None argues that the risk is not present. However why would the characters ingame raise it? It is common knowledge. Fact. These are the details of a setting that you describe to the reader/player, and by the time Dragon Age II comes around (and you are faced with Wesley and his death), the groundwork has been laid. They are all aware of the risks and each and every single of them (save for Merrill) are seasoned veterans in their respective battlefields. To argue and fuss over it would not make them present more depth. It would add another facet to whoever complains or shows concern, but the lack of it doesn't break the characters.Trolldor said:No. There is still the risk of the taint, even if low, that none of the characters raise.
I would be rather upset if BioWare was going down the Resident Evil 5 route and have the characters explain every single detail of the plot and surroundings to me, even though I have a brain capable of deducting these things on my own. They already pulled that with Wesley and Hawke being able to ask "What corruption?", though at least didn't force it on me.
... if I'd be asked to complain about any lack of "mentioning" something or "plot holish" then it would be the whole casting magic in the middle of Kirkwall disaster and everyone just going on about their business. I appreciate how BioWare made Varric and Aveline protect the two Apostates in your party, but the lack of eyebrow raising was still a little grating.
Darkspawn though and the Expedition?
Ffffft.