11146 réponses à ce sujet

[Lady Jess]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Edit: Sarah, you need to select the line "I don't really care what you're up to" to unlock the persuade check in the slaver quest. She'll ask why you're even there and then you'll say "I'll explain it to whoever is in charge." Moral outrage or "get out of my way" type of dialogue is just going to lead to confrontation.

All of my characters tend to go the moral outrage route because they're fairly moral people (like my HN) or because they see parallels to their own situations (my DC, CE, human mage), or are also elven (elven mage, DE). My DN, of course, takes that route because since the caste system eliminates the need for slavery in Orzammar she actually gets to be morally outraged about something for once and so is having fun with that.

You can always, being so close to the landsmeet and knowing a huge battle battle comes after do it to risk less injury to your companions. You're in a hurry after all. Or "catch more flies with honey" then and do moral outrage at the landsmeet.

[KnightofPhoenix]

tmp7704 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

But, Bhelen promises you that he will send the army if crowned. Harrowmont on the otherhand promises that he will put the matter up to the Assembly. The same Assembly that was locked and paralysed by political infighting. Doesn't sound like a safer bet to me.

True, but you have no good reason to believe Bhelen actually follows through on his promise, so it matters little whether he promised sending army or the sky and all the stars. He knows that getting the army is what you want so he promises you that, but in the end he can leave you empty-handed.

On the other hand dwarves have traditionally helped with fighting the Blight if the treaties you have with you are anything to go by, and so a traditionalist like Harrowmont is more likely to see to it so this tradition is uphold. And with him influencing the views in such manner the Assembly shouldn't have as much difficulty in reaching their decision as they had in the arguably much more complicated matter of choosing the next leader.

Bhelen's crier does say something to the effect that Orzammar needs someone like Bhelen to fight the Blight. That, in addition to it being clear that Orzammar has no interests in ignoring a Blight. I don't see why Bhelen wouldn't see that.

Furthermore, Bhelen's political agenda is focused on rapprochement with the surface and better trade. It's not in his interests to allow the surface to be destroyed, lest his support from the merchants be weakened and his whole political ambition ruined. In addition, his recruitment of casteless in the military suggests he is planing to go to war.

The Assembly on the otherhand has proven how devisive and inefficient it is during a crisis. I would rather trust a pragmatic man, than a bunch of corrupt individuals. And finally, being the isolationist that he is, I dont' see why Harrowmont would care that much for the surface anyhow. Bhelen has vested interest in the surface's survival. Not Harrowmon.t

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 05 juillet 2010 - 04:06 .

[tmp7704]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It was made clear that only the King of Orzammar can act on the treaty they had with the Wardens. Why does Harrowmont need to put it up for debate?

I'm not sure how the dwarves have it arranged, but it is possible while only the king can put the motion forward, the Assembly still has to accept it. Isn't it the reason why in the epiloque Bhelen dissolves the assembly, so he can rule completely unchecked?

Bhelen promising intervention is him being true to and respectful of the treaty. 

Well, that's more of you believing he's being true to and respectful despite all signs pointing to the contrary (you don't get to see a single case of him dealing with anyone honestly until you hand him the crown, if i recall right)

[KnightofPhoenix]

tmp7704 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It was made clear that only the King of Orzammar can act on the treaty they had with the Wardens. Why does Harrowmont need to put it up for debate?

I'm not sure how the dwarves have it arranged, but it is possible while only the king can put the motion forward, the Assembly still has to accept it. Isn't it the reason why in the epiloque Bhelen dissolves the assembly, so he can rule completely unchecked?

That's after the Blight, which makes it irrelevent to the point at hand. Bhelen acting on the treaty proves that the matter doesn't need to be put up for debate.

Bhelen dissolves the Assembly to act on his reforms. The treaty was a non issue.

And I didnt' see Harrowmont acting honestly with anyone either.

[tmp7704]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It was made clear that only the King of Orzammar can act on the treaty they had with the Wardens. Why does Harrowmont need to put it up for debate?

I'm not sure how the dwarves have it arranged, but it is possible while only the king can put the motion forward, the Assembly still has to accept it. Isn't it the reason why in the epiloque Bhelen dissolves the assembly, so he can rule completely unchecked?

That's after the Blight, which makes it irrelevent to the point at hand. Bhelen acting on the treaty proves that the matter doesn't need to be put up for debate.

Uhmm, no. *If* there's mechanics in place which requires the king to get approval of the Assembly in important decisions then it didn't magically appear our of thin air after the Blight, but already was there when you spoke to both Bhelen and Harrowmont. As for it appear after the Blight it would require Bhelen to introduce it, in case you give the crown to him. Which is obviously a nonsense.

That Bhelen doesn't mention it at all but tries to make it sound like it's just a matter of his decision isn't really proof of anything but what was already pointed out -- that he's willing to lie and manipulate to achieve his personal goals. Which makes him unreliable ally as long as you try to remain objective.

We don't exactly know if Bhelen provided you the army with approval of the Assembly or without it. But considering it's the individual houses that provide the warriors, i doubt he could provide much of the force if the heads of the houses were against it and told him to go screw a nug.

And I didnt' see Harrowmont acting honestly with anyone either.

You don't? But you also don't get to see him actively cheating people, which was the whole point in the answer to your question what rational reasons one could possibly have to choose him over Bhelen.

Modifié par tmp7704, 05 juillet 2010 - 04:28 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

tmp7704 wrote...
Uhmm, no. *If* there's mechanics in place which requires the king to get approval of the Assembly in important decisions then it doesn't magically appear our of thin air after the Blight, but already was there when you speak to both Bhelen and Harrowmont. As for it appear after the Blight it would require Bhelen to introduce it, in case you give the crown to him. Which is obviously a nonsense.

I meant him dissolving the Assembly was after the Blight, as such it's obviously unrelated to the treaty issue, which is what you suggested was the reason why he dissolved it.

tmp7704 wrote...
We don't exactly know if Bhelen provided you the army with approval of the Assembly or without it. But considering it's the individual houses that provide the warriors, i doubt he could provide much of the force if the heads of the houses were against it and told him to go screw a nug.

Bhelen tells you he will send the army the moment you crown him. He didn't put the matter up for a vote, which suggests that such mechanism does not exist.
I don't recall if Harrowmont did the same, but that would contradict his earlier statement.

Plus, Harrowmont's inability to keep his own men and supporters loyal to him, would question his ability to earn the loyalty of the Assembly and the army and influence them into agreeing upon honorign the treaty.

You don't? But you also don't get to see him actively cheating people, which was the whole point in the answer to your question what rational reasons one could possibly have to choose him over Bhelen.

I see him sending fanatics at me and buying loyalty. Why should I think he is honest? He is a politician like all others. Albeit a bad one.
 
And my statement that there is only one smart reason to put him on the throne was a joke. I should have clarified.
A rational, if ultimately incorrect, reason to choose Harrowmont is that he is seemingly more experienced in both administration and war.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 05 juillet 2010 - 04:36 .

[Lady Jess]

tmp7704 wrote...

You don't? But you also don't get to see him actively cheating people, which was the whole point in the answer to your question what rational reasons one could possibly have to choose him over Bhelen.

A rational reason to choose Harrowmont, if you're not a DN it's pretty easy. your pc believes the facts presented. He killed one brother, framing the other brother, and poisoned his own father to get the throne in the first place. And you're kind of in a hurry, you need those troops...can your PC trust a man that very well may (and well, we know he did the brothers in if not Endrin, and even if he didn't poison endrin, what he did to his brothers still had a large hand in his death) have done all that, to fulfill his end of the bargain?

Both times I chose Harrowmont I started with Bhelen, and had the shaper confirm the forged documents. I then switched to Harrowmont when Jarvia came up, and that got me the proof of what he did to his brothers.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Lady Jess wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

You don't? But you also don't get to see him actively cheating people, which was the whole point in the answer to your question what rational reasons one could possibly have to choose him over Bhelen.

A rational reason to choose Harrowmont, if you're not a DN it's pretty easy. your pc believes the facts presented. He killed one brother, framing the other brother, and poisoned his own father to get the throne in the first place. And you're kind of in a hurry, you need those troops...can your PC trust a man that very well may (and well, we know he did the brothers in if not Endrin, and even if he didn't poison endrin, what he did to his brothers still had a large hand in his death) have done all that, to fulfill his end of the bargain?

Nope, no fact is presented implicating Bhelen in any murder. Just rumours. Rumours uttered by Harrowmont supporters I might add, which makes them unreliable.

In addition, only Harrowmont was with Endrin before he died. What's to say, for our PC, that Harrowmont wasn't the one who poisoned him and spread lies to harm his political opponent?

And I trust a pragmatic man that knows that Orzammar needs the surface to survive, to honor his deal.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 05 juillet 2010 - 04:39 .

[Sarah1281]

Nope, no fact is presented implicating Bhelen in any murder. Just rumours. Rumours uttered by Harrowmont supporters I might add, which makes them unreliable.

On the contrary, if you initially side with Bhelen and then either get cold feet or try to play both sides by going to Harrowmont and Dulin asks you to look for evidence that Bhelen did have Trian killed and framed the DN then you DO find letters from Bhelen (or possibly a known lackey of his) to the carta calling for Trian's death.

[Lady Jess]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Lady Jess wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

You don't? But you also don't get to see him actively cheating people, which was the whole point in the answer to your question what rational reasons one could possibly have to choose him over Bhelen.

A rational reason to choose Harrowmont, if you're not a DN it's pretty easy. your pc believes the facts presented. He killed one brother, framing the other brother, and poisoned his own father to get the throne in the first place. And you're kind of in a hurry, you need those troops...can your PC trust a man that very well may (and well, we know he did the brothers in if not Endrin, and even if he didn't poison endrin, what he did to his brothers still had a large hand in his death) have done all that, to fulfill his end of the bargain?

Nope, no fact is presented implicating Bhelen in any murder. Just rumours. Rumours uttered by Harrowmont supporters I might add, which makes them unreliable.

In addition, only Harrowmont was with Endrin before he died. What's to say, for our PC, that Harrowmont wasn't the one who poisoned him and spread lies to harm his political opponent?

And I trust a pragmatic man that knows that Orzammar needs the surface to survive, to honor his deal.

The Shaper proves the documents for Dace and Helmi are forged.
Jarvia's chest proves the murders.

But nothing any of us give you as a reason for siding with Harrowmont is going to work, so in the end you'll just have to play it that way because you WANT to, and have that be as rational a reason as anything else.

[Lady Jess]

Meanwhile...WANT DWARF+ZEV TENT SCENES DARNIT!!!

[Herr Uhl]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Nope, no fact is presented implicating Bhelen in any murder. Just rumours. Rumours uttered by Harrowmont supporters I might add, which makes them unreliable.

In addition, only Harrowmont was with Endrin before he died. What's to say, for our PC, that Harrowmont wasn't the one who poisoned him and spread lies to harm his political opponent?

And I trust a pragmatic man that knows that Orzammar needs the surface to survive, to honor his deal.

We have Trian's journal and the hit-list in Jarvia's place.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Nope, no fact is presented implicating Bhelen in any murder. Just rumours. Rumours uttered by Harrowmont supporters I might add, which makes them unreliable.

On the contrary, if you initially side with Bhelen and then either get cold feet or try to play both sides by going to Harrowmont and Dulin asks you to look for evidence that Bhelen did have Trian killed and framed the DN then you DO find letters from Bhelen (or possibly a known lackey of his) to the carta calling for Trian's death.

Hmm, I never knew we could do that.
 
Still I don't see why someone willing to kill his brother, has to be an idiot as to not send the army and fight the Blight with  the surface.

So that's not and never has been an issue for me, even had I known.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Lady Jess wrote...
The Shaper proves the documents for Dace and Helmi are forged.
Jarvia's chest proves the murders.

But nothing any of us give you as a reason for siding with Harrowmont is going to work, so in the end you'll just have to play it that way because you WANT to, and have that be as rational a reason as anything else.

Harrowmont sends fanatics to kill a Warden, and buys loyalty (this is not forged). He is a politician like others. Why should I trust him compeltely is beyond me.

If you read further up, I did say there are rational reasons to support Harrowmont and I did not say all of you are idiots for doing so. I should have clarified that I was joking.

[tmp7704]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I meant him dissolving the Assembly was after the Blight, as such it's obviously unrelated to the treaty issue, which is what you suggested was the reason why he dissolved it.

And my counter-point was, in order for it to be dissolved such rule (king has to have approval of Assembly in important decisions) had to exist already when Bhelen got the crown. Meaning it is not obviously unrelated because it would be in effect when the whole treaty following business was taking place.

Bhelen tells you he will send the army the moment you crown him. He didn't put the matter up for a vote, which suggests that such mechanism does not exist.

Again, this is what he tells you. Given his track record we have no reason to believe a single word of it. You can choose to trust him of course, but this is pure act of faith and requires you to disregard what you so far know about the man.

I see him sending fanatics at me and buying loyalty. Why should I think he is honest? He is a politician like all others. Albeit a bad one.

Considering you can get attacked by Bhelen's fanatics even long after Bhelen is already dead, i don't think these people are sent personally by those they try to support. And i don't think you can really look down at "buying loyalty" as something dishonest as long as the deals are actually done in square manner. Choosing one's side was based very much on what personal benefits one would get out of it back then, no matter how we may view it now -- the whole feudal system was openly based on this after all, that's how lesser lords would chose who they'd swear fealty to.

[Sarah1281]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

Nope, no fact is presented implicating Bhelen in any murder. Just rumours. Rumours uttered by Harrowmont supporters I might add, which makes them unreliable.

On the contrary, if you initially side with Bhelen and then either get cold feet or try to play both sides by going to Harrowmont and Dulin asks you to look for evidence that Bhelen did have Trian killed and framed the DN then you DO find letters from Bhelen (or possibly a known lackey of his) to the carta calling for Trian's death.

Hmm, I never knew we could do that.
 
Still I don't see why someone willing to kill his brother, has to be an idiot as to not send the army and fight the Blight with  the surface.

So that's not and never has been an issue for me, even had I known.

If you're playing a more moral or family-focused Warden (say, a HN who's still distraught that Fergus is missing and everyone else is dead and can't understand what sort of monster would do that to his own brother) then it might matter. I've done this dialogue tree before since I had a Warden who did believe the rumors but also didn't really care:
PC: A man ruthless enough to kill his own brothers?
Bhelen: If you believe that then why are you here?
PC: We don't need a good King right now, we need a strong one.

[tmp7704]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Hmm, I never knew we could do that.
 
Still I don't see why someone willing to kill his brother, has to be an idiot as to not send the army and fight the Blight with  the surface.

It's not exactly idiotic to let the surface fend for itself for a while. It is huge and its armies are much more numerous than what remains of the dwarves. They can take the blows and bleed instead, for a change and for few good years. Each day the darkspawn roams the surface is a breather for the dwarves, a better chance to regain some of their old places. The moment it ends it's back to the same old and pointless struggle in the darkness with few surfacers caring.

Plus, the weakened surface makes for more equal partner shall it come to trade and alliances. It makes a more desperate and willing buyer of the goods the dwarves can provide. It makes less of a threat if you consider the possibility of having a March declared against you. Really, the benefits can be quite obvious.

[KnightofPhoenix]

tmp7704 wrote...
And my counter-point was, in order for it to be dissolved such rule (king has to have approval of Assembly in important decisions) had to exist already when Bhelen got the crown. Meaning it is not obviously unrelated because it would be in effect when the whole treaty following business was taking place.

You are assuming that all acts have to pass throught the Assembly. While nothing suggests that, as the Dwarf guard says only the King of Orzammar can act upon the treaty.  
Bhelen declared his intentions in the Assembly and his crier. They didnt' say a word. As such, I do not believe such mechanism exists when dealign with the treaty.

 

Again, this is what he tells you. Given his track record we have no reason to believe a single word of it. You can choose to trust him of course, but this is pure act of faith and requires you to disregard what you so far know about the man.

That's quite a stretch to think that Bhelen is going to lie to you right in front of the Assembly.
A bigger stretch to think that he is going to not care about the surface that is instrumental to his political project.

Not saying that him lying isn't a possibility. But you seem to say that one has to have blind faith and be irrational when choosing Bhelen, which I believe is completely wrong (and I clarified that I didn't think there was only one reason to put Harrowmont).

And him doing what he needs to to get power, has little relevence to what he needs to do to ensure that his city survives. So it's realy a moot point for me.
But trusting the Assembly that just proved how devisive it is, to decide to help you? Well, forgive me when I say I am not impressed.

Considering you can get attacked by Bhelen's fanatics even long after Bhelen is already dead, i don't think these people are sent personally by those they try to support.

You can't know that about the fanatics until after. It is perfect reasonable to think that Harrowmont personally ordered them.

And seeing how Harrowmont was around Endrin before he died, what's to tell me he didn't kill him and lie? The fact that Bhelen might be a liar, isn't a reason why I should think HArrowmont is trustworthy. Not when I know that Orzammar's politics is like that.

[KnightofPhoenix]

tmp7704 wrote...
It's not exactly idiotic to let the surface fend for itself for a while.

It is idiotic because Orzammar happens to be right under Ferelden and not that deep. If the Blight reaches the Frostback mountains, they would crush Orzammar with ease.

tmp7704 wrote...
Plus, the weakened surface makes for more equal partner shall it come to trade and alliances. It makes a more desperate and willing buyer of the goods the dwarves can provide. It makes less of a threat if you consider the possibility of having a March declared against you. Really, the benefits can be quite obvious.

See above point.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 05 juillet 2010 - 05:08 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Anyways I gtg. See you guys tomorrow!

[tmp7704]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...
It's not exactly idiotic to let the surface fend for itself for a while.

It is idiotic because Orzammar happens to be right under Ferelden and not that deep. If the Blight reaches the Frostback mountains, they would crush Orzammar with ease.

Why is it supposed to be easier for the darkspawn to get to the Orzammar from the surface (through the massive defenses) when it so far failed to do that through the Deep Roads which lack these extra barriers?

Additionally the darkspawn isn't prevented from using the said Deep Roads to emerge wherever they darn please rather than slavishly follow the surface trails. They have much softer, easier and better targets if they head west and the faster they move there, the larger advantage of catching the enemies unprepared. It'd be pretty silly to waste time trying to squash few dwarves instead.

[tmp7704]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

You are assuming that all acts have to pass throught the Assembly. While nothing suggests that, as the Dwarf guard says only the King of Orzammar can act upon the treaty.

I suppose it's easiest to just check what is said in game:

PC: So you're going to give me my troops?
Harrowmont: It is hard to consider the threat of darkspawn on the surface when all we see is them retreating from our gates. (apologetic)
Harrowmont: Ultimately, the Assembly decides what troops to send. If they no longer fear civil war, they'll have no reason to hold back. (pointed)

so it'd seem simple enough. There is no law here, but while Bhelen promises you he'll send the troops, Harrowmont suggests the amount of help you're going to get is directly related to how the individual members of the Assembly perceive the threats. A reasonable point to make when it's these members of the Assembly who actually choose to field the warriors or not (aside from king's own)

You can't know that about the fanatics until after. It is perfect reasonable to think that Harrowmont personally ordered them.

That's true. But then it's not exactly betrayal when they attack you openly declaring they do that in the name of Harrowmont (or Bhelen) after you have equally openly aligned yourself with the other side, no? And we were discussing whether one of them appears less likely to keep his promises than the other.

And seeing how Harrowmont was around Endrin before he died, what's to tell me he didn't kill him and lie? The fact that Bhelen might be a liar, isn't a reason why I should think HArrowmont is trustworthy. Not when I know that Orzammar's politics is like that.

Yes, i had that doubt as well. But ultimately while you can suspect both of them, only one of them shows himself to act in manner which confirms these suspicions. Whether that makes Harrowmont a honest man or just a better liar can be debated, but i'd still consider it a risky decision to pick a proven liar over a potential one.

[Gilsa]

A bit late to the Harrowmont discussion, but I wanted to add some material:

Starting with the honesty thing, I don't think he actively lies or goes out of his way to misrepresent information.

- Vartag is the one that gives fake papers and pretends Harrowmont is cheating two deshyrs.
- Harrowmont could have easily blamed Endrin's death on Bhelen, but he flat out says that if Bhelen did it, he does not see how it was possible. He exonerates Bhelen from this. Sure, he could have done it himself, but why admit he was alone with Endrin in his final hours and make himself look guilty?
- I had a DC game where he sided with Harrowmont and raised the issue of his casteless sister. Harrowmont made no promises to take care of her. He simply said that she was more the responsibility of House Aeducan. We never spoke again about the DC situation. He did not offer anything to the commoner to raise status or anything -- just treated him like any other warden. So while he doesn't improve the caste system, he's not lying or making promises he can't keep.
- And I agree with tmp, I thought the fanatics were acting on their own accord. Hence the term fanatics. =p

The strong motivations for siding with Harrowmont are largely for family reasons. KoP, you look at things from a political and strategical perspective and I think that colors how you play your games. I've seen you speak of your own RL family with fondness and it's obvious you have a lot of respect for your dad. What if your dad was King Endrin? 
- If your DN had no issues with how King Endrin rules Orzammar, why not carry out the final wish of the last king in that Bhelen does not rule? If he feels Bhelen would not be good for the dwarven people (Bhelen is good short-term, but what about long-term after he's established himself as a tyrant?), why question his word?
- Harrowmont was part of the family and treats you with respect and warmth. In fact, he's the only one that believes in your innocence. He was desperately looking for a reason that you didn't kill Trian during the confrontation. He fought, however ineffectively, to save you. He is the one that sent Gorim along with a message about Duncan being in the Deep Roads so you'd have a chance to get out. He takes whatever message you have to your father before you are exiled. He could have easily turned his back on you to save his own skin, but he was a kind face in your final moments if you had not found Duncan.
- When he finds out about the DN's bastard child, he immediately takes the child in while Bhelen torments the DN over this.
- If Harrowmont had known you were in Orzammar, he would have embraced you immediately, I'm reasonably sure of it. You just don't because Dulin doesn't trust you and is trying to protect Harrowmont from being fooled by those sneaky Aeducans.

So that's why, politics aside, it's hard for me to look at Harrowmont in the face at the assembly and condemn a man who fought so hard to save me. Even though Harrowmont is a weaker man politically, you have to keep in mind that he never planned on being king. He was going to live out his days being King Endrin's loyal second while Bhelen plotted for years to overthrow the Aeducan family. He had half of the Assembly firmly in his grasp, which put Harrowmont at a significant disadvantage. Anyone in Harrowmont's position would have been just as hard-pressed. Harrowmont chooses to fulfill the wishes of his former king out of loyalty, despite his own shortcomings.

Don't know if any of that helps. If you can't find a reason to side with Harrowmont and still enjoy that game, I wouldn't really waste your time because you'd just be half-assing it at that point. I have two DN games where each sided with a different candidate just in case the ramifications actually do play out in an expansion. (Not holding my breath -- Awakening couldn't be bothered to list a default dwarf king for the Orlesian warden.)

[Sarah1281]

Gilsa wrote...

A bit late to the Harrowmont discussion, but I wanted to add some material:

Starting with the honesty thing, I don't think he actively lies or goes out of his way to misrepresent information.

- Vartag is the one that gives fake papers and pretends Harrowmont is cheating two deshyrs.
- Harrowmont could have easily blamed Endrin's death on Bhelen, but he flat out says that if Bhelen did it, he does not see how it was possible. He exonerates Bhelen from this. Sure, he could have done it himself, but why admit he was alone with Endrin in his final hours and make himself look guilty?
- I had a DC game where he sided with Harrowmont and raised the issue of his casteless sister. Harrowmont made no promises to take care of her. He simply said that she was more the responsibility of House Aeducan. We never spoke again about the DC situation. He did not offer anything to the commoner to raise status or anything -- just treated him like any other warden. So while he doesn't improve the caste system, he's not lying or making promises he can't keep.
- And I agree with tmp, I thought the fanatics were acting on their own accord. Hence the term fanatics. =p

The strong motivations for siding with Harrowmont are largely for family reasons. KoP, you look at things from a political and strategical perspective and I think that colors how you play your games. I've seen you speak of your own RL family with fondness and it's obvious you have a lot of respect for your dad. What if your dad was King Endrin? 
- If your DN had no issues with how King Endrin rules Orzammar, why not carry out the final wish of the last king in that Bhelen does not rule? If he feels Bhelen would not be good for the dwarven people (Bhelen is good short-term, but what about long-term after he's established himself as a tyrant?), why question his word?
- Harrowmont was part of the family and treats you with respect and warmth. In fact, he's the only one that believes in your innocence. He was desperately looking for a reason that you didn't kill Trian during the confrontation. He fought, however ineffectively, to save you. He is the one that sent Gorim along with a message about Duncan being in the Deep Roads so you'd have a chance to get out. He takes whatever message you have to your father before you are exiled. He could have easily turned his back on you to save his own skin, but he was a kind face in your final moments if you had not found Duncan.
- When he finds out about the DN's bastard child, he immediately takes the child in while Bhelen torments the DN over this.
- If Harrowmont had known you were in Orzammar, he would have embraced you immediately, I'm reasonably sure of it. You just don't because Dulin doesn't trust you and is trying to protect Harrowmont from being fooled by those sneaky Aeducans.

So that's why, politics aside, it's hard for me to look at Harrowmont in the face at the assembly and condemn a man who fought so hard to save me. Even though Harrowmont is a weaker man politically, you have to keep in mind that he never planned on being king. He was going to live out his days being King Endrin's loyal second while Bhelen plotted for years to overthrow the Aeducan family. He had half of the Assembly firmly in his grasp, which put Harrowmont at a significant disadvantage. Anyone in Harrowmont's position would have been just as hard-pressed. Harrowmont chooses to fulfill the wishes of his former king out of loyalty, despite his own shortcomings.

Don't know if any of that helps. If you can't find a reason to side with Harrowmont and still enjoy that game, I wouldn't really waste your time because you'd just be half-assing it at that point. I have two DN games where each sided with a different candidate just in case the ramifications actually do play out in an expansion. (Not holding my breath -- Awakening couldn't be bothered to list a default dwarf king for the Orlesian warden.)

Well said, Gilsa.

People always say that for the Surfacers you can really go either way but for the dwarves you're choice of candidate is pretty much set. While I'd agree that for the DC it doesn't make much sense to side with Harrowmont in the face or your relative ignorance about the candidates and Rica's own position, my Surfacers always go with Bhelen when they hear (from Harrowmont's criers, ironically) that he doesn't support the caste system and having been to Dust Town.  With my DNs it's a much harder choice even if Bhelen does screw you over in the Origin which is why I have two DNs who do two different things.

Bhelen might be a stronger King but it might not last, you might be able to succeed Harrowmont, Bhelen is your brother and it might not be personal, Bhelen will keep your family in power, Bhelen's issues might not make returning to Orzammar very practical, Harrowmont was your biggest defender and respecting your father's wishes, siding with Harrowmont might give you the opportunity to get rid of Vartag, Bhelen might be able to succeed Harrowmont if he doesn't freak out and commit suicide...it could go either way.

[Lady Jess]

"Oh...this is not good"





REALLY not GOOD!





Home Sweet Cell





My Salroka





Thank you gilsa for the voiceset idea...





Love Duncan's "I can, and I AM!" But I have to reload, because I didn't get to talk to Rica with "Sodding right I will, let's go!"