146 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarah1281]

2. Why do people say it's justifiable for Loghain to be killed because he killed so many grey wardens and they say it wasn't justifiable for Loghain to be doing what he was doing because of the Orlesians? the Orlesians had killed his father, raped and killed his mom when he was a child, performed awful deeds to the citizens, etc. Now, i'm not saying either is justified (killing Loghain or his actions) but isn't it a double standard to say one is justified over the other?

The Grey Wardens are not Orlesians. Some of them may be Orlesians themselves, but the Order is not automatically in Celene's pocket seeking to reconquer Ferelden. The occupation was over thirty years ago and he has every right to deeply loathe Orlais. He just takes his paranoia too far and seeks to kill any GW who survived Ostagar out of fear that Ferelden will be conquered again even when it goes against common sense (such as if you're a HN).



Killing him do to that isn't out of revenge but because he's clearly not thinking clearly, isn't likely to stop being paraoid, and is more dangerous than people are willing to risk.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I will not get into another Loghain debate thread, despite the fact that absolute statements like "This is evil" REALLY tick me off.

However, I will provide an example of what happened in Thedas. During the 3rd Blight, the tevinter Imperium and Orlais joined forfces and freed Nevarra and Hunter Fell. Immeidately after, Orlais invaded Nevarra and Tevinter invaded Hunter Fell. With that in mind, one could understand why Loghain would hate the idea of Orlais coming to Ferelden's "rescue" against a unconfirmed Blight. The Grey Wardens associating themselves with Orlais (having an army of Orlesians come with them) was a big mistake.

With that, I am off.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 14 avril 2010 - 11:26 .

[Sarah1281]

4. If you question him on this he actually thought he was doing the right thing. the slaves in Tevinter, apparently, have a much better living condition than in Fereldan and they can much more easily get out of being a second class citizen

He thought the Alienage was beyond salvageable, which may be a fair opinion, but slaves in Tevinter are not NEARLY treated like that. Where did you hear that? It sounds like Leliana's description of Orlais. In Tevinter, they're just as likely as not to be sacrificed in a blood magic ritual.

[Thalorin1919]

zapkeet wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

From an RP perspective, my characters killed Loghain because:

1) He abandoned Cailan. Sure, Cailan was arrogant, but he was the king and Loghain's son-in-law as well. Loghain had a duty to try to save the king, at the very least to go through with the plan to try to win the battle. Walking away when even his second in command was shocked tells me he was purposefully leaving his king to die. Given her shock, I am not at all convinced that timely lighting of the beacon was an issue.

2) He took in Howe and rewarded him for his treachery.

3) Even if he had for some reason left Cailan on the battlefield to save Ferelden from the king's stupidity, that doesn't explain blaming the Wardens and hiring mercenaries to kill them.

4) He allied with slavers. This is Evil.

5) He contracted a maleficar to kill Arl Eamon. This is Evil.

Whatever Loghain might have been before his fear of Orlais took over no longer counts. He decides what is best for Ferelden is for him to be in charge and do some horrible things. For these crimes and to prevent any further threat from him, he deserves summary execution and he gets it from all of my Wardens.

1. it's mentioned in RTO (and i believe the lead author said this as well) that if Loghain had charged he and his men would have died, pretty much everyone (including Cailen) knew they were fighting a nearly suicidal mission.

2. This is true, but he wasn't directly responsible for HOwe's crimes

3. Duncan didn't want them to leave Ostagar and tried to prevent Loghain from doing so.  Also they were late at lighting the beacon, in a way it WAS their fault, a very minor one, but still

4.  If you question him on this he actually thought he was doing the right thing.  the slaves in Tevinter, apparently, have a much better living condition than in Fereldan and they can much more easily get out of being a second class citizen

5. It was meant to put him in a coma until after the landsmeet

Actually I thought Duncan did want him to leave Ostagar? He said he wanted the king to wait for reinforcement, so I figured they would move back.

But dont really try to justify 4 and 5. A slave is a slave, whether they would be treated good or not. You dont just "sell" people. And with five, where did you hear that it was just to put him in a coma? It seemed like Loghain wanted Eamon dead.

[Raiil]

It is partially a Loghain vs. Alistair debate.





I've never spared Loghain, and the reasons are varied. Is Alistair a factor? With a bit of metagaming, absolutely; I've built him into my perfect tank and I'm not about to let that go. In game, my PC would have taken the 'lock him up and throw away the key' option if it had been avaliable for execution later, as I think a private one would have been preferable. However, game mechanics dictate that it's not, so he dies.





As the PC, Loghain has lied endless times, including framing the Grey Wardens for essentially treason. If you think he's not power hungry, consider the fact that he has a regent's crown made for him that can be stolen. He has damn near broken Ferelden- that alone being enough to merit serious punishment- but the fact that he has lied, killed, and condoned acts of slavery and murder, all of which is illegal in Ferelden, is enough to merit his punishments. He is more dangerous alive, from the perspective of the PC, who has no idea that he can be redeemed. In normal times, locking him up would be better but at the brink of annihilation, what must be done is done, from her perspective.





There is a measure of vengence in that matter, but I never declared my PC to all that great at being a Grey Warden- in fact, as far as they go, I think Alistair and my PC are both kind of crap Wardens at the whole 'whatever it takes' mentality.

[GavrielKay]

@zapkeet

Loghain was quite justified in killing as many Orlesian invaders (or even Ferelden sympathizers) as he pleased during the war against Orlais. But that war ended years ago and now there is a new battle. This battle is against the Darkspawn. Anything Loghain does that puts Ferelden in worse shape to fight the new war can't be excused just because he still remembers the old one. Loghain shows that he will put Ferelden in danger of falling to the Darkspawn in order to avoid a scant possibility of danger from Orlesian Wardens.



To me anyway, that is different from my character deciding that Loghain has crossed too many lines and poses a continued threat. If he had won many battles and shown great promise in defeating the Darkspawn then perhaps you could say my Warden should not have let her feelings get in the way of what's best for the country. But I couldn't possibly argue that Loghain's actions were in any way best, or even good for Ferelden.

[zapkeet]

alrighty, you guys win. Thank you, that decision has been seriously nagging at me, I definitely see why Loghain could have been considered "evil"



granted, I still wasn't a big fan of Alistair's reaction (and i KNOW Duncan wouldn't have been either) but that can't be helped I guess. Thank you very much everyone

[Sarah1281]

I do think you're right and that some people do kill him for Alistair, but that isn't the only reason available.

[LadyDamodred]

zapkeet wrote...

INteresting and slightly valid points everyone, there are just two points I want to say


1. About the entire "it's just like alistair letting Howe live and wanting to join" I would be a hypocrite if I said that I was against that. Killing Howe wouldn't have brought my family back and if i could have spared him, i would have. Same thing if it was real life, I think it would be disrespecting my family by killing someone (also a brother, husband, father, cousin, etc. despite his evilness) just for my family members who couldn't come back. Don't get me wrong, i'd have a major "you give me a reason and I won't hesitate to kill you" viewpoint, but I wouldn't kill him for the sake of revenge

2. Why do people say it's justifiable for Loghain to be killed because he killed so many grey wardens and they say it wasn't justifiable for Loghain to be doing what he was doing because of the Orlesians? the Orlesians had killed his father, raped and killed his mom when he was a child, performed awful deeds to the citizens, etc. Now, i'm not saying either is justified (killing Loghain or his actions) but isn't it a double standard to say one is justified over the other?

More than slightly valid.  That would be like someone calling your points 'slightly valid'.

As for Howe, you would seriously spare him?  Why?  He MURDERED your family.  So kidding killing him won't bring them back.  But there's a reason it's a crime and there is a punishment for it.  There's also the fact that your parents ASKED you to take vengeance on him for them.  >.>  Sorry if I seem a little irate about this, but the thought of sparing Howe makes zero sense to me.

[zapkeet]

LadyDamodred wrote...

zapkeet wrote...

INteresting and slightly valid points everyone, there are just two points I want to say


1. About the entire "it's just like alistair letting Howe live and wanting to join" I would be a hypocrite if I said that I was against that. Killing Howe wouldn't have brought my family back and if i could have spared him, i would have. Same thing if it was real life, I think it would be disrespecting my family by killing someone (also a brother, husband, father, cousin, etc. despite his evilness) just for my family members who couldn't come back. Don't get me wrong, i'd have a major "you give me a reason and I won't hesitate to kill you" viewpoint, but I wouldn't kill him for the sake of revenge

2. Why do people say it's justifiable for Loghain to be killed because he killed so many grey wardens and they say it wasn't justifiable for Loghain to be doing what he was doing because of the Orlesians? the Orlesians had killed his father, raped and killed his mom when he was a child, performed awful deeds to the citizens, etc. Now, i'm not saying either is justified (killing Loghain or his actions) but isn't it a double standard to say one is justified over the other?

More than slightly valid.  That would be like someone calling your points 'slightly valid'.

As for Howe, you would seriously spare him?  Why?  He MURDERED your family.  So kidding killing him won't bring them back.  But there's a reason it's a crime and there is a punishment for it.  There's also the fact that your parents ASKED you to take vengeance on him for them.  >.>  Sorry if I seem a little irate about this, but the thought of sparing Howe makes zero sense to me.

Like i said, it's the entire "two wrongs don't make a right" viewpoint

[KnightofPhoenix]

LadyDamodred wrote...
More than slightly valid.  That would be like someone calling your points 'slightly valid'.

There are people who won't even concede that sparing Loghain is valid. So I think his terminology isn't that bad.

And him not wanting to kill Howe is also valid. If Howe was useful and showed a bit of remorse, I would have spared him. But my logic and the logic of the OP are different.   

[LadyDamodred]

zapkeet wrote...
Like i said, it's the entire "two wrongs don't make a right" viewpoint

It is not about two wrongs.  What do you think was going to happen to Howe in the end anyway?  He just gets to go back to Amaranthine or something?  He murdered people.  He was going to die anyway.

[BHRamsay]

     Just as an aside, Loghain, if he had been locked up, would not have been locked up for long. Anora was angling for his being spared and, I have little doubt, would have found a way to have him released.
                                                                                                                                                                          Alister has the right of it about that family -- MacTair's think they know what's best for everyone else and the rest of us should just get out of their way and let them do whatever they feel they need to.

    *edit*

If it were not for the Alister's inexperience I would happily see a Anora imprisioned or worse. -- She is just a little too cold-blooded for my use.

I have no idea why so many guys want to tap that.

Modifié par BHRamsay, 15 avril 2010 - 12:39 .

[Sarah1281]

It is not about two wrongs. What do you think was going to happen to Howe in the end anyway? He just gets to go back to Amaranthine or something? He murdered people. He was going to die anyway.

I agree that sparing Howe as he was was impractical. He wasn't even remotely sorry and wouldn't cooperate. If he had, who knows? Lock him up in Fort Drakon. And him murdering people means nothing. The Warden & co. murder people. You'd have to get into the specifics in order to insist he needs to die (and there are a lo of specifics).

[LadyDamodred]

Yes, but he murdered a noble family. If nothing else, the Landsmeet would call for his execution.

[highcastle]

Here's the thing, and the reason why most of my characters kill Loghain:

He committed regicide once before. He's a clever man, devious even. He's demonstrated that he's not above using that mind to work around those he disagrees with. As such, I don't trust him. I don't want him at my back, not when he's proven untrustworthy. Al, on the other hand, has proven himself. He may have character flaws, but I'm aware of them at this point. And loyalty isn't one of them.

Also, my elves kill him because of his hand in the slave ring, and my human nobles kill him because of his connection to Howe.

I liked Loghain in the prequel novels, but I just can't justify letting him live. It has to do with a trust issue. Plus, Anora is clearly out for herself. She was spineless when she had the throne (unable to control her father), and at the same time ruthless enough to want Al out of the picture. She's a little schizophrenic, and I'm not about to make her queen for good. So she's out, Al's up, and that still means Loghain has to die.

[Val Seleznyov]

I thought that Loghain partly allied himself with the Tevinter slavers to raise funds for the war effort. On that basis, it's reprehensible, but kind of reasonable.



As a Grey Warden we're supposed to do what is necessary. Loghain was a leader too. He may not have drank from a goblet of darkspawn blood, but he was doing what he thought was necessary.



By the end of the game i came to see Loghain as a little like Saren from Mass Effect. Not exactly an anti-hero, but he did a lot of messed up things because he felt it was for the greater good.

[Sarah1281]

She's a little schizophrenic, and I'm not about to make her queen for good.

How is she schizophrenic?

[Reaverwind]

AwesomeEffect2 wrote...

I believe Loghain wanted to protect his country. But in my opinion he deserved to die.
Leaving the king and trying to submit others to his regency caused a civil war. Thousands and thousand have died because of this. Isn't this a good enough reason.
And he also tried to kill the remaining Wardens in Fereldan and if he accomplished that then there wouldn't be any Fereldan. The orlesians would then probably occupy the rest of Fereldan after their wardens kill the archdemon.

No, there would have been no Fereldan to occupy. Logically, Fereldan would have been written off as a lost cause if the 2 remaining Wardens hadn't managed to put together an alliance willing to save the country. The Wardens themselves have historically needed the backing of nations to defeat blights - and I don't see Orlay willing to come in and save the collective asses of Fereldan after Loghain's shenaningans. With that in mind - it's off with the moron's head.

[LadyDamodred]

Sarah1281 wrote...

She's a little schizophrenic, and I'm not about to make her queen for good.

How is she schizophrenic?

She's not schizophrenic, she's a lying, devious b*tch.  >.>

[Raiil]

Anora's not schizophrenic. And she's not a horrible person either. She is someone who was moulded into believing that she would be at least partially responsible for ruling Ferelden. And as it turns out, that was correct. While I'm not entirely sympathetic to Anora, it's not just a matter of power, it's a matter that if you were to deprive her of being Queen, you would be destroying the only thing she knew how to do, and no one would ever want to lose that. She is a political entity and she does it well. And while I do believe she does want power, I also believe that she loves Ferelden and will do nothing to harm it.





I think she makes a fine queen, which is enough to plop her on the throne whilst I take my merry band off to continue saving the world after the Blight ends. (Well, Alistair, Zevran and Dog take off with me anyways.)

[BHRamsay]

Old Nan in the HN origin tells a story that very much applies here. about the prideful War Hound who's arrogance and bullying leads to him being cast out and torn apart by the townspeople.



Whatever Loghain's reasonings for his actions. the moment he placed his own ideals and self interests above his oaths to the king and the people, he betrayed both. As a Soldier, as a General and as a Ferelden Lord his obligation was to serve his King, support his Commander-in-Chief and act as an example to his vessels and soldiers of decorum and reverence toward their liege.

Under a monarchy a bad king is still a king...a stupid king is still a king and Calian was neither bad nor was he stupid ... considering Calian couldn't get respect from his father-in-law, his wife or his uncle -- all of whom questioned him publicly and persistently, It is no wonder he was so eager to prove himself he placed himself in harm's way.

[EmperorSahlertz]

BHRamsay wrote...
Under a monarchy a bad king is still a king...a stupid king is still a king and Calian was neither bad nor was he stupid ... considering Calian couldn't get respect from his father-in-law, his wife or his uncle -- all of whom questioned him publicly and persistently, It is no wonder he was so eager to prove himself he placed himself in harm's way.

Under Feudalism a bad king gets exiled or killed and the council picks a new king... And Cailan certainly wasn't a good king. A good man perhaps, but not a good king.