346 réponses à ce sujet

[roundcrow]

roundcrow wrote...
Loghain is one of the best characters I've ever encountered (and, for my sins, I've read a lot). I haven't been able to put together all of the reasons he fascinates me, but I think the primary one is that I see myself in him - someone who is trying to protect something precious to him, but the world is more complicated, frustrating, and vague than "want to protect = protected".

Well put but it doesn't absolve him of responsibility for his crimes.

Nothing absolves an adult of the responsibility for his decisions, especially one who is in a position of command.  I think it is clear if you leave him alive that he knows that, and it is an enormous weight upon him (the RtO conversations with Wynne).  I couldn't kill him because I'm as guilty of bad judgment IRL as he is, but thankfully my decisions
don't have as many moving parts.  Also, the thought of a tactician in the GWs (not that it helps in-game, more's the pity) was very appealing. 

Heinlein's Law is helpful here, I think.

Slightly off topic, speaking of Wuthering Heights, the writers have done a great job forcing the player to decide who is a reliable narrator and who is not, and who wants what from whom and why. 

[MordantWastrel]

I don't think that anyone would suggest that Loghain is 'innocent' or undeserving of some punishment. Even when you choose to redeem him, it's clear that the decision you're making is (ironically, like many of Loghain's decisions) 'for Ferelden' and not 'for Loghain.' It's also clear from the conversations you can have with Loghain post-redemption that he still has the capacity to be invaluable to Ferelden now that he's been humbled and is not in a position to simply have his will be done without question.



Like most stories of redemption, talking about whether or not Loghain is guilty is sort of beside the point. He's clearly guilty in fact, even if his motives were pure or understandable; I don't think that deciding to kill him requires an especially spirited moral defense.



But if I'm the PC, and I know that I'm not going to rule Ferelden myself (or maybe even if I am), I'd rather have the likes of Anora and Loghain running things with a few checks on their power than Alistair, who, as much as he may be modeled on Buffy's Xander, never quite seems to 'grow up' in the same way that Xander does, even if Alistair has gone through the Joining and accepted his Gray Warden responsibility -- it seems like he embraces being a Gray Warden because it excuses him from having to deal with his fear or failing with respect to his responsibility as a Templar and as and heir to the throne.

[Swifty]

[quote]

[quote]Default137 wrote...
Now lets see what evidence we have against Loghain shall we?[/quote]
That he abandoned the king and army is undeniable. The question is whether he was justified or not.

Agreed.
That he framed the grey wardens and tried to assassinate them is also undeniable. I've said before that if he came to them after the battle and explained it in terms of he could see the battle was unwinnable and he tried to save as much of the army as possible then he probably would have won me over as grey warden.

The game does not give you that choice. Who would he go to and explain? The Grey Wardens he believed lit the beacon late, deliberately? Why should he tell a bunch of regicides what he's thinking?

That it was his plan that Calain wanted to wait for the Orlesians and GWs is also in game.

Loghain's plan was to either wait for Fereldon reinforcements or gather a bigger army ingame and plan an attack on his terms--the same thing any good general does.

That he ignored teh blight is also ingame, Loghain himself admits it.

Of course he did--the question is why? He's not a fool.

That Loghain sold elves into slavery is also undeniable.

Agreed. Whether he thought they were safer in Tevinter as slaves rather than dead as the darkspawn attacked is questionable. In his eyes as a general--they were cannon fodder either way.

That he conspired with the man who slaughtered the entire Cousland houselhold and tortured and killed other nobles and even rewarded him is also in game.

No, what is clear from the game is that Howe did these things and how much Loghain knew about it, or why he trusted Howe is not made clear. I've already shown the parts where the "Tortured Noble's Son", both him and his father say that his father supports Loghain. If Loghain supports this--why aren't they in the Palace prison?

One of the prisoners is the previous Arl's son--the same one who runs through the elven alienage in a rape/kill gang so we don't know why he's there. Soris the elf is there because he was part of the "uprising" against the arl's son that happened before Howe was the arl--they weren't put there by Howe, they simply were never released. I can't even blame those two on Howe other than negligence--never mind try to pin them on Loghain.

That he poisoned Eamonn is ingame. That he didn't mean for it to kill him isn't.

It may not be but the fact is--poison is all throughout the game. A level one rogue can kill with it but Jowan, mage, blows it? Doesn't that seem just too convenient? Who gave him the poison? If Jowan was supposed to kill Eamon, it would only take one simple spell to suck out his life. The implication is obvious. Jowan wasn't told to assasinate Eamon--he was told to poison him. That is ingame.

That he conspired with blood mages is also ingame.

And considering that an evil act only works if you accept two premises. One, that there is something inherently wrong with blood maging as opposed to some of the people practising it are the problem and two--that the mages need the Templars/Chantry to control their behaviour. If you remove those two premises and believe that mages should be free or have their own controlling bodies responsible to the king--then it becomes a whole other debate and Loghain may believe any number of things about what's wrong with that picture.

[quote]Swifty wrote...
Yes, what was his real agenda?  Eamon didn't even keep the child a secret nor did he take care of him with any of the respect you might give to a possible heir to the throne. At the whining of his Orlesian wife he promptly shipped the boy off to the chantry like an unwanted orphan where everyone thought he was Eamon's bastard instead of Maric's. Now that's a man with a sense of responsibility for his King's son! Now, twenty years later he pops Alistair out of hiding and says, "Look! Take my word for it folks--it's King Maric's boy and he should rule the land!"--and then try to say he has no personal or political agenda? That's simply laughable or bad writing and I don't think, given the quality of writing in this story that writing is the problem, here.[/quote]
No offence but you really need to improve your quoting.

Its not laughable, Eamonn was concealing the boy, how could he have given him preferential treatment? He did actually make sure he was safe. Shipping him off to the chantry is hardly like sending him off sa say a slave.

Wrongo. It is slavery to send him there. You don't call deliberately addicting the Templars to lyrium so they can be controlled by the chantry, slavery? At least an Orlesian slave can run away. A templar never can. Once a templar is "in" they never get out. Alistair tells you that. They hunt and kill rogue templars as well as they are not allowed to marry or have families or a future. It is slavery, plain and simple. Eamon took the easy way out. 

You could say that he probably hoped that Alistair would harden up under the templars, something he did need.

It is a morally ambigous choice at the best of times. Eamon didn't hope for anything. He dumped the boy on his wife's orders leaving Alistair bereft at 10 of the only family and friends he'd ever known to a bunch of Chantry slavers and a forced future as a Templar-- thus Alistair's ingame whininess and wistful hoping for family. I find that reprehensible. His trophy wife took precidence over the boy he was sworn to care for.

The reason Alistair is so thrilled with Duncan is that he is a father figure who "saved" him from slavery and at least Alistair has some limited freedom as a GW to have a love affair, marry, have children and wander about or even walk away if he wants before dying of the taint. It's the best of bad choices.

[quote]Swifty wrote...
Eamon's only crime is to support Cailin? Oh and he's no accessory to his wife's crimes of killing hundreds of villagers and knights because she would not send her son to the [legal, much as I find it abominable] mage's tower? The boy could well have become an abomination without Jowan there at all due to her stupidity.[/quote]

She was stupid but hardly responsible, you're looking for ways to blame Eamonn and excuse Loghain. We don't see what happened with them behind closed doors either. Eamonn did have more pressing concerns as well. Besides in 2 of my play throughs I make her sacrifice herself, so there you go, problem solved.

Your MC  killing her is not the same as Eamon taking responsibilitiy for cleaning up his own house. That's my point.

She's more than stupid--she's dangerous, arrogant and influences Eamon's decisions about what is right/wrong. She has Alistar sent off to the Templars because as a trophy wife she doesn't want the embarrassment. Eamon complies. She lies to Eamon and brings in Jowan knowing he's an illegal blood mage [meaning she had to have "conspired" as you keep saying] with Loghain or Howe to get him, behind her husband's back. What else is that devious woman conspiring? She nearly gets Tegon killed out of her own deviousness and refusing to tell the GW and Teagon the truth of what she did.

Yet Eamon does nothing about it, if the MC refuses to clean up her mess. He's at best blinded by lust, at worst, serving his own agenda before the villagers he's supposed to be governing.

And in a worse scenario, Alister the "step son" must advise killing his own "brother" due to this madness.

All of this is negligent in the extreme and if you're going to apply those moral standards to Loghain about his relationship with Howe--you need to apply them with Eamon or you've unbalanced your argument.

In game--She is in the same position to Eamon as Howe is to Loghain without the excuse that he lives somewhere else and so Eamon can be ignorant of these facts.

Eamon is morally ambiguous. He isn't the "good guy" here.


[quote]Swifty wrote...
Or the fact he knew so little about his own son he doesn't realize the kid is a mage? In his own house?[/quote]
You're just proving my point.
[quote]Swifty wrote...
Yet you argue that Loghain is responsible for everything Howe did in a different location--where's the logic in that?[/quote]
I'm arguing that Loghain conspired with howe and rewarded him despite knowing what he did. He's an accessory after the fact.

Then so is Eamon... and more guilty in fact because Howe has his own dungeon and we do not know if Loghain has ever even seen it--Eamon let this go on right in his own house. My point is your illogical conclusion that Loghain knows everything that Howe does while it's acceptable for Eamon to be twice as thick and do nothing about it.

As for the slavery I'm not going to quote you but none of what you wrote excuses selling them into slavery. Loghain wasn't selling the into slavery to save them he was selling them to fund the civil war effort.
[quote]Swifty wrote...
Arl Eamon at the time is going against the law of the land for supporting the Gray Wardens since they are to be arrested on sight. Bluntly, that is treasonable. And you didn't notice his private little prison there in the basement while you were hanging with Jowan? With dead skeletons against the walls in chains? Or that when the MC is imprisoned in Drakon that there are torture racks? Or what Leliana says about the Orlesian guards? Or that his guards and wife did torture Jowan for information? Did this all escape your notice?[/quote]
Its a medieval society, you don't know who he tortured or why and you can hardly say Jowan didn't have it coming.

Oh I see, it's conveniently medieval for Eamon but not for Loghain or Howe?

Besides it wasn't even Eamonn that put him there. As for committing treason by supporting the GWs sorry thats a laughable thing to tar Eamonn with compared to Loghain's actions.

No, it isn't. Anora is the rightful queen and Loghain is the appointed regent. Do you understand that regencies are appointed? He didn't inherit the title. The Bannorn appointed him on Cailin's death then backed out when all the "oooh he murdered Cailin, his a big bad boy" rumours started and when Loghain didn't dance to their tune after being appointed. That's simply the same politics that went on in most medieval societies with appointed regents.

It is Eamon that is the upstart here.

Not that I'm anti-rebellion, but those are the facts.

[quote]Swifty wrote...
How can Loghain know about how the Gray Wardens bring down a blight other than dusty legends? Even the main character doesn't know why it takes a GW to kill an archdemon this until AFTER Loghain either joins, or does not.  The Orlesians are recent history to Loghain--not ancient legends.[/quote]
Even without knowing the specifics of what the GWs do it is undeniable that they are the only organisation remotely prepared to face a blight. Its their whole raison d'etre after all and they must have documentation and lore from previous blights.

And a political agenda just like any other private army--that's Loghain's worry. 

And before we go holding up the GW as some sort of morally superiour force; they recruit glory hungry fools and reprobates that they conscript, tell them nothing, kill at least half of them in the joining [a fact they are not advertising] don't tell them they'll turn into darkspawn themselves until after they join and don't tell them they are only needed because they have to drive the deathblow into the archdemon to kill it. Why do they need hundreds when it only takes a few to make the killing blow? They're a private army not under the direction of the crown and that's a justifiable concern on Loghain's part.

Somehow I don't think that makes GW the masters of moral turpitude, either. I also found them completely untrustworthy and am not surprised Loghain came to the same conclusion.

[quote]Swifty wrote...
Watch the cutaway--Bann Teagon goes after Loghain and Loghain bellows back. Not the other way around. We don't have any proof in the game about who fired the first shot in a civil war. It's a deliberately ambiguous plot point.[/quote]

The civil war came about primarily because Loghain made himself regent. I've said before but he didn't have to do that. He could have let Anora sit on the throne as queen, she would have been accepted, and simply been the General for teh armies. It looks like a power play from Loghain.

As I've said before, this is a problem. Regents are appointed. They can't just "declare" themselves. It's either a plot point error or the Bannorn are just piffed because Loghain didn't do things their way or he's a commoner upstart. Take your pick.

If he wanted power he simply could have forced Anora to step down and made himself king. It's really that simple. He talks about *why* he didn't if you recruit him. He truly believes Anora to be the better politician. What is politically obvious is that if he didn't take the regency--the Bannorns would have deposed Anora in a heartbeat and executed her because she has no legal right to be queen since she produced no heir. The civil war is a direct result of the Bannorns fight for power amongst themselves and hoping to usurp Anora with a candidate of their own choosing. That's simple historical feudal political reality.

[quote]Swifty wrote...
He's exactly like Cailin--Anora talks about this a number of times. I think she'd know the difference. Loghain is the only one who tells you why Maric didn't accept Alistair--strictly politics because Maric knew the Orlesians would try to use Alistair to upset the hereditary throne line and in Loghain's opinion, it was what he believed Alistair or the GW's were doing when they crashed the landsmeet.[/quote]
Which is itself an indication of his paranoia.

No, it's not an indication of paranoia at all or Maric would have said, "nope that's nuts" unless Maric was just as nuts. It's a political reality ingame that both the Orlesians and Bersaad have every intention of conquoring Fereldon.

There's a vast difference between the view of someone who has lived under the heels of a conquorer and those who have profited from that conquest [including a number of the bannorn, no doubt] or the next generation that have not felt it.

Asking the Orlesians for help as Cailin did would be like the Irish asking for British troops after the rebellion and we all saw how well that turned out.

[quote]Swifty wrote...
The whole plot hangs together only if one sees Loghain as "gray"--if he's the bad guy--the plot has more holes than a bleached j-cloth.[/quote]
I'm not saying he's evil. I'm saying he's not a hero, and that due to his actions largely gets what he deserves if you execute him. He's paranoid about the Orlesians and it infected every single decision he made in the game to Ferelden's detriment.

I'm saying two things. One is that Loghain's not paranoid.  People throw that term around but it's inaccurate in this case because Loghain's fear of the Orlesians is not unfounded. It's a reaction to a very real political possibility that happened within his lifetime. A political reality that Alistair and Cailin refuse to acknowledge.

I'm saying simply that it's hypocritical to give redeeming chances to Zevran/assassin, Leliana/spy, Shale/murderer, Sten/mass murderer etc throughout the game and then because Loghain attacked the GW directly to assume he's more in need of killing than many of the other morally ambiguous characters in the game.

Unless you want no party  members to prance around with--simple black/white morality doesn't enter the play, here.

He doesn't "deserve" redemption is the big bawwwing going on. Let's look at the choices we have.

• Alister, a nice guy dies killing the dragon after the MC has just spent the entire game putting that idiot on the throne and leaving Anora the drama queen and betrayer on the throne to rule and just hope for the best without Alister or the MC to keep her in check. [remember we don't know the end yet]. Take the risk of the king dying killing the archdemon.
  
• The MC, who is hopefully a nice guy/gal leaps on the dragon and dies leaving the country bereft of the best council that Alistair the idiot king could possibly have with Loghain either alive or dead. Either way, there'a shortage of Grey Wardens to kill the beast since we don't know that Alistair is going to have a hissy and bail. Or maybe we figure he's grown up a bit and will accept the reality that "more hands are better" in this situation".
  
• Knock up Morrigan the sociopath and who knows what evil that will unleash? At the landsmeet we don't know this possibility yet and even on a playthrough--does any "righteous" character want to unleash that?
  
• Let Loghain sacrifice himself, unite the anti and pro Loghain factions, unite the country, give it a live hero who helped kill the archdemon and a dead one to look up to who already saved them from slavery under the Orlesians.
  

That's why I keep saying that if the MC cares about Fereldon rather than vengence on Loghain or petty personal concerns the Loghain sacrifice is actually the best Choice for the country. And if you do it and watch the end bits--it turns out to be the most politically astute choice for the country's stability.

Of course that means putting aside one's personal agenda [including Alistair's ]for the good of Fereldon, a sentiment that Loghain echoes.

And Loghain is just as dead.


[quote]Swifty wrote...
No, Loghain refused the Orlesians at the border and suggested Cailin wait for Fereldon reinforcements or withdraw. Cailin wanted Orlesian reinforcements--thus Loghain's problem with Cailin's plan.[/quote]
I can't remember exactly what was said then, its still amounts to his plan and Cailan wanting to wait. Even without reinforcements Loghain could have planned for a holding action and would have been able to persuade the king I'm sure.

You obviously don't remember what was said, obviously. Even Duncan believes Cailin's decisions are rash but he won't risk losing support for the GW by telling him that.  Watch it again.
[/quote]

[Swifty]

roundcrow wrote...


Nothing absolves an adult of the responsibility for his decisions, especially one who is in a position of command.  I think it is clear if you leave him alive that he knows that, and it is an enormous weight upon him (the RtO conversations with Wynne).  I couldn't kill him because I'm as guilty of bad judgment IRL as he is, but thankfully my decisions
don't have as many moving parts.  Also, the thought of a tactician in the GWs (not that it helps in-game, more's the pity) was very appealing. 

Heinlein's Law is helpful here, I think.

Slightly off topic, speaking of Wuthering Heights, the writers have done a great job forcing the player to decide who is a reliable narrator and who is not, and who wants what from whom and why. 

Speaking of Wuthering--that's the difference with Dragon Age--we honestly don't know who has reliable information. Everyone has an agenda --much like real life, everyone is morally ambiguous which is what makes it fascinating on playthrough.

I too thought that  Loghain made sense since end game one is not just a guerilla band anymore but commanding an army, in terms of strategy Loghain makes the most sense if one is truly into the role.

With Loghain, and playing a mage I used only one set of troops [mages] and three of my troop sets were alive when I was finished at *normal* difficulty. Also it would make tactical sense to have him hold the gates [because he's a general] as well. In other words--battling up Drakon and killing the archdemon--only 9 people died with Loghain due to his "rally" and "warcry" being so powerful.

With Alistair--I lost the dwarves and mages on *easy*. 60 dead vs. 9 dead?

If I gotta live with the consequences of my actions and who lives or dies?--Loghain, all the way. He tanks and kicks the crap out of the bad guys. Didn't realize what a powerhouse he was until I used him.

Well that's the part I don't get about Loghain hating. Alistair doesn't take responsibility for his actions and their impact. Loghain does. At first he shuffles it off a bit [good writing] until he trusts you and then he tells you how much he regrets the impact on his victims. Once he realizes that you are good for the country--he couldn't BE a more uncomplaining, respectful party member.

He's willing to take responsibility for what he's done and he's pretty confrontational that others do the same and I suspect that's what really annoys people.

Abrasive? Yes. Evil? Absolutely not.

I cannot understand why folks don't see Alistair as morally ambigous, as well.

[SurelyForth]

With Loghain, and playing a mage I used only one set of troops [mages] and three of my troop sets were alive when I was finished at *normal* difficulty. Also it would make tactical sense to have him hold the gates [because he's a general] as well. In other words--battling up Drakon and killing the archdemon--only 9 people died with Loghain due to his "rally" and "warcry" being so powerful.

That has literally nothing to do with Loghain being better than Alistair and everything with you not speccing Alistair as well as the game spec'd Loghain. There is no inherent difference between the two and, when I compare one of my playthroughs to another, I had a harder time with Loghain than I did with Alistair.

Well that's the part I don't get about Loghain hating. Alistair doesn't take responsibility for his actions and their impact. Loghain does. At first he shuffles it off a bit [good writing] until he trusts you and then he tells you how much he regrets the impact on his victims. Once he realizes that you are good for the country--he couldn't BE a more uncomplaining, respectful party member.

Actually, Alistair regrets his decision to leave the Wardens quite a bit. He admits he's jealous of you if you stay with the Wardens and it's a big part of why he can become a wandering drunk, the PC just doesn't get a chance to have a big conversation about it.

Modifié par SurelyForth, 09 mars 2010 - 02:52 .

[Swifty]

MordantWastrel wrote...

I don't think that anyone would suggest that Loghain is 'innocent' or undeserving of some punishment. Even when you choose to redeem him, it's clear that the decision you're making is (ironically, like many of Loghain's decisions) 'for Ferelden' and not 'for Loghain.' It's also clear from the conversations you can have with Loghain post-redemption that he still has the capacity to be invaluable to Ferelden now that he's been humbled and is not in a position to simply have his will be done without question.

Like most stories of redemption, talking about whether or not Loghain is guilty is sort of beside the point. He's clearly guilty in fact, even if his motives were pure or understandable; I don't think that deciding to kill him requires an especially spirited moral defense.

Exactly. It's the morally easy way out, really, to kill him. It takes thought and the ability to see "the greater good" to let Loghain become a GW.

Other than Zevran, he's the only major character to attack the MC personally. It takes maturity to step back from that and see why. It doesn't take much moral superiority to yell, "off with his head".

But if I'm the PC, and I know that I'm not going to rule Ferelden myself (or maybe even if I am), I'd rather have the likes of Anora and Loghain running things with a few checks on their power than Alistair, who, as much as he may be modeled on Buffy's Xander, never quite seems to 'grow up' in the same way that Xander does, even if Alistair has gone through the Joining and accepted his Gray Warden responsibility -- it seems like he embraces being a Gray Warden because it excuses him from having to deal with his fear or failing with respect to his responsibility as a Templar and as and heir to the throne.

Absolutely. Alistair is a child who never grew up. He's at the whims of his personal feelings constantly. Loghain may fall to his occassionally but if anything he's pretty consistant that what he does in not for the "crown" but for Fereldon.

Alistair running a country? Disasterous. Anora the drama queen running rampant? Another possible disaster. The only people available to put a check on that mess are Loghain and or the MC.

And the Bannorn are a treacherous infighting mess. I actually felt for Loghain, the upstart commoner, having to deal with that lot.

[Swifty]

SurelyForth wrote...

With Loghain, and playing a mage I used only one set of troops [mages] and three of my troop sets were alive when I was finished at *normal* difficulty. Also it would make tactical sense to have him hold the gates [because he's a general] as well. In other words--battling up Drakon and killing the archdemon--only 9 people died with Loghain due to his "rally" and "warcry" being so powerful.

That has literally nothing to do with Loghain being better than Alistair and everything with you not speccing Alistair as well as the game spec'd Loghain. There is no inherent difference between the two and, when I compare one of my playthroughs to another, I had a harder time with Loghain than I did with Alistair.

I specced Alistair as my tank and he bailed because I saved Loghain, leaving me tankless. If I hadn't been an Archane I would have my butt handed to me on a plate because of Alistair's hissy fit.

Speaking in purely strategic terms then--who do you want fighting a war for the good of a country? A leader of a guerilla band [MC] or a winning general?

That's my actual point.

[SurelyForth]

Swifty wrote...

Absolutely. Alistair is a child who never grew up. He's at the whims of his personal feelings constantly. Loghain may fall to his occassionally but if anything he's pretty consistant that what he does in not for the "crown" but for Fereldon.

Alistair running a country? Disasterous. Anora the drama queen running rampant? Another possible disaster. The only people available to put a check on that mess are Loghain and or the MC.

And the Bannorn are a treacherous infighting mess. I actually felt for Loghain, the upstart commoner, having to deal with that lot.

Actually, Alistair is at the whims of his duty constantly, except for when it comes to sparing Loghain. If he were a slave to his feelings as you are suggesting, there would be about 99% less heartbreak amongst female players.

Alistair running the country is good if he's hardened- he's arguably better at it than Anora is. And he doesn't need the PC to help him do a decent job.

And how the heck do you know the Bannorn are treacherous? What proof is there in the game? The way I understand it, they were, justifiably, freaked out by what happened at Ostagar and didn't want to hand their armies over to Loghain without knowing for certain that he wouldn't waste them. We know from the game that he was pulling banns away from their lands in the south, where the darkspawn were rapidly advancing. Were I a bann who watched my lands fall because of Loghain's need to fight an enemy that didn't exist instead of one that did, I would also refuse to leap to his aid.

Swifty wrote...
I specced Alistair as my tank and he bailed because I saved Loghain, leaving me tankless. If I hadn't been an Archane I would have my butt handed to me on a plate because of Alistair's hissy fit.

Speaking in purely strategic terms then--who do you want fighting a war for the good of a country? A leader of a guerilla band [MC] or a winning general?

That's my actual point.

Right, but you directly compared their performance to make it seem like Loghain was a better fighter than Alistair when, in fact, it all depends on how you spec Alistair.

As far as a winning general...from what we see in the game the PC has a better success rate than Loghain without resorting to slavery and torture to bolster their support.

Modifié par SurelyForth, 09 mars 2010 - 03:06 .

[Swifty]

SurelyForth wrote...


Actually, Alistair regrets his decision to leave the Wardens quite a bit. He admits he's jealous of you if you stay with the Wardens and it's a big part of why he can become a wandering drunk, the PC just doesn't get a chance to have a big conversation about it.

I did have the conversation with Alistair at the end as well as Anora before I left town with Zevran and he still carried on like a child. [Figured I did my bit and wasn't dealing with the unholy political mess, not my problem.] I hardened him so he didn't become a wandering drunk but he certainly was about useless. Didn't even address the troops before battle and he's the rightful king? Anora had to do it because, as she said--he was upstairs moping.

Made me regret I didn't put Anora on the throne alone, make Loghain a general under the command of the crown and become the Prime Minister myself, if they'd had one.

[SurelyForth]

Swifty wrote...

SurelyForth wrote...


Actually, Alistair regrets his decision to leave the Wardens quite a bit. He admits he's jealous of you if you stay with the Wardens and it's a big part of why he can become a wandering drunk, the PC just doesn't get a chance to have a big conversation about it.

I did have the conversation with Alistair at the end as well as Anora before I left town with Zevran and he still carried on like a child. [Figured I did my bit and wasn't dealing with the unholy political mess, not my problem.] I hardened him so he didn't become a wandering drunk but he certainly was about useless. Didn't even address the troops before battle and he's the rightful king? Anora had to do it because, as she said--he was upstairs moping.

Made me regret I didn't put Anora on the throne alone, make Loghain a general under the command of the crown and become the Prime Minister myself, if they'd had one.

Since the address to the troops is about how awesome you are, it makes sense that he wouldn't want to be singing your praises at that point. And he's not useless as a king- he and Anora do far better than she does alone. Loghain living or dying doesn't change that at all.

[SurelyForth]

[list][/list]That's why I keep saying that if the MC cares about Fereldon rather than vengence on Loghain or petty personal concerns the Loghain sacrifice is actually the best Choice for the country. And if you do it and watch the end bits--it turns out to be the most politically astute choice for the country's stability.

Of course that means putting aside one's personal agenda [including Alistair's ]for the good of Fereldon, a sentiment that Loghain echoes.

There is no proof anywhere that letting Loghain take the final blow is better for Ferelden. The epilogues are the same whether the PC dies or if  Alistair dies or if Loghain dies or if no one dies.

I have a problem letting Loghain die a hero because his actions during the game were very unheroic. You mention uniting the pro-Loghain faction with the anti-Loghain faction, but what about the elves whose family members were sold into slavery? Is it fair to them to let Loghain die a hero, to say nothing of those who lost their lives to Howe's Loghain-sanctioned actions. 

Modifié par SurelyForth, 09 mars 2010 - 03:40 .

[Swifty]

[quote]SurelyForth wrote...

Actually, Alistair is at the whims of his duty constantly, except for when it comes to sparing Loghain. [/quote]

Wrongo. He bailed on the Templars for the GW and if you spare Loghain he will bail on the GW in a fit of pique. What "duty" does he actually carry through? He says that--he doesn't act it out.

Guilt over Duncan's death does not equate to "doing his duty."


[quote] If he were a slave to his feelings as you are suggesting, there would be about 99% less heartbreak amongst female players.[/quote]

He sacrifices himself no matter how high the persuade in the pursuit of a woman he has already abandoned if you marry him to Anora. That's not "duty", nor is it "love"-- it's self-aggrandizement. If I could have knocked him out cold to get off the dragon I would have. He steals the MC's thunder out of some misguided sense of romantic attachment instead of doing his duty as king.

A serious problem for any female GW who just spent the entire game putting him on the throne in the belief that when the time came he would actually "do his duty". No matter how it plays out Anora winds up the undisputed queen after the MC already knows she's a untrustworthy wench. He knows that and leaps on the dragon anyway. That's precisely why I call him an idiot. The MC did all that work to fix the country and he piffs it away for some lustful foolery?

Doing his duty does not consist of killing himself to the detriment of an entire country because he has some romantic notion.


[quote] Alistair running the country is good if he's hardened- he's arguably better at it than Anora is. And he doesn't need the PC to help him do a decent job. [/unquote]

Actually, play out the other endings. The "best for all" ending is putting him on the throne so he and Anora keep each other in checkmate with the MC running the GW and Loghain sacrificing himself.

Learning governance is not the same as knowing it.

[quote] And how the heck do you know the Bannorn are treacherous? What proof is there in the game? The way I understand it, they were, justifiably, freaked out by what happened at Ostagar and didn't want to hand their armies over to Loghain without knowing for certain that he wouldn't waste them. [/quote]

It is not Loghain who attacks their position in the cutshot--Teagon attacks Loghain's postition in council and Loghain yells back. Not vice versa. Shortly thereafter a civil war starts. Nowhere in the game does it say who actually started the civil war. They are quick to believe that Loghain has abandoned Cailin yet they wouldn't even be in their 'noble positions' had Loghain not driven out the Orlesians. Yet they spread the rumour that he killed Cailin with no proof? You don't call that "treacherous"? Even Wynn admits the mages fled the field instead of of blowing open the darkspawn to get Cailin out of there. A fact Loghain confronts her with and she agrees. What gets lost in the bickering is the obvious. Whether Loghain likes Cailin or not is irrelevent. It's his son-in-law and there's no doubt that he loves his daughter even after she betrays him to keep the throne. He has no agenda in killing Cailin because he has no desire to be king. He had the power to take the throne and he did not do it. Doesn't anyone ever ask "why"?

Loghain didn't kidnap his own daughter--hence his absolute outrage when accused of it. He thinks the GW's killed her. Of course he's absolutely outraged. He does not know that Anora confronted Howe and that Howe is scared if she returns to Loghain, Loghain will have him executed for sedition against the crown.  Howe actually has the nerve to accuse her of treachery even though she's the rightful ruler and locks her up, presumably as some sort of insurance against Loghain's righteous wrath.

Listen to what the maid says about that confrontation, again.


[quote] We know from the game that he was pulling banns away from their lands in the south, where the darkspawn were rapidly advancing. Were I a bann who watched my lands fall because of Loghain's need to fight an enemy that didn't exist instead of one that did, I would also refuse to leap to his aid. [/quote]

Wrong again if we're thinking strategically. Why waste valuable troops in an indefensible position when you can wait get them into a winning position? Those banns and peasants would be dead if they didn't leave, simple as that. Denerim is a city of stone walls and castles--it's defensible. Most of the southern cities are not. Redcliff castle is somewhat defensible. The village is not. The MC defends it from walking dead coming from the castle--not a darkspawn invasion.

Loghain cares about troops and commoners--that's a blatently obvious part of his make up. What he doesn't seem to care about is the opinions of a bunch of nobles and their land grabbing ploys. That's his hubris. Lothering is completely undefendable, militariliy speaking. I doubt the darkspawn are going to be nice enough to bottleneck themselves on a bridge somewhere for the army's benefit.

I suspect if they weren't darkspawn corpse-eaters he'd have used a scorched earth policy which is exactly what I would have done in his position to save the country.

He's a general and abrasive. That's what annoys everyone including the nobles.

The fact is--every main character in this game is morally ambiguous and has serious flaws. That's the fun of it. Nobody in it is completely good or evil with the possible except of Howe, the Darkspawn and the Archdemon.

[roundcrow]

Swifty wrote...

The fact is--every main character in this game is morally ambiguous and has serious flaws. That's the fun of it. Nobody in it is completely good or evil with the possible except of Howe, the Darkspawn and the Archdemon.

This is one of the things that pleased me about the game.  Rather than merely taking up arms against a sea of opposing Darkspawn, what you're really dealing with is Fereldan politics.  The Darkspawn almost achieve Macguffin status.

[Swifty]

SurelyForth wrote...

I have a problem letting Loghain die a hero because his actions during the game were very unheroic. You mention uniting the pro-Loghain faction with the anti-Loghain faction, but what about the elves whose family members were sold into slavery? Is it fair to them to let Loghain die a hero, to say nothing of those who lost their lives to Howe's Loghain-sanctioned actions. 

First off let's not equate Howe's actions to Loghain unless there is actual proof that Loghain knew about them--which in most cases, there isn't. In fact--Howe commits treachery against the crown by kidnapping Anora when she confronts him so he even is bold enough to imprison Loghain's daughter.

The elves, and yes I played both forms of elves, actually. The elves have no political power. Period.

That's the tragedy for the elves. That isn't Loghain's doing--it's actually Maric's since he was the first king since the occupation and he certainly did not have any desire to give them a seat at the landsmeet, obviously. All the nobles see them as nothing more than cheap household labour. That can't be blamed on Loghain, either.

The elves? Ah yes the elves! When you bring it up in the landsmeet--note other than a few gasps it does precisely nothing
to sway the votes of the Bannorn. I was pretty piffed about that as a
City elf and yes, I noticed it. Why doesn't anyone else see that does
NOT sway a single vote? It's part of the
reason I think the nobles are a bunch of self-serving gits. They don't
give a crap, either way. Yet a noble's son was tortured and boo
hoo--two of 'em jump on board even though there's no proof Loghain actually knew about it. One noble's son vs. hundreds of elves sold into slavery and one boy who Loghain may not even know about sways two votes?
Hello? Priorities here?

He "dies a hero" uh well play it through is all I can tell you and see what really happens for yourself.

• He doesn't actually die a hero. He feels better. The country, other than Anora forget about him.
• Who cares *how* he dies? Really? Better Loghain dead than the leader of the GW or the king or an OldGod demon raised by a sociopath.  Period.

Loghain is not "unheroic"--quite the opposite. He's a "tragic hero" whose own hubris about the noble's agendas is his downfall. He's won them a country and still they turn on him at the first opportunity. That's his position. He's not a politician. He's a general who, by Maric and Cailin's  deaths is forced into a political postition he never desired and fighting for his daughter as well as his country's life. He's no pampered noble who uses tact, diplomacy and coercion to get his way.

His hubris is believing that Anora and Howe are the best judges of that sort of strategy and he's tragically wrong about it.

[SurelyForth]

[quote]Swifty wrote...

[quote]SurelyForth wrote...

Actually, Alistair is at the whims of his duty constantly, except for when it comes to sparing Loghain. [/quote]

Wrongo. He bailed on the Templars for the GW and if you spare Loghain he will bail on the GW in a fit of pique. What "duty" does he actually carry through? He says that--he doesn't act it out.

Guilt over Duncan's death does not equate to "doing his duty."




[quote]If he were a slave to his feelings as you are suggesting, there would be about 99% less heartbreak amongst female players.[/quote]


He sacrifices himself no matter how high the persuade in the pursuit of a woman he has already abandoned if you marry him to Anora. That's not "duty", nor is it "love"-- it's self-aggrandizement. If I could have knocked him out cold to get off the dragon I would have. He steals the MC's thunder out of some misguided sense of romantic attachment instead of doing his duty as king.

A serious problem for any female GW who just spent the entire game putting him on the throne in the belief that when the time came he would actually "do his duty". No matter how it plays out Anora winds up the undisputed queen after the MC already knows she's a untrustworthy wench. He knows that and leaps on the dragon anyway. That's precisely why I call him an idiot. The MC did all that work to fix the country and he piffs it away for some lustful foolery?

Doing his duty does not consist of killing himself to the detriment of an entire country because he has some romantic notion.

[quote] Alistair running the country is good if he's hardened- he's arguably better at it than Anora is. And he doesn't need the PC to help him do a decent job. [/unquote]

Actually, play out the other endings. The "best for all" ending is putting him on the throne so he and Anora keep each other in checkmate with the MC running the GW and Loghain sacrificing himself.

Learning governance is not the same as knowing it.
[/quote]

Alistair did not choose to become a templar and, as you said before, being a templar is a form of slavery, not duty. And it's not like he didn't just trade one life of servitude for another.

And I mentioned that sparing Loghain is the one time he drops the ball on his duty and it can ruin his life. He'll end his relationship with the woman he loves for duty, he'll marry a woman he really doesn't care about for duty, he'll allow himself to be a pawn in Eamon's game just on the off-chance that it will end the civil war.  

I don't see him sacrificing himself to the Archdemon as being a failing- since he makes it clear when you crown him that being a Grey Warden and ending the Blight is his first priority. Besides, he believes that Anora is a good ruler and trusts that the country will be safe in her hands (and he's mostly right).

I have played out all the other endings- the only thing that changes how Alistair rules is whether he's hardened or not or whether he's married to Anora. Again, Loghain being around or dying a hero only really matters to Alistair and/or Anora.

Modifié par SurelyForth, 09 mars 2010 - 04:15 .

[Swifty]

roundcrow wrote...


This is one of the things that pleased me about the game.  Rather than merely taking up arms against a sea of opposing Darkspawn, what you're really dealing with is Fereldan politics.  The Darkspawn almost achieve Macguffin status.

Absolutely. It's the same reason I wandered Morrowind for months. In this case, it's a bit more linear.

And yes, the darkspawn are merely a catalyst for the rest of the intrigue to take place. Making the game utterly addictive if you want enough of the story to see everyone's viewpoint.

[Sarah1281]

If he were a slave to his feelings as you are suggesting, there would be about 99% less heartbreak amongst female players.

Unless, of course, he's hardened and you can convince him to make you his dirty little secret. How that equates to a 'happy ending' as far as the romance goes is beyond me.

[SurelyForth]

Swifty wrote...
First off let's not equate Howe's actions to Loghain unless there is actual proof that Loghain knew about them--which in most cases, there isn't. In fact--Howe commits treachery against the crown by kidnapping Anora when she confronts him so he even is bold enough to imprison Loghain's daughter.

The elves, and yes I played both forms of elves, actually. The elves have no political power. Period.

That's the tragedy for the elves. That isn't Loghain's doing--it's actually Maric's since he was the first king since the occupation and he certainly did not have any desire to give them a seat at the landsmeet, obviously. All the nobles see them as nothing more than cheap household labour. That can't be blamed on Loghain, either.

The elves? Ah yes the elves! When you bring it up in the landsmeet--note other than a few gasps it does precisely nothing to sway the votes of the Bannorn. I was pretty piffed about that as a City elf and yes, I noticed it. Why doesn't anyone else see that does NOT sway a single vote? It's part of the reason I think the nobles are a bunch of self-serving gits. They don't give a crap, either way. Yet a noble's son was tortured and boo hoo--two of 'em jump on board even though there's no proof Loghain actually knew about it. One noble's son vs. hundreds of elves sold into slavery and one boy who Loghain may not even know about sways two votes? Hello? Priorities here?

He "dies a hero" uh well play it through is all I can tell you and see what really happens for yourself.

• He doesn't actually die a hero. He feels better. The country, other than Anora forget about him.
  
• Who cares *how* he dies? Really? Better Loghain dead than the leader of the GW or the king or an OldGod demon raised by a sociopath.  Period.

Loghain is not "unheroic"--quite the opposite. He's a "tragic hero" whose own hubris about the noble's agendas is his downfall. He's won them a country and still they turn on him at the first opportunity. That's his position. He's not a politician. He's a general who, by Maric and Cailin's  deaths is forced into a political postition he never desired and fighting for his daughter as well as his country's life. He's no pampered noble who uses tact, diplomacy and coercion to get his way.

His hubris is believing that Anora and Howe are the best judges of that sort of strategy and he's tragically wrong about it.

Loghain is a pretty terrible leader if he is so completely ignorant as to what his right hand is doing, especially since it's not that hard for the PC to peice together a pretty substantial picture of what a psychotic sh*theel Howe is. He has to know a small part of what's going on (he does approve of Howe hiring the Crows) and he lets Howe run unchecked.

Re: Elves. So, because no one at the Landsmeet cares about the elves, the elves don't matter? I'm missing your logic on that one. My point is that Loghain caused them harm and should be brought to justice for that alone. By letting him kill the Archdemon, he dies a hero (or did you not mean that when you said "give it a live hero who helped kill the archdemon and a dead one to look up to...?") and I don't think it's right, given the harm he knowingly causes.

I didn't Loghain was unheroic, but that his actions during the game were unheroic. I guess most of my PC's would have an idea of what he did for the rebellion, but they are much more familiar with the assassination attempts, slavery and general accusing them of being Orlesian sympathizers when they aren't at all.

Sarah1281 wrote...

If he were a slave to his feelings as you are suggesting, there would be about 99% less heartbreak amongst female players.

Unless, of course, he's hardened and you can convince him to make you his dirty little secret. How that equates to a 'happy ending' as far as the romance goes is beyond me.

If you want to boil his feelings for the PC down to access to sex, maybe, but it goes far deeper than that. I actually like the mistress ending because he's way more resolute about the relationship in this scenario than he is in any other and, if you marry him to Anora, it's not even a secret.

Modifié par SurelyForth, 09 mars 2010 - 04:35 .

[Swifty]

[/quote]

Alistair did not choose to become a templar and, as you said before, being a templar is a form of slavery, not duty. And it's not like he didn't just trade one life of servitude for another. [/unquote]


Therein lies the crux of the problem as well. Did he have to become a templar [no doubt about Eamon dumping him on the chantry] or did he choose that later? Either way, as an adult he made a vow to them and he broke it. Then he breaks his GW vow. Then he breaks his romantic vow to the GW warden. Or he breaks his vows as king and dies.

He may do it all out of misguided innocence but actions speak louder than words.


[quote] And I mentioned that sparing Loghain is the one time he drops the ball on his duty and it can ruin his life. He'll end his relationship with the woman he loves for duty, he'll marry a woman he really doesn't care about for duty, he'll allow himself to be a pawn in Eamon's game just on the off-chance that it will end the civil war.  [/quote]

He lets Eamon use him because he wants Eamon's love back after you find the amulet. There's nothing in the game that says he is smart enough to even know that Eamon is "using" him. He is, in fact, politically naive and rather stupid. He's a cute lost puppy but a lost puppy does not a ruler, make.

And if you played out the endings you know he promptly falls in love with Anora after betrothal unless he's playing kissy face with the GW. Made me wonder if he just didn't need to get laid.


[quote]I don't see him sacrificing himself to the Archdemon as being a failing- since he makes it clear when you crown him that being a Grey Warden and ending the Blight is his first priority. Besides, he believes that Anora is a good ruler and trusts that the country will be safe in her hands (and he's mostly right). [/unquote]

It's his first priority until he doesn't get his own way. And there's no way of telling at that point that civil war wouldn't be a heartbeat away if he is not there as Maric's son to mitigate the previous damage.

I have played out all the other endings- the only thing that changes how Alistair rules is whether he's hardened or not or whether he's married to Anora. Again, Loghain being around or dying a hero only really matters to Alistair and/or Anora.

[/quote]

If you played it you know Loghain does not die the hero and you know that it is HE who says to you, "It is easier to sacrifice oneself than to live with sending others to die because then you have to live with those decisions." That's a failing in Alistair right there--he goes wading in idiotically whereas Loghain realizes just what's at stake. You also know that Loghain did not leave the battlefield until two things happened--the beacon was lit too late and the mages bailed out on him leaving Cailin to die. A problem which Loghain was blamed for unreservedy and with no foresight on the part of the nobility.

By sacrificing Loghain there are two competant GW's left alive--by killing him, there's only one.

Waste of resources and not good leadership if there's to be a future for the GW. If one is on the throne, just who is supposed to start up the GW again if not foreigners? Foreigners who, in this case, have a vested interest in keeping Fereldon ripe for conquest. Why not just invite the Bersaad home for tea?

Oh yeah, did that--and Sten said they were waiting for the opportunity...

[ejoslin]

Sarah1281 wrote...

If he were a slave to his feelings as you are suggesting, there would be about 99% less heartbreak amongst female players.

Unless, of course, he's hardened and you can convince him to make you his dirty little secret. How that equates to a 'happy ending' as far as the romance goes is beyond me.

Same reason I see marrying Alistair for political reasons but keeping Zevran on the side as a happy ending.  Is it ideal? No, but it's still happy.

[SurelyForth]

Swifty wrote...

Therein lies the crux of the problem as well. Did he have to become a templar [no doubt about Eamon dumping him on the chantry] or did he choose that later? Either way, as an adult he made a vow to them and he broke it. Then he breaks his GW vow. Then he breaks his romantic vow to the GW warden. Or he breaks his vows as king and dies.

He may do it all out of misguided innocence but actions speak louder than words.

He says "...and becoming a templar was a decision made for me, a long time ago." Also, he had taken no vows.

He lets Eamon use him because he wants Eamon's love back after you find the amulet. There's nothing in the game that says he is smart enough to even know that Eamon is "using" him. He is, in fact, politically naive and rather stupid. He's a cute lost puppy but a lost puppy does not a ruler, make.

And if you played out the endings you know he promptly falls in love with Anora after betrothal unless he's playing kissy face with the GW. Made me wonder if he just didn't need to get laid.

Actually, he protests being put forward as the heir but is placated when Eamon points out that if Loghain wins, then he (Eamon) will have to swear fealty to Loghain, implying that the only chance of success they have is for Alistair to take the throne.

And, if you spare Loghain, Alistair is far from in love with Anora after the Landsmeet. He makes it pretty clear that the reason he even accepted the match was to ensure that she couldn't carry on unchecked.

If you played it you know Loghain does not die the hero and you know that it is HE who says to you, "It is easier to sacrifice oneself than to live with sending others to die because then you have to live with those decisions." That's a failing in Alistair right there--he goes wading in idiotically whereas Loghain realizes just what's at stake. You also know that Loghain did not leave the battlefield until two things happened--the beacon was lit too late and the mages bailed out on him leaving Cailin to die. A problem which Loghain was blamed for unreservedy and with no foresight on the part of the nobility.

Alistair knows what's at stake- he just believes that he'd do as much good dead as alive. There is a legitimate back-up in Anora. 

Re: Loghain: you said yourself that Loghain would die a hero if he slayed the Archdemon, I didn't pull that out of the air. And he gets a statue in Amaranthine, too, doesn't he? 

I actually don't know anything about what Loghain did or did not do at Ostagar. All my PC gets are piece-meal accounts and the knowledge that he sees her as a traitor, despite there being absolutely no proof to support that claim, and he and Howe are destroying a country that needs all its resources for the Blight. And even with all the information that I as a player have gotten, I still don't think that Loghain's actions were justifable, at Ostagar or after. 

Modifié par SurelyForth, 09 mars 2010 - 04:53 .

[Swifty]

[*]Loghain is a pretty terrible leader if he is so completely ignorant as to what his right hand is doing, especially since it's not that hard for the PC to peice together a pretty substantial picture of what a psychotic sh*theel Howe is. He has to know a small part of what's going on (he does approve of Howe hiring the Crows) and he lets Howe run unchecked.
[*]
[*]And Eamon, who lets his wife run rampant so the villagers are slaughtered wholesale is the  great advisor to Alistair? Not once does Eamon take responsibility. If you GW Loghain--he does.
[*]
[*]He doesn't "approve" of Howe hiring the Crows--he conceedes because his own men keep getting slaughtered by the GW's team and if you understand Loghain at all--he hates watching his troops die needlessly.  There's a difference between active and passive support. The GW are outlaws. Period. What Loghain does by hiring the Crows in this case is not against the law by any stretch of the imagination.
[*]
[*]Loghain didn't choose to lead. He's a general not a politician. That's the whole point. He's thrust into that position on the death of Cailin.

Re: Elves. So, because no one at the Landsmeet cares about the elves, the elves don't matter? I'm missing your logic on that one. My point is that Loghain caused them harm and should be brought to justice for that alone.
[*]
[*]Then so should all the nobles be brought to justice over it.  Selling the elves saved them ponying up cash out of their own pockets for troops no matter how you slice it. It comes down to doing an evil by believing it's a practical thing or those who are standing by watching it happen *knowing* it's evil, benefiting by it and doing nothing to stop it and in fact, supporting it through deliberate inaction.  I believe that's what the Nuremberg trials were about in many cases.
[*]
[*]You can't say Loghain is so "evil" he doesn't deserve to die honorably because of what Howe did and then not tar Eamon with the same brush even though there's ample proof that Eamon knew something was going on in his own house [his wife hired a blood mage on his dime and he was clueless? that's a leap of faith, there] and nobody comes to justice over those dead villagers and knights.
[*]
[*]By letting him kill the Archdemon, he dies a hero (or did you not mean that when you said "give it a live hero who helped kill the archdemon and a dead one to look up to...?") and I don't think it's right, given the harm he knowingly causes.[/qi
[*]
I didn't Loghain was unheroic, but that his actions during the game were unheroic. I guess most of my PC's would have an idea of what he did for the rebellion, but they are much more familiar with the assassination attempts, slavery and general accusing them of being Orlesian sympathizers when they aren't at all.
[*]
[*]However, some of the nobles such as Eamon and the older commoners are old enough to remember the Orlesian conquest and they are the pro-Loghain faction. Better to unite them than keep the civil unrest going, regardless of how unpalatable it may seem.

Sarah1281 wrote...

If he were a slave to his feelings as you are suggesting, there would be about 99% less heartbreak amongst female players.

Unless, of course, he's hardened and you can convince him to make you his dirty little secret. How that equates to a 'happy ending' as far as the romance goes is beyond me.

[*]
[*]Which also points to what I've said about Alistair being childish when it comes to taking his duty seriously. He says it--he doesn't live it.

If you want to boil his feelings for the PC down to access to sex, maybe, but it goes far deeper than that. I actually like the mistress ending because he's way more resolute about the relationship in this scenario than he is in any other and, if you marry him to Anora, it's not even a secret.

[*]Sorry the quoting is killing me here, I can't fix it so I went bold to clarify.

[Swifty]

ejoslin wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

If he were a slave to his feelings as you are suggesting, there would be about 99% less heartbreak amongst female players.

Unless, of course, he's hardened and you can convince him to make you his dirty little secret. How that equates to a 'happy ending' as far as the romance goes is beyond me.

Same reason I see marrying Alistair for political reasons but keeping Zevran on the side as a happy ending.  Is it ideal? No, but it's still happy.

Actually Zevran is by far the superiour romantic choice anyway.

[ejoslin]

Swifty wrote...

ejoslin wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

If he were a slave to his feelings as you are suggesting, there would be about 99% less heartbreak amongst female players.

Unless, of course, he's hardened and you can convince him to make you his dirty little secret. How that equates to a 'happy ending' as far as the romance goes is beyond me.

Same reason I see marrying Alistair for political reasons but keeping Zevran on the side as a happy ending.  Is it ideal? No, but it's still happy.

Actually Zevran is by far the superiour romantic choice anyway.

Well, I certainly think so.  But I was only pointing out that just because you can't be married to your LI doesn't mean you can't have a very happy ending with them anyway.  

[Swifty]

[quote]

He says "...and becoming a templar was a decision made for me, a long time ago." Also, he had taken no vows.[/unquote]

Ah, thank you for the clarification. I proves my point that Eamon is a problem, here.


[quote]He lets Eamon use him because he wants Eamon's love back after you find the amulet. There's nothing in the game that says he is smart enough to even know that Eamon is "using" him. He is, in fact, politically naive and rather stupid. He's a cute lost puppy but a lost puppy does not a ruler, make.

And if you played out the endings you know he promptly falls in love with Anora after betrothal unless he's playing kissy face with the GW. Made me wonder if he just didn't need to get laid.[/quote]

Actually, he protests being put forward as the heir but is placated when Eamon points out that if Loghain wins, then he (Eamon) will have to swear fealty to Loghain, implying that the only chance of success they have is for Alistair to take the throne.[/quote]



And, if you spare Loghain, Alistair is far from in love with Anora after the Landsmeet. He makes it pretty clear that the reason he even accepted the match was to ensure that she couldn't carry on unchecked. [/unquote]

Yet according to the ending if Alistair dragon jumps--she does quite fine on her own.

Again I did talk to both of them and it's my problem with Alistair, right there. If you kill Loghain and he gets his own way, he happily marries her knowing you just executed her father-in-law in cold blood. If you believe that it's in the greater good to recruit Loghain as a GW he mopes and takes it out on you and his wife. It's exactly why I believe he's unfit to rule regardless of any happy ending tacked on.

And I would have loved the option to swear fealty to Loghain/Anora on the premise that the GW become advisors and loyal to the crown without Alistair being executed. Too bad it's not an option.


[quote]If you played it you know Loghain does not die the hero and you know that it is HE who says to you, "It is easier to sacrifice oneself than to live with sending others to die because then you have to live with those decisions." That's a failing in Alistair right there--he goes wading in idiotically whereas Loghain realizes just what's at stake. You also know that Loghain did not leave the battlefield until two things happened--the beacon was lit too late and the mages bailed out on him leaving Cailin to die. A problem which Loghain was blamed for unreservedy and with no foresight on the part of the nobility.[/quote]

Alistair knows what's at stake- he just believes that he'd do as much good dead as alive. There is a legitimate back-up in Anora. 

Re: Loghain: you said yourself that Loghain would die a hero if he slayed the Archdemon, I didn't pull that out of the air. And he gets a statue in Amaranthine, too, doesn't he? [/quote]

That hardly anyone visits, apparently. What I am saying is that Loghain feels better if he dragon jumps. That doesn't mean the entire country viewed it the same way.



I actually don't know anything about what Loghain did or did not do at Ostagar. All my PC gets are piece-meal accounts and the knowledge that he sees her as a traitor, despite there being absolutely no proof to support that claim, and he and Howe are destroying a country that needs all its resources for the Blight. And even with all the information that I as a player have gotten, I still don't think that Loghain's actions were justifable, at Ostagar or after. [/quote]

There's no proof Loghain is a traitor, either. And actually his actions at Ostagar were more than justifiable in military strategy terms.

He's got serious flaws but not about "traitorness"--it's about arrogance or hubris. He is an unrepentent patriot, really. That's his major flaw.