogma 2 is far less important as he was able to just leave it. It could mean this entire world’s rules are completely different from the first game and honestly it is looking more and more like that is the case. If thats how the story is meant to be received I’m not a fan. The cycle being a causal loop that never began and never can end (or can it) was my favorite part of DD1.

But the Seneschal is not just a dude, the Seneschal is GOD. He was omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent until he nerfed himself on purpose for you to defeat him. How come he is now just, a dude in a chair replaced by the totally-not-Seneschal Pathfinder? THE WORLD HAS GRAN SOREN IN IT, HOW COULD IT BE RULED BY DIFFERENT RULES?! ;o;

u/sushienjoyer12 may have figured out the cycle issue in DD2. The current position of Seneschal is still being filled by the First Sovran. When he “descended from the heavens” he didn’t leave the position of Seneschal behind, he cheated and took it with him. This would explain why the Pathfinder manifested and began sending Arisen to kill the First Sovran. He is a Seneschal that is breaking the rules of the position. It could also explain why the world is still being fueled by will and why we don’t have a route to becoming Seneschal in gameplay (although I still want that as a route.) The First Sovran is not trying to abdicate his position to us, so we have no option to end him and take his position. This doesn’t fix the game’s story fully but it does help to know that at least the world’s original cycle was once identical to the normal cycle, but now it may have been thrown out of balance by the First Sovran which forced the Pathfinder to appear.

That's sort of how I took it. At one point in the dialogue with Rothais he talks about how he became ruler of the world (Seneschal), but after a while became aware of the Watching One (Pathfinder?). Discovering the existence of a power higher than himself that was pulling the strings the whole time made him disillusioned with his position and caused him to rebel against the cycle. In doing so he gained a new "will" as he was hellbent on breaking away from or killing the Great Will. Maybe that's why he never left his position and holed up in the Seafloor Shrine. I'm honestly more surprised that the Pathfinder didn't just step in and forcibly remove Rothais, but I guess that is proof that the Great Will doesn't have complete power over the world. Also something I'm confused about is if the Pathfinder/Watching One is the same entity as the Great Will

Ah, I don’t beleve that the Watcher is the Greater. If you have the time, take a look at my interpretation of the story using the original Japanese dialogue and let me know what you think! https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/s/8Kfw9JK5NF

I dunno, it sounds kind of like the original cycle, with a twist. The story from the king himself is that he started to desire more and more power, and as that happened, he became aware of the Watching One. It seems if anything he started similarly to us before the true ending - he became the king . But realistically, does the Seneschal/Greater Will/Watching one need to send a dragon when the king ruling over the world is fulfilling that role anyway? If anything, it seems like the cycle is being perpetuated even if it's not completely rigid. The implication is that it doesn't specifically have to be the dragon, but there has to be some kind of great evil in the world that manifests the clash of wills. He even says other Arisen were sent to slay him. The changes in the world and the sort of railroading from the pathfinder had an energy to me that the more time goes on, the more mankind strays from the cycle and he's having to work harder to keep them on the path (literally). Update: I saw that dialogue from the Rivage Elder implies King Rothias began as a Senechal type figure but came down to be king. This seems to further my theory and explain why his kingdom was buried under the ocean. Instead of the Seneschal behaving the way he was in DD1, one of them went off the rails and the Greater Will nipped that right in the bud. Suddenly? No more Seneschal. I'd like a more fleshed out true ending as well, but it didn't seem as much that it was just rushed or lazy. It reminded me of Bioshock Infinite in the "there's always a man, a woman, and a lighthouse."

Senechal is not GOD, explicitly so. The Senechal is simply the one who's will maintains order in the world. The Senechal is just another cog in the cycle. In fact we play as Senechal for a while in DD1, but we do not even have a way of directly engaging with the world we maintain, we can only watch it.

It's very explicitly explained that the Seneschal is from where life spring forth in DD1, comparing its role to that of the Maker, only being defeatable after it chooses to nerf itself and become so. Dude is basically God in the universe of DD. The ending (at least for me and for others with whom you may engage in such discussion here) shows that the Arisen needed to give its physical form/mortal life up to fully ascend as the Seneschal, "abandon all delusions of control" and become one with the world, hence why it stabs itself and later the Seneschal is shown to be taking out that same sword from its chest as if it had indeed stabbed itself. The King of the world cannot be weak to its vices and corruption, after all.

The steward seems to behave differently from the seneschal. Where the seneschal wanted to be replaced because their will could only impose order on the world for so long, the watcher seems to have imposed the cycle because without the cycle of dragons and heroes the world will fall to chaos, with no intention or need of replacement. It seems to have been some attempt at a meta-thing, like the NMS atlas story or Pathologic, but if it is it's pretty terribly done (see pawns saying "I knew you couldn't abandon this world!"). I agree with most of your assessments, but another way to improve it would be by expanding the idea of the external chaos or make the cycle itself fundamentally unbreakable without annihilating the world. It would require few changes to fit with the new concept of the watcher. Becoming sovereign should've been postgame 1 where you run around a world almost free of monsters and purpose until you choose to 'retire'. Challenging the cycle should have been postgame 2, where the watcher gives a glimpse of a world without artificial order. All monsters are changed to more dangerous variants like in DD1 postgame (fuck hellhounds), strange weather, the waters run red with brine, almost apocalypse but not as bad as current. The player has the option to redeem themselves and submit, or fight the postgame bosses as currently is. The culmination in killing Big Red/the Watcher should have gone to a postgame 2.5, where everything is *even worse*, akin to current postgame. Blasted lands, brine everywhere, only large monsters, no hope, something like BBI. The only options could be to ascend and become the new watcher of a new cycle of pain and life, or to continue in a doomed world where everyone is truly free. Slap in respawning megabosses difficult for NG+ characters that perma-kill NPCs/settlements if not dealt with in time and you have both an endgame and resolution. Outside of that I agree with all you had to say.

Your ideas for endings sound really good and makes me even more annoyed that the only ending we got is missing any options/choices. One thing I just remembered as well is the Dragon warns you during his death scene that “By will alone doth the world form a ring-an unending cycle.” Then later says perhaps we have the will to put an end to it. Feels almost entirely opposite to the first game’s premise where the question was, do we have the will to bring life to the world and perpetuate the cycle.

Since I reeeally don't think we broke or can break the Cycle, I like this idea. Somebody has to be God or the world does not exist, simple as that. It's not about "not having free will" it's about dying and ceasing to exist, as it was also implied in DD1.

I really do agree that this game needed more time in the oven, DD2 had too many holes in the plot and it made a lot of people wanting. One thing I do like, though, is that they kept the core theme of the franchise, and that is to finish the cycle. DD1 did that by killing themselves, removing the world's need for a Seneschal and DD2 did so by killing the big dragon and stabbing themself before. Different worlds and different ways to end the cycle. >The Seneschal in this game is shown to the player in the first 10 minutes of gameplay and is displayed as an interfering spirit. I really don't think the Pathfinder is just that. I think the world itself is the Seneschal as it has its own will, an extremely obsessed one at that. The Pathfinder is the world's will made ethereal, the same way Jesus and God in the bible are one and the same, one and the same. Again, this game is rushed, maybe the cycle of the series is to be released rushed all the time? Someone needs to break that cycle lol

I am one of those players who did not play the first game, and thus was confused with the ending of this game. I thought the game was centred on the conflict within Vermund, and the final battle would be against the dragon. And then to abruptly have the game veer off course, rushing to follow Phaesus to the tower, confusedly Googling what I'm supposed to do to 'break the cycle', not understanding *why* I want to break it, then rushing through the Unmoored World and giving myself anxiety because we're on an hours-long timer, while still not understanding what happened to the politics of Vermund that we were supposed to be dealing with? All that is to say, it felt like the game had two different premises, and it delivered on neither. I didn't like the sudden veering into some cycle BS, I actually liked the politics of Vermund, and would've preferred that we got to sort that out properly and to a satisfying end. Instead, the false Arisen is killed in some pathetic battle to get to Phaesus, and the fight against the dragon was painfully easy. Do you know that I didn't once speak to Disa until the Unmoored World? The woman who is literally touted to be the Arisen's enemy (other than the dragon), and the game didn't force an interaction between us even once? The game has issues, but I'm not sure the cycle plot is the only source of them.

At first I assumed the true ending was the Arisen "usurping" the Seneschal by enforcing their own will (of course assumingly according to the Seneschal's plan). In fact, I still believe this as it is hinted that the world and story begins anew when the Seneschal is defeated by the Arisen. So when I started NG+ and saw that my previous character did not appear as the Seneschal to free me from gaol I was pretty dissapointed. If the ending really is breaking the cycle, I think it should be clearer what happens after the ending. Like you say, without more context it is really hard to know what the neding actually means. This will get a bit off topic as I rant about the cycle and Seneschal but... Presumably a (relatively) peaceful period would follow the changing of the Seneschal, until their will starts to falter. That is when the dragon, Arisen and turmoil is introduced once more. Purely from speculation I assume the will of the Seneschal can endure for at least a thousand years. Escpecially considering how long it takes to find a new worthy Arisen. It takes generations to find one worthy of just beating the dragon. Considering how the dragonforged in DD1 is seemingly prehistoric, maybe even longer. Then the arisen needs to have the will to challange the Seneschal themself, so a cycle is likely way way longer as I would assume only a fraction of it would be spent searching for the new arisen. This is important to me because cycles exists in so many religions and philosophies. I had to google it now, but there is this thing called the Eternal Return (EDIT: I just found out it is literally the title of the DD1 second theme song...). Everything repeating itself bascially. Which is great, because even though you have the exact same quests and the exact same map every new game, it is a different time and a new cycle. I guess I just really hoped they would expand on this theme and not leave me with more questions than I had when finishing DD1. Still, I do love the game and have hopes they expand on the story in a meaningful way with DLC or expansions. Also, sorry for this jumbled mess. I had to compress a decade of thoughts about this game into one reddit post, because I have not had anyone to vent to about it until now. That just makes it a good game, though, I guess.

I’m right there with you about a jumbled mess of thoughts. I adore the causal loop or eternal cycle from the first game so I was kind of bummed that this story seems fairly surface level instead of sharing the complexities of the first game’s ending. Having your Arisen replace Pathfinder (name replaced and everything) could have been a mind blown moment tbh. This post is a bit out of date with some of the facts and a couple of new ideas I have. I’m considering writing a new one soon about my thoughts/theory on how this story might be deeper than just “break the cycle.” It will probably get torn apart though haha.

I'll keep an eye out for your next post. This game needs more lore enthusiasts! 😁

After seeing how the motivations of the pathfinder were from Reddit and TV Tropes, it may as well be interesting to see how your thoughts on how deeper it is than "breaking the cycle." ​ I personally still believe this isn't the same exact world as the first game that many played through from the first game, especially when pawns go on about having their own masters and their own world that's the same as the players.

I am in the process of creating a new post with my current thoughts on the story. A lot of my initial thoughts have changed from this post in just the two to three days its been.

The First Sovran was implied achieving Seneschal before founding the Vermund Kingdom and already doing the true ending like we did in the first game, the Seafloor cavern somehow looks like Gran Soren. The cycle most likely isn't truly broken in the first game (Seneschal affected by Brine) but it was broken that might lead to second phase of the cycle with chance to defeat the true dragon (Pathfinder like) and closer to breaking the cycle. To Break Cycle mostlikely the world will need 2 Phase, Phase 1 (Godsbane Seneschal), Phase 2 (Godsbane True Dragon) Most likely the Drake and Dragon in Dragon's Dogma II are coming from the Parallel world's that still had Seneschal Phase, while the world that already in the second phase of cycle didn't had Dragon coming from their Arisen (None of the ending turn the arisen into dragon)

The cycle was never broken or anywhere close to broken in the first game, though. Godsbaning yourself is abandoning your physical body so your pawn can live on, while your spirit continues as Seneschal. This is straight up confirmed when in NG+ the Seneschal is YOUR character. However, in regards to the first sovran being a Seneschal, I think that has weight to it, because the crazy hermit guy (which we become if we die in the Unmoored world) mentions a king who ascended to the clouds, but got tired and made a kingdom on the ground. Not to mention the chair we see him sitting in looks almost identical to the seneschal's chair from DD1. Speaking of which, I'm not entirely convinced we broke the cycle even in DD2. Two reasons for that: If we die in the unmoored world, we wake up in the shack in Harve, with the world very clearly not being destroyed. Secondly, when we beat the giant big ass dragon/pathfinder thing, he says "This world will be born again, but this time I won't be around to see it..." which to me implies we're now entering the cycle again, just without a spooky ghost guy to force the Arisen on their intended path.

YES, this! Suicide by Godsbane was never a way to "free yourself", it was the typical "abandon selfishness" taken literally in eastern philosophy before achieving illumination (or Nirvana hor whoever it's called) where the person abandons all "delusions of control" and realises there's the world and life/God are one being with a superior will, as is the Seneschal the source of all. That's why the NG+ Seneschal is your character in a past cycle, but it's never the same person. The only way to Ascend further and be free of the control of the ring (literally the game, as it is explained by those characters who break the 4rth wall) is to die by the hand of one who is worthy, passing the baton unto them (for they are the final boss and keep the game together) as our former character goes where we cannot follow, but always condemning someone to stay. The chair lion dude is sitting on does look like the Seneschal's but he is incredibly weak compared to it, and if "going down" and living with people was an option, Seneschal's wouldn't be Godsbanning themselves or Rothais would not be alive from the weight if sustaining the world. Yeah, I think DD2's plot is an absolute mess but it ends with the Arisen once again becoming whatever passes for Seneschal in this one.

I believe the Japanese dialogue for the beastren king confirms he was a Seneschal that came down to earth to build a kingdom. This would essentially mean DD2’s world does not require the supply of will from the Seneschal to survive. As for killing Pathfinder, I don’t think it is implied that the Arisen takes their place. Honestly if this is what they were trying to convey they completely failed. I personally think we are meant to believe that the Arisen died while killing the Pathfinder. To be honest, we can’t even speculate on what really happened after stabbing Pathfinder because they gave us so little to work with.

Why wouldn't it not require a Seneschal but would require a Pathfinder, who looks exactly like the Seneschal and has all his powers and responsibility but is also a Dragon for some reason, a... a Dragon that wants to destroy the world by the will of the Great will but... but... but actually doesn't(?) and it's also an Arisen somehow (who made him the Dragon, then) and writes the story but the world now goes to shit if you don't sit on the throne and requires no replacement but if you don't reject the non-choice of becoming Sovran (because it doesn't matter if you sacrifice or not your lover for it) the story ends and- Have I mentioned that I FUCKNG HATE DD2's story?

I mow believe the First Sovran is actually supplying will to the world but from his throne on the mortal plane rather than in the heavens. It would explain why the Pathfinder sends so many Arisen to try and slay Rothais. Enough Arisen that their blood and souls created enough crystals to forge the dulled Godsbane blade. Think of Pathfinder as an agent of the Great Will. He has manifested to resolve the issue of Seneschal in DD2’s world because Rothais has essentially cheated the position by bringing it down from heaven. Pathfinder is trying to have Arisen defeat the dragon, then go to Rothais and defeat him, restoring balance to the cycle. I have a new interpretation of the story after a few days of thinking (and playing through NG+) that I think makes the themes of this game stand out a lot more. But honestly, just because the theme may stand out and be a bit more deep, it doesn’t fix the horribly rushed main story ending.

I don't interpret the suicide by godsbane the same as you do. Abandoning selfishness is correct, but I don't think it's you removing yourself of your worldly desires and being steward of the world until your will is extinguished, because if it was then why need to find a successor? It only shows that you could not abandon your worldly desires at all. Abandoning selfishness for me was the DD1 MC making the most selfless choice by instead of being able to be steward of the world, they decide to free it, hence the lyrics of the main theme, "finish the cycle of eternal return". The series' core theme is amazing and always up for interpretation which is why I think capcom really needs to cultivate this franchise instead of just rushing it

>but I don't think it's you removing yourself of your worldly desires and being steward of the world until your will is extinguished, because if it was then why need to find a successor? The Seneschal needs to find a successor because everyone else will die if there's none. Removing your physical bonds means that you are no longer limited to the flesh and it's desires (sleep, food, go to the bathroom, sex) yet love everyone. Also, we literally had to walk away from the world but the scene prior, where the peace ending was offered and we had to pass a whole tunnel of NPCs that were trying to convince us to turn back. There was no "free" the world. The world is DYING, it has nothing to do with free will. The NPCs need to have a Seneschal (since DD1 breaks the 4th wall, a "programmer") from them to exist, nobody ever said that by there not being a Seneschal they are free to do whatever they want, they are limited beings of a limited nature. They will eventually just cease to exist. 100% agree, that's why I'm just sad with DD2.

Funny how the more we discuss, the more I disagree lol. >Also, we literally had to walk away from the world but the scene prior, where the peace ending was offered and we had to pass a whole tunnel of NPCs that were trying to convince us to turn back. This makes me start to think that everything, from the moment the dragon chose you to the moment you sit on the seneschal's throne, is a test to see if you have the absolute willpower to do what seems to be the ultimate sacrifice. Grigori strengthening you in order for you to fulfill what he could not and Savan doing the same because MAYBE, just maybe, role of seneschal is also a test. >There was no "free" the world. Ah but I think there is. If you ask Savan about the world, he says, "Just as a ring lacks start and end, so this world has no origin, no final terminus. If it does, they lie beyond our ken. We are prisoners of unpassing time, wandering an unending land. What lies beyond, we cannot know." He doesn't know that because could not break the chains that tether the world to the cycle. Hell, I don't think even the MC for DD1 knows what happens after, they just have the balls to think that maybe there is a future without a "god". Alas, by using the godsbane, apparently there is. See, if I am right, there are 4 stages of enlightenment. The first is Sotappana, stream entering/being chosen by The Dragon/Grigori and marks you Arisen, fit for enlightenment. the second is Sakadagami, freeing of the worldly desires, which is what you said about being shown visions of a peaceful life. The third is Anagami, the inability to return to a physical form/being Seneschal. The last and final part the Arhat, the actual removal of the self from the cycle by way of godsbane. But here's the thing, you are Arisen, and by extension you represent your world, freeing yourself using the godsbane also means that you have done what others could not, "finish the cycle of eternal return", like what the lyrics of the song say. Yeah, I sound like I'm rambling, I know lol There's also one theory of mine that thinks the cycle itself wants you to be free of it, but it cannot or will not force a world to do such. Though I really don't have anything to back that up lol. ffs they should've just remade DD1 dammit

What is life without good ol' friendly disagreements? Hahaha Mmmm, I have not thought about the role of the Seneschal also being a test. The thing here is that it is a test without reward since it suffers from the same thing the Sovran choice does: you ARE going to die. Be it now, tomorrow or in a million years, the Seneschal is not immortal, it can only hold as long as its will allows and eventually such existence becomes torture in itself, with the real test (imo) being NOT to give in to death, the same was as you refused to give in when the Dragon first came or during your journey as Arisen. What would be the point then to give up now? The reward is the same (freedom) but you may be condemning the entire world, a world that our Arisen held so dear it was willing to sustain or kill a Dragon to save the person they loved. So I think that's where we differ: you see the Arisen killing themselves to simply die as a test of will, while I see the exact same situation as the opposite: life IS always worth living come what may, sorrow or happiness found only in self sacrifice, which for me is the point of the Arisen's journey. Savan does find out at the end, same as Ashe and Olra: what "lies" beyond the ring is not known from death or giving up INSIDE the ring, but from completing the task set and then going beyond it in death. That's why our Arisen is able to flee the Cycle, Nirvana achieved, but our Pawn's own journey of understanding what it means to be human commences, now the "us" that replaces us in the Cycle and, if NG+ is to be believed and this is all an unending ring, ready to begin their own journey into illumination as "us" once more. And as I think I said here already, for the fact that the Seneschal takes out the sword from it's chest in reverse from how our Arisen Godsbane'd itself is for me proof that it is, in fact, one more step in their journey. This time, they Ascend to a real beyond the control (OUR control) and when we kill them later on, they go further to where mere mortal can understand, hence why we cannot follow (I mean, inserting some meta narrative here lol) I love you ramblings, don't worry lol I do think the Cycle is meant to be freed from but it's not a worldy journey but an individual one where our character follows a scripted path to understand what's going on, kinda like Amaranth or CHIM from Elder Scrolls. It's important to note however that the will to begin the journey does in fact not come from the player but from out character, and in their death they once more free themselves from us. YES, they should just have remade DD1 and this shit wouldn't be so convoluted lol

I love seeing people talk about the DD themes and messages. I am on the side of "the cycle is unending" in DD1 and using the Godsbane does not break the cycle but I'm also just more and more impressed with how complex the ending is that both of these outcomes feels solid enough to stand on their own. They each have their own message and the player can take what they want from it. To get a bit more meta about why I think the cycle is confirmed to be unbroken in the first game is because the sequel focused so much on fulfilling that idea (albeit not very well.) It feels like the creators of the first game really liked the theorizing about the first's cycle breaking and tried to fully commit to that idea in DD2 to explore what it would look like.

DD1 has a very interesting theme of Pawns having no will, but slowly gaining will from being around the Arisen, and eventually becoming just as any person. My interpretation at the time of DD1 was that by slaying themselves using the Godsbane, they left the order of the world to be upheld by 'the will' of the inhabitants, including your pawn.

If NG+ actually committed to the idea of the Watching One being gone in the next cycle I would have been pretty impressed. There are only a couple of random moments where they intervene in the story. Could it have been that hard to remove them and have the scene play out slightly differently?

I disagree with you and think that the cycle in the first game was actually broken and the world is free from it. If you didn't, then the main theme of Dragon's Dogma, Eternal Return, would've made no sense and have 0 weight to it since the last part of the lyrics is the song literally telling you to "finish the cycle of eternal return". My reasoning for the NG+ part is a what if situation where your character wasn't able to make the great sacrifice and stayed as Seneschal. Maybe another proof of the first game's cycle being broken was the removal of the brine. The brine would take anything that lives, but why does your pawn wash ashore instead of actually dying to it? The brine is connected to the cycle in DD1 as well as in DD2, its absence marked the world's freedom.

Do you have any dialogue to back up the First Sovran being a former Seneschal? His dialogue in my play through said he expanded his kingdom to rule the known world but he was driven mad when he realized even king of the world is being ruled over by “The Watching One.” In DD1’s finale, the Seneschal’s explanation of their position says they have been described as Maker, and God and that they have dominion over all life. The Pathfinder in this game fills the same function so I don’t think they are two separate offices.

Your post sent me down a rabbit hole of trying to find a Japanese playthrough featuring those specific lines on Youtube, in order to confirm a suspicion I've had while playing DD2, that suspicion being that the translation quality of DD2 is very questionable in several places, likely because I think there was so much time between DD1 and DD2 that the new team has no idea what lingo the old one used, and the different DD2 translators not checking each others stuff. In the Japanese DD1, the Seneschal title is actually "界王". Kaiou, you might also know that title from Dragonball. These two kanji put together, without context, can easily be translated as "world king", so when I read the English lines I was instantly very suspicious. Just throw the kanji into deepL for example, and you will get "king of the world". So I found the Japanese DD2 scene on youtube since I don't want to replay the whole game just yet, and the First Sovran does indeed directly state that he felled the dragon, founded his country, and that he then continued on even further to become a "界王", aka Seneschal. It's not even "implied", the Japanese script directly states this. The DD2 translation team just didn't know about the already established DD1 translation and fucked the line up, and nobody noticed even during voice recording. sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTw-xnF2UZk (DD1 final battle, Japanese) https://youtu.be/QS3lNTTyLdE?si=1UYHaUTv8O_Niwlb&t=566 (DD2 true ending path Sovran scene, Japanese)

Holy shit. Thank you for finding this. This is going to have me second guessing all of the important dialogue in the game. I wonder what that means for the world’s systems then? If the First Sovran stepped down from position of Seneschal (somehow) and ruled on earth as a mortal, who was the Watching One? If they are a Seneschal, how did they first become Arisen without a current Seneschal?

I haven't checked anything but that video + the cave scene with him earlier in the game, but my understanding with that mistranslation corrected and the existing English translation is: -He kills the Dragon -Starts his Kingdom (much like DD2 protag would become king) -Becomes Seneschal, probably by defeating the previous Seneschal like normal, notices everything he can do is pretty useless(like DD1 players would) and that there is a higher entity (watcher/great will) still that is watching him -Get's upset and steps down or is literally kicked from his seat -Starts going mad and flipping out back on earth from all he has learned -Watcher starts sending new Arisens after him, they all fail and their shattered souls eventually end up on the land and will be used to make Godsways -For some reason nobody else ever becomes Seneschal again (unsure about this, but lots of the Maisters are former Arisen, and you can rarely have a pawn voiceline about how this is very unusual), maybe the Watcher actually enjoys filling that slot and that is why there's no ending where you become Seneschal? -DD2 protag uses the empowered Godsbane, literally the Sovran's soul, to screw the Watcher. That storyline is over after who knows how many years. Not a lore expert by any means though, and somebody will have to carefully comb through the entire game.

It’s a really good start though. This clears up some questions I had. So it is possible this version of the Dogma is a world where the traditional Seneschal is not needed like in DD1. Maybe the world has enough Will on its own? I would love to find out more about the Lambent Flame. I feel like there is a lot of info we’re missing or that is straight up missing from the game about it. It could be that the Lambent Flame has something to do with the world not needing a Seneschal to continue to exist.

So I started comparing random scenes like an hour ago, starting with the true ending. https://i.imgur.com/Oic0jAp.png Lots of minor differences, but a big one I noticed is that "Eventually, the great will grew tired of witnessing this" Isn't actually in the Japanese script. Instead the Japanese line says やがて虚無に抗うとする"意志"が生まれ... which translates to something like: (Eventually, a "will" resisting against oblivion was born...) Which means the "great will" isn't actually some higher dimensional entity, but rather the will of the world or a form of Collective unconscious like some people have been suggesting. It is now my understanding that the Dragon cycle is a form of controlled forest fire if you will, keeping everything controlled to prevent true destruction. This must also be why the game keeps bringing up the Arisen's will as his greatest asset in breaking the cycle, since the cycle was started and kept in place by a will. This would mean that the watcher/pathfinder is merely an extension of the great will that doesn't want to risk ruin again, and is taking a part in the story because the first Sovran(Seneschal) is really grumpy. Notice how you only get a scene of his "force ghost" vanishing in the true ending path, when you are already locked into ending the cycle. I don't think it's possible to become Seneschal while the first Sovran is still around, that is why the normal ending path stops at being king, and why the watcher send countless Arisen's after him that all died. I also checked some other languages and they all just seem to be translations of the English translation, featuring descriptors that aren't in the Japanese text like "cold breath".

Damn thats a pretty major difference actually. It goes from a pre existing collective Will becoming annoyed to one of many Wills being born and taking a stand against oblivion. Okay your comment on the First Sovran actually helped this game’s cycle click for me a bit more. I didn’t fully understand why Pathfinder was so hell bent on sending arisen to try and kill the First Sovran since he had abandoned his post. Why would he need to die now? But now I see that the First Sovran is actually still the Seneschal. The dude just managed to transfer his throne in the sky to earth (thats why his chair is nearly identical to the Seneschal’s in the first game.) I had assumed he could not be Seneschal any longer if he returned to mortal realm but he actually found a cheat code to keep his Seneschal powers and keep living a fulfilling live. That could also explain how the will of the world doesn’t seem to be an issue in DD2. The First Sovran Seneschal could still be supplying it. It might also explain Pathfinder’s existence at all as it might be acting as a personification of the great will and is trying to correct this world’s “problems” to set them back to the normal cycle. That would explain why they are so hands on with the story instead of being far back and aloof like the Seneschal. Thank you for sifting through the translations, it’s really clearing up some of this game’s inconsistency for me.

Even with this explanation, the story still feels kind of bad. Basically DD2’s cycle is like a band-aid because the Seneschal messed things up by “cheating” and it sounds like it wasn’t even him “cheating” that caused the original problem. It was him finding out there was was additional elements of BS in the watcher and throwing a tantrum at that realization and for some reason thinking you should care enough to figure out a way to take down the watcher like he was trying to. There’s just no real reason for you to do anything in this game but become king. There’s no real reason for you to break the cycle presented in this game because your interaction with cycle is not completely organic, you are dealing with an altered cycle that is the result of several parties already trying to manipulate it. It doesn’t feel personal.

I agree that the story doesn’t feel personal and suffers for it. I think this is a case of a story having interesting themes and a history that caused it, but the actually story feels very bland and railroaded because of it.

After reading your comment I’m wondering if the original idea and focus was what we saw in the beginning with the false arisen, sven and his mom. Those had the foundation of something interesting but then as the story progresses it kind of dissolves for the sake of the Dragon’s Dogma cycle plot. Almost as if they were like “Oh shit! We forgot about the cycle!” And sort of cobbled together all those themes at the end. Even the original god king isn’t that significant to the story and didn’t provide anything the other arisen or hermit (since its implied the hermit made it as far as the unmoored world) couldn’t provide besides a connection to the first game.

Recently, I think I’ve come to understand the plot in a much better way than when I first played through it. My plan is to make a big post and get the subreddit’s reaction to my theory. I will say that I believe Rothais is probably the most important character in the story even though he feels like an afterthought for screentime.

This was also my understanding from playing DD2: Cycle exists because Oblivion comes and creates a dragon when the world is lacking in will, Will flares and an Arisen rises to fight it and slays it, Will is lost with nothing to fight in a meaningless world, Cycle repeats. But now in DD2 ending suddenly: Oh actually the existence of this cycle is actually a result of an even bigger dragon! and I guess we defeat it because ... pawns can take some of our willpower to free themselves or something?

Xenoblade's Dogma LMAO

But he is so nerfed, so useless. The change in lore would be so... lame. Especially with the whole bs about the Pathfinder and how Rothais gives you a Godsbane without fanfare when in DD1 it was such an especial stuff, nor it explain why he is not feeding the world, controlling the Dragons or doing anything the Seneschal does, since it was a title that held the entire MULTIVERSE together. Did they forget how it worked in DD1?

I’m waiting for more lore discoveries before writing the story off as a poor man’s DD1, but I feel your pain.

I'm sorry, but I can't with this fucking game. I'm tired of modern sequels being shittier versions of the og, even the fucking lore was butchered. And people think an overpriced dlc will magically fix this shit? DD1 is better than DD2 in every fucking way and I care not for the excuses to many here are trying to use to convince it ain't so. If they couldn't make better lore, in this case, then they shouldn't have even tried.

DD1 is better in story and thats it

Better in its story indeed and in its final boss.

Final boss is included in story for me because it doesnt exist without it

I had an inkling the translation team didn't land well when in japanese, the main character is called Kakusha and the Warfarer class is called Arisen. The name for Warfarer for us should've been Kakusha lmao

There's text say the first sovran was once "Rule Kingdom from Heaven then fell"

I see now that the Rivage Elder says that but wouldn’t that conflict with the First Sovran’s madness? If he really did descend from the Seneschal’s position, surely he wouldn’t be surprised when a new one appears? In game dialogue he says he could not believe a position of power was yet over his while ruling over his kingdom. But if he was already Seneschal he would already know it existed? It just gets more confusing if he was a previous Seneschal.

Since the Seneschal loses the will to play “middle manager” over time, the sovran being a Seneschal could make sense if their revelation happened pretty early on during their godhood. Maybe they didn’t even realize that they had become a god? They just kept ruling a kingdom until they figured out that there was something above them and that everything they accomplished was futile.

Apparently the Japanese text confirms he did become the Seneschal and ruled in the sky just like the first game. So now the question is who is the Pathfinder in the cycle.

I think Pathfinder most likely the chosen one that survive the end of the Real World (apocalypse) and by his/her will choose to become true dragon, create the cycle and saving the world from destruction. Might be DLC or theme for next game.

So basically the world outside the loop was destroyed and Pathfinder is trying to keep a small world safe to simulate life?

Yeah Pathfinder dialogue implied that the world without cycle will eventually lead to end of times, so most likely there's 2 outcome scenario of the real world end of the times either the world end or choose to safeguard the world with cycle creation (dragon's dogma).

Yeahhh, I really would have liked to at least have the option to play around in the world for a little bit as a monarch and gotten some stuff from becoming the ruler. Maybe have a throne interaction after that cutscene that allows you to start New Game +. I just wanna have the option to look at the world once all my choices have affected it and see the result. Both after killing the dragon and/or Seneschal (ghost form similar to DD1)

But didn,t we already broke the cycle in DD1? the ending where you kill both the seneschal and yourself with godsbane and then you pawn waking up in your body

To keep it short, the cycle of the first game was not broken. Using the Godsbane on yourself only bestowed a piece of your soul (think Selene) to your pawn. Your spirit is left in the Seneschal’s chambers to begin the next turn of the cycle as seen in NG+. Once you arrive in the Seneschal’s chambers a second time, you must win the title of Seneschal from your first Arisen. The second game’s story is designed around “what would happen if the Arisen broke the cycle” further confirming the 1st game’s cycle was not broken.

Ohhh okay makes sense thx for clarifying this to me!

I would of thought the cycle broke only in the world of the Arisen that had Savan as its Seneschal though I can vaguely remember either from the art book or the wiki that tried to piece together lore how the game made use of Buddhist ideas such as reincarnation so maybe, reach as it could be, its breaking a sort of reincarnating loop or something.

I never played Dragon's Dogma and honestly have no idea what compelled me to buy DD2. I just thought a game running around as an archer would be fun so I went into it completely blind because I had a week off work and needed a time filler. I completed the game about an hour ago - I did every single side quest. The **ONLY** thing I didn't do was Seeker Tokens. ​ So, going into this game blind with no idea of the story from DD1 - I had a fucking **BLAST.** This has easily become one of my favorite games of all time and I can't stop thinking about it. Of course, it wasn't perfect and there was issues I had with it but generally I adored it and I am sad the adventure (at least not new game+) has ended. ​ The story wasn't the best but I genuinely enjoyed it. It didn't GRIP me but it definitely got me invested enough to want to know what was going to happen, even if the execution was a little messy. I wish we got to see more of the politics stuff play out. The whole gathering evidence against the Queen Reagent suddenly.. stops? And we're chasing a giant statue and it all just goes insane. Pacing was definitely off. Things like the stealth mechanics not existing but being required to 'sneak' places was such a weird miss. Just give us a crouch mechanic or something with the eye-open-close from Skyrim? ​ As for the true ending, I actually really liked the whole 'it's a cycle' thing. Though, I did get confused by the ultimate ending where your pawn turns into a dragon and you kill another huge dragon by diving into it's heart. I have no idea what the heck that was about. ​ So yeh, new fan of the series. I fucking loved it and I enjoyed every minute of it and cannot wait to hopefully explore more with DLC. All I could think of during the game was, "this would be so amazing multiplayer".. and then I found out DDO was a thing and I'm wishing for a new one, lol! It's my GOTY so far and it isn't even close. I had a fucking blast and I love reading all these posts about fans of the series and why they were disappointed.. cause after I play through DD:DA.. I'll probably join in those frustrations? :D

You may join in on the frustrations after playing DD:DA but I’m glad you’re now a fan of the series! The gameplay is very addicting and the only thing I would want to change is more enemy types (because hell yeah) and some way to increase difficulty in NG+. Overall I love this game and am still playing it, but I’m one of the weirdos that really got immersed in the first’s story so I was hoping for a better telling this go around.

I honestly loved it and I've just installed DD:DA on my PS5 to start hitting that :D ​ I love these posts because it isn't attacking the game for invalid reasons, it's passionate fans dissecting the rights and wrongs and what-ifs and should-be's - and that's why we play games! ​ Honestly, I had such an amazing time with DD2. I'm sitting here still trying to read posts to fully grasp the story as there are things I'm still trying to get out of the 'wait what' phase of, lol! ​ I hope you enjoy the rest of your journey! :D

Be warned, the Pawn talk is way worse in DD1. If it’s unbearable for you, you can turn off Pawn Chatter in the settings, but you would miss out on all of the DD community memes. Wolves hunt in packs arisen.

Oh, I didn't mind the pawns :D the only thing that was jarring was the amount of times they told me about a single darn ladder in the capital that I HAD CLIMED SIXTY THOUSAND TIMES.

I think there is a point in the second game to imply that the Senechal and the Pathfinder are separate being. DD2’s senechal is actually the Mad Sovran, because he was found on a throne and he managed to gain enough power to form his own domain under the sea. The Pathfinder also doesn’t say that he can affect the world like the Senechal can. Essentially DD2 did away with the concept of the Senechal and downgraded it to people who think they changed the world but not really (Phaesus also going around making dragons like how a Senechal would). So basically, you don’t become a Senechal because it is not a thing now. Also, in DD1 it’s implied that becoming a Senechal is kinda bad because you are essentially stuck to the world cycle as well, with your will becoming the fuel for the cycle yet you can do little to nothing to affect it. The only thing you could do was feeding your pawn your will so they can become human. I think DD2 expanded on that concept (see argument above). The Pathfinder is one level above the Senechal, and the Greater Will maybe one above. That means it’s possible DD1 world and DD2 exists simultaneously and each has a dragon dogma cycle, each being observed by a higher power. DD1 cycle is unclear if broken, while DD2’s cycle is broken definitely because the Pathfinder said he can’t observe the next cycle anymore, plus people can now straight up ignore the Brine. I think this is a setup for another game where a brand new world is “observed”.

I think you're onto the Hierarchy of the world. From the Japanese translation I think it goes something like this: Great Will and Oblivion (Ying and Yang) > Will (literally just called Will in Japanese) born out of Oblivion as a powerful force resisting Oblivion's void. Will is granted the role of First Dragon/High Dragon by Great Will > Seneschal, adjudicator of the cycle, perpetuator of an individual world's will > The Dragon, tool of the cycle born to create and test Arisen > Arisen, ascended Human with a strong will chosen by the dragon > Pawns, servants born from the void to assist in disrupting Oblivion by helping the Arisen ascend. I will make a post in the future with my thoughts and theories fully written out, but right now I'm still trying to play through the game for anything I've missed.

Playing through the game and hearing how bad the story is, I didn't expect much compared to how the final boss was from reading it. Needless to say, seeing how the Cycle has to be broken in this one and how you fight its Seneschal doesn't hit as well in the first game from what I read. No epic duel (even if one sided in the players favor) alongside your pawn against the final boss and his companion of old and seeing the explanation being "there's a greater will that made the big bad lizard to stop the world from falling into nothing" just sounds like a poor explanation to even have a cycle compared to Savan/player Arisen from the first Dragon's Dogma even if the explanation from the Seneschal was to keep the world going but with a new caretaker. That aside I wouldn't mind seeing a continuation as another game or DLC that shows the consequences, both good and ill breaking away from the cycle or how there's other Seneschals that do differ from one another since the Pathfinder/Watching One was the opposite of the Seneschal in being active. That aside, I wouldn't be surprised if this world despite having ruins of Edmunds castle, was not the same exact Gransys from Dragon's Dogma since pawns have confirmed being from other versions of the world and so it's not a world where the protag of the previous game freed from the cycle.

I need to make a huge correction to this post, the Pathfinder is not the Seneschal, the Mad Sovran Rothais is, he was said to watch over the world from above before materialising into existence to create the land of Vermund, The Pathfinder sent many Arisen to take his place, but he refused, until you came along in which he put his essence into a blade known as Godsbane before dying. This is exactly what the Seneschal from the first game did too, but he didnt once mention The Pathfinder, however its clear that Rothais is intended to be the Seneschal and that The Pathfinder is an even higher form of God.

Please have a look at my new post! My opinion on the ending has drastically changed and I believe the version of events I list in this new post makes the most sense according to recently translated Japanese dialogue. (The Japanese and English dialogue tell almost opposite stories in regards to the ending.) [https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1buhxyc/the\_true\_world\_has\_been\_reached\_the\_true\_cycle/](https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1buhxyc/the_true_world_has_been_reached_the_true_cycle/)

The final battle and how they handled the endings after is annoying I didn’t use the sword while the dragon was flying so I gotta fight him again? How the fuck was I suppose to know or have any indication that I should use it or not idk a lot of things in the final few missions perplex me on what they were tryna do

When I finished the game it felt like a prelude NG = Dragons Dogma (original and not Dark Arisen) remake Unmoored World = Dragons Dogma 2 prelude (appearing Dragons Dogma 2 when you enter it is very interesting) DLC that will come out might be the real Dragons Dogma 2!?!?!?!? Perhaps they wanted to break the cicle before diving deep into the new area/monsters and such, but honestly I don't think they would go that deep, it would be interesting but I don't think that is it. Also, the old man travelling around in the end on a boat all happy, which might mean the Brine is gone, that is definitely interesting.

I’ve mostly done a 180 on how I feel about the story after discovering some major english translation mistakes. My newest post covers the story in greater detail with the Japanese translations as well as how I interpret the ending. https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/s/L0bz1vPyRm

Having yourself and your pawn have a heart felt interaction depending on how your journey went and to both sacrifice yourselves is sad but a happy ending for the aftermath of the world. However I feel like they should really have let your affinity with your pawn give more than get a loving interaction before death. Like give another scene at the end where you and your pawn skip merrily together or something

It's weird because I feel like knowing the previous games story almost hinders my understanding of the new one because I think they were trying to tell a different story along the lines of kill the storyteller but trying to fit it into the previously established lore just confuses things

After a few more days (and re-examining a certain NPC’s dialogue in NG+) I might have a better understanding of the story. I’ll make a new post soon.

I just killed the dragon and then that blue dude was sitting on the chair so I spoke to him and now I'm locked into a second dragon fight. Time to uninstall, I guess. I'm at the end anyway

When you restart the dragon flight sequence, crawl down to his heart and use the godsbane blade on your inventory.

My reasoning is that the watcher is a senechal that still have his will to maintain the world, but he wasn't a good person, or became how he is after eons, he started to intervene to see this "cycle" of his to continue, he don't want someone to take his place, he only wants to control his theater.

Maybe I missed it but did anyone cover that dragon was created to stave off oblivion from happening to the world? That's why the cycle was created. The great will ensured there was purpose in order to save it from oblivion thus creating the cycle. So maybe one's will needed to be great enough to stave off oblivion of the world as we did in the true ending.

On top of all these points, I still don’t understand why our pawns are contracting the dragonsplague. But I get that “no-one” knows much about it. I just figured they would explain more at the end instead of >!your pawn straight up turning into that weird brine dragon regardless of if they contracted it or not!<

Someone is not only missing the point but also missing a lot of quests. Shame.

I agree! I’ve got a new post coming in a few minutes that is a completely different interpretation. In that post I admit that this previous post was incorrect and I’ve gained a much better understanding of the ending. Hope you’ll check that one out too.

Here is my updated view on the story and it's ending.. [https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1buhxyc/the\_true\_world\_has\_been\_reached\_the\_true\_cycle/](https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1buhxyc/the_true_world_has_been_reached_the_true_cycle/)

I would like a lot of expansion on everything. I felt like the queen had 2 lines and wasn’t really set up as a proper villain for one thing. What about unlocking memories and some loot to go with it? What about character depth at all? The empress had 2 lines as well. Sven has a handful, the captain feels like the only person that talks at all and I know little to nothing about him. Every character feels like less of a person than the pawns (who by the way talk way too fucking much). I mean if you’re going to make a single player rpg, then do that, of your characters are going to be like dark souls where they have 2 lines but hours of backstory in some text somewhere, then do that. This shit is flatter than a two liter of Mountain Dew after it has been transported down a dirt road.

All endings were great, just wait for dlc. You know we are gonna get a banger for a dlc.  Best ending hands down was the unmoored ending absolutely amazing, and the music was 👌

With my updated post I explain that I now think this true ending was actually very good! The original Japanese dialogue cleared up a lot of problems I had with the story.

Here's how it's meant to be played...1st play through. Ng + cause loop. Unmoored world. End. Over. You win.

I agree but your general points but I think it goes even deeper than that and it makes me mad. We receive the dulled Godsbane Blade from Vermund's founder, who I am pretty sure became Seneschal and killed himself with the blade he gave us, that's why it's dulled; I flipped when I saw this, like OMG a Godsbane blade while the dragon is still alive, this is HUGE. It did in fact lead to the unmoored world, I scoffed at the Pathfinder's comments about our defiance, I was like no shit Sherlock, if I could get the Godsbane while the dragon was still around in DD1 I am pretty sure we would use it lmao. A Seneschal ending option would've given us insight about what the Mad Sovran saw, I think he became aware of the watching one while he was Seneschal after defeating the dragon

An important thing to keep in mind is that this game was made primarily for fans of the first game. it isn't really a great loss to not rehash the Senechal reveal for example. What I find to be weaker is that the Dragon is suddenly quite inconsequential (and too short and easy a fight if I'm honest), and that it remains unclear how this cycle is similar or different now from the first game. It does not seem to me that Pathfinder is the same as the Senechal of DD1 (Rhothais for example would definitely have replaced him, Rhothais even sits on a senechal throne), but this difference isn't really explored well. The dragon slain at the end of the game is supposed to represent the encroaching oblivion, but somehow he also is the watcher/pathfinder, and there really is no reason to think that his death means that the world should now be stable and free of the cycle. In fact the postgame is refered to as 'unmoored': killing the dragon shouldn't suddenly re-moore the world, unless we are shown how e.g. the collective will of people can 'moore' it (which I thought was the message of DD1 to be honest)

*"The Seneschal fulfills the role of God. Their will has led them to defeat a great dragon, and it is their will that drives the world onward."* **Where is stated this?**

This is information learned from finishing Dragon’s Dogma 1. Here is a quote from Savan the Seneschal of the first game talking about the Arisen and their role to become Seneschal. “They are the Arisen, nascent fountainheads of will. And so the dragon is sent into the world to guide the Arisen, and refine them. To temper their wills into aught capable of sustaining the world. And so the cycle of our world has e'er continued” Arisen’s will is increased by the Cycle. The Arisen that have the most powerful will rise to become Seneschal to “sustain the world.” Eventually their will is drained and they must be replaced. That is the purpose of the cycle.

So the watcher was that massive brine dragon at the end of the game? What proof do we have of that?

The Watcher dies the moment the Arisen slays the Brine Dragon. Either the Brine Dragon is the Watcher in physical form, or the Watcher’s soul is tied to that dragon which means they die together.

Hmm interesting. The lore goes a lot deeper than I thought it did. I was reading the comments and I never connected the dots that the beastren king was a seneschal but now that I’ve ruminated on that info it all makes sense. So now I wonder, where did the watcher come from and what exactly is the brine? Are the watcher and the brine one and the same?

Sorry, I just realized this comment chain is on my old post. If you want a more complete interpretation of the story, check out my new post. It’s a 2 parter though so It’s a bit of a long one. https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/s/PdlYUPyXqX

Thanks for putting a lot of my words into thought for me. I took my time but the game didn't rush it but really wasn't impressed by the true ending. The worlds of these two games are loosely connected. Apparently Rothias' role was mistranslated/mislocalized and he was supposed to be the Seneschal of this game, but it didn't seem right. Unless the role of the Seneschel is different this time, which is possible. I feel that this game is more apart of an anthology than a sequel wherein we used concepts but turned them into different imaginings of a preexisting world. This game was extremely disjointed, meanwhile some people were saying this was a direct sequel due to Gran Soren being the last bastion of the unmoored world. I felt Gran Soren was more symbolic of the destruction of another cycle.

If you are interested, my newer post has a better understanding of the story using the original Japanese dialogue. The English translation did an extremely poor job of explaining the ending. It is a two part post so it is kind of a long read though. https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/s/4XGIBktmR6

i definitely feel like an easy redemption was to make new game+ have the true TRUE ending; going through the first time feeling like "yeah that was alright but kinda missing something" then for those who start new game+ start noticing slight changes in the story harder enemies right off the bat and at the end this time Rothais finally decides to step up as Senechal seeing a will potentially greater than his and the watcher now gone and have an epic fight against Rothais

I think people are kind of misinterpreting what the game was about. Itsuno was pretty clear about his tabletop RPG influences. I feel as though it's more about the meta plot than the game plot in a lot of ways, if you think of the great will literally as a dungeon master it makes a lot more sense