118 réponses à ce sujet

[Layn]

i'd just like to know if the people who feel that Loghain deserves to die are in favour of the death sentence in real life

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Crrash wrote...

i'd just like to know if the people who feel that Loghain deserves to die are in favour of the death sentence in real life

Yes, I am, as a case by case basis. Not every case deserves the death sentance. But there are cases that do.

Loghain is one of those cases. We call it high treason, where his crimes cost thousands of lives, doomed thousands more, and set the stage of total annihilation of his people and his culture because of personal biases and reasons. Oh, and the torture and condoning of slavery and exploitation don't help his case much either.

If that doesn't deserve the death penalty, I don't know what does. At least when you kill Loghain, it's alot less painful a death than the many others who were killed because of him. And leaving him alive would cause serious problems in the future once the whole blight thing is settled.

[Layn]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

If that doesn't deserve the death penalty, I don't know what does.

imho nothing does.

just goes to show why no one can agree whats the right thing to do with Loghain.

also how awesome is it that a videogame sparked a mature discussion about a death sentence?

[TeleProd]

I wanted him to live but Alistair was more important. As a Fereldan noble, Loghain was a hero to me and he would've made a great asset for the Blight. I also saw similarities with my character. Both rose by chance to battle against a great enemy, doing what they must to win. Still, I couldn't just kill Alistair, my friend, over the guy who has made my life difficult. This choice made me feel for the first time after the beginning like I'm not the one in control of the world. That also made him realise that maybe its time for him to leave saving the world to others after the Archdemon is killed.

[Galad22]

Crrash wrote...

i'd just like to know if the people who feel that Loghain deserves to die are in favour of the death sentence in real life

I initially wanted to spare him, but Alistair for me is much more important, and Alistair is completely correct in his assesment of Loghains character.

But no in real life I don't think nothing deserves death penalty, however this is a game and Loghain in this game had no proplems killing anyone that got in his way. So it is for me in the end just fair that he tastes his own poison in the end.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Crrash wrote...

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

If that doesn't deserve the death penalty, I don't know what does.

imho nothing does.

just goes to show why no one can agree whats the right thing to do with Loghain.

also how awesome is it that a videogame sparked a mature discussion about a death sentence?

 

Yes, totally agreed there. This game does really bring up and show how very grey and difficult choices are. Loghain is a great villian, because he is not the simple cackling evil ""bwahahahahahahah"" type. He was a hero at one point who had endured horrible things at the hand of his oppresors and ended up freeing his country. And, if you talk to Anora in Eamon's house, you get to ask her about her father, and she really shows a man who is not a totally evil bastard, but is very human and has loves and human traits of his own. Which is why it puts weight on the descision to kill him.

He is similar in many ways to real world "villians"". In my example of Hitler, a study of his life shows he was once a shy, senstivie artist who loved his mother and became a vegetarian because he hated cruelty to animals. Yet given the opportunity, I would not have hestiated to remove his head, either. I'm not a blood thirsty fiend who looks forward to killing people, but there are simply some people that really need it.

As Zevran so eloquently put it "Some people just need assassinating""

Like I said, Bioware did an excellent job in doing these moral, social, and personal dilemas.

[Jaryd theBlackDragon]

Koyasha wrote...

Whatever one's opinion of Loghain's crimes or actions, Alistair demanding that he be killed no matter what, even when Riordan says that there are compelling reasons to have as many Grey Wardens as possible available to fight the Archdemon is damning, and shows he is putting his personal vengeance and sense of justice above the Grey Warden philosophy of defeating the Blight at all costs. Worse, if you choose to let Loghain live, Alistair actually abandons you and the fight, essentially saying 'screw the nation and everyone in it, if I can't get my revenge you can live or die without my help.'
Loghain, on the other hand, would make an excellent Grey Warden. In the course of the game, the only person more dedicated to victory, no matter the cost, is Branka. That is what Grey Wardens do, and Alistair has failed to learn the lesson Duncan taught from the very beginning: "Grey Wardens do whatever is necessary to end the Blight."

This is exactly how I saw it as well, I felt Alistair failed Duncan by throwing a fit at the Landsmeet and I'm pretty sure he'd have turned around if the devs had given you the option of pointing this out to him, which they sadly didn't.

[vocalemuse]

I have to say I'd feel the same way that Alistair feels at the Landsmeet, I do not take betrayal lightly and I'd have killed Loghain too. Think of the many lives that were lost at Ostagar, if that doesn't move you to reconsider letting him live just because he 'acts' remorseful... then I don't know what would.

As for the death penalty thing, I am for it in real life. As the comedian Ron White said, "Some states are trying to abolish the death penalty. Mine is putting in an express lane." xD

Modifié par vocalemuse, 05 décembre 2009 - 10:45 .

[Kuravid]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

Yes, I am, as a case by case basis. Not every case deserves the death sentance. But there are cases that do.

Loghain is one of those cases. We call it high treason, where his crimes cost thousands of lives, doomed thousands more, and set the stage of total annihilation of his people and his culture because of personal biases and reasons. Oh, and the torture and condoning of slavery and exploitation don't help his case much either.

If that doesn't deserve the death penalty, I don't know what does. At least when you kill Loghain, it's alot less painful a death than the many others who were killed because of him. And leaving him alive would cause serious problems in the future once the whole blight thing is settled.

First, let me say this: I am no bleeding heart liberal. Okay, now that's out of the way : there is no logical argument in existence that justifies the death penalty. Not one human being, regardless of their history, deserves to die more so than another. The only reason why anyone would ever consider the death penalty for someone is because of how they feel about that person (i.e. they seek vengeance on the death of a loved one). 

Loghain's crimes were terrible, and there is no excusing that. At the Landsmeet, Alistair wants him executed because Alistair feels scorned and heartbroken over something that has already happened that he has refused to let go of. The problem, really, is no longer Loghain: the problem is Alistair's inability to take control of his own emotions. 

And, really, killing Loghain surely doesn't bring Duncan nor the dead wardens back. 

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Kuravid wrote...



First, let me say this: I am no bleeding heart liberal. Okay, now that's out of the way : there is no logical argument in existence that justifies the death penalty. Not one human being, regardless of their history, deserves to die more so than another. The only reason why anyone would ever consider the death penalty for someone is because of how they feel about that person (i.e. they seek vengeance on the death of a loved one). 

Loghain's crimes were terrible, and there is no excusing that. At the Landsmeet, Alistair wants him executed because Alistair feels scorned and heartbroken over something that has already happened that he has refused to let go of. The problem, really, is no longer Loghain: the problem is Alistair's inability to take control of his own emotions. 

And, really, killing Loghain surely doesn't bring Duncan nor the dead wardens back. 

Nor am I a conservative of any sort. I still believe the death penalty is warranted in certain cases. I do believe it justified in certain situations.

There are some crimes that "pennance" and atonement simply do not cut it for. Your average murderer? Life sentance is fine for me. Most murders are done on an impulse or out of a moment of rage, passion, whatever. Life in prison for them.

But cold, calculating, planned, knowing murder, costing thousands their lives? No. Actions carry consequences, and Loghain made a conscious, planned out choice to do so. He knew what the consequences were, and his intentions and plans do not help his case much more.

Besides, Loghain was hardly helpless. He fought you or Alistair in battle, he lost, thus, its not your typical ""death sentance"". He technically dies fighting.

I do not believe mercy is something everyone has some god-given right too. I only think mercy should be given when there is really good reason. Can't think of any for Loghain, sorry. And from a practical point of view, his continued existance could prove problematic in the future.

[Mnemnosyne]

Kuravid wrote...

there is no logical argument in existence that justifies the death penalty.

Yes there is.  It costs less to kill someone than keep them imprisoned indefinitely, and it completely removes any chance of them harming another again, unlike imprisonment which there is a chance they could escape from and harm people once more.  You can say there's no "moral" argument for the death penalty (according to your view of morality), but from a logical standpoint, death is the most efficient penalty to impose on someone for any serious crime, when the person has no specific, objective usefulness to you or your society alive.

If you think Loghain's crimes were unforgivable and he deserves to be punished for them, executing him is logical, because otherwise there's no way to know if he will, at some point in the future, gather enough support to free himself and attempt another takeover of the country.  It doesn't really seem in-character for him to do so, but again, if you feel he needs to be punished to the point of imprisoning him for the rest of his life, then you can't ignore the possibility.

Of course, in this situation there's no logical reason for executing Loghain.  He is known to be a brilliant general, a hero to the people of Ferelden, and Riordan says there's compelling reasons to have more Grey Wardens available.  He acknowledges the threat of the Blight and has no issue following you into battle at that point, doing what you tell him to.  Vengeance is the only reason not to follow Riordan's advice at that point, and make the best use of Loghain as you possibly can.

[Kuravid]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

Nor am I a conservative of any sort. I still believe the death penalty is warranted in certain cases. I do believe it justified in certain situations.

There are some crimes that "pennance" and atonement simply do not cut it for. Your average murderer? Life sentance is fine for me. Most murders are done on an impulse or out of a moment of rage, passion, whatever. Life in prison for them.

First, some definitions.

There is a difference between murder and killing. For example, if someone attacks you and the only possible way for you to defend yourself is by killing that person, then killing is justified. You are trying to protect your own life from harm and you have the right to do it. Murder, on the other hand, is a premeditated plan to take a human life.

The death penalty is a premeditated plan to take a human life.

So, you tell me that the death penalty is justified in certain instances. Well, then, murder, too, is justified in certain instances. That's all that I'm saying. If you justify the death penalty, you justify murder. If you take a human life, then it is just as equally all right for another person to take your life. 

And to say that some people are beyond redemption is to say that some people are "subhuman" and that, unfortunately, is biologically untrue.

If you murder Loghain, then you're no better than he is. You're agreeing with him on every horrible thing he has done, the most horrible being murder. 

Modifié par Kuravid, 06 décembre 2009 - 02:30 .

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Kuravid wrote...




And to say that some people are beyond redemption is to say that some people are "subhuman" and that, unfortunately, is biologically untrue.

I disagree. Not even in the same class. People are born what they are. Comparing a person as potentially sub-human is not even in the same class. The idea of "subhumans"" is based on an idea that people born a certain way are unworthy of life by virtue of their birth and biological attributes. People simply have no control over such things.

People, however, do have control over the choices and descisions they make in life. And in some cases, those choices shape them and lead them to a point of no return. But in the end, they themselves made such choices, the consequences they face are a result.

If you murder Loghain, then you're no better than he is. You're agreeing with him on every horrible thing he has done, the most horrible being murder. 

I must disagree. For starters, it's not murder. You kill Loghain in a duel. He is armed. He loses. You can choose to spare him, but I do not consider killing him murder. He picked up his sword and fought you of his own free will. The consequences of such a duel are known, and he accepts as such.

And considering the game, you spend plenty of time killing more than darkspawn.

Its merely a case of Loghain's own chickens coming home to roost. Live by the sword, die by it. Your own character, regardless of origin, will face this reality soon enough. Why should Loghain be spared the same bitter lesson?

[Kuravid]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

Kuravid wrote...




And to say that some people are beyond redemption is to say that some people are "subhuman" and that, unfortunately, is biologically untrue.

I disagree. Not even in the same class. People are born what they are. Comparing a person as potentially sub-human is not even in the same class. The idea of "subhumans"" is based on an idea that people born a certain way are unworthy of life by virtue of their birth and biological attributes. People simply have no control over such things.  

You said that some people are not deserving of mercy. My response to you was that above. I didn't say that people are subhuman, I said that because they are human they are worthy of redemption. To say that they are not is like saying "some people are subhuman." I'm just curious as to why you think only some people are worthy of mercy or redemption.

People, however, do have control over the choices and descisions they make in life. And in some cases, those choices shape them and lead them to a point of no return. But in the end, they themselves made such choices, the consequences they face are a result.

A point of no return to what? Humanity? 

I must disagree. For starters, it's not murder. You kill Loghain in a duel. He is armed. He loses. You can choose to spare him, but I do not consider killing him murder. He picked up his sword and fought you of his own free will. The consequences of such a duel are known, and he accepts as such.

And considering the game, you spend plenty of time killing more than darkspawn.

Its merely a case of Loghain's own chickens coming home to roost. Live by the sword, die by it. Your own character, regardless of origin, will face this reality soon enough. Why should Loghain be spared the same bitter lesson?

Yes, you spend a lot of time killing a bunch of people. However, the choice of whether or not to kill those hostile NPCs isn't really provided to you most of the time.

The point where "duel" transitions to murder is when you are given the option to spare his life.

[Mnemnosyne]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

I must disagree. For starters, it's not murder. You kill Loghain in a duel. He is armed. He loses. You can choose to spare him, but I do not consider killing him murder. He picked up his sword and fought you of his own free will. The consequences of such a duel are known, and he accepts as such.

Technically, no.  You killed him after the duel, after he yielded.  The terms of the duel were that it continues until one party yields.  If he fought to the death, yes, you would be killing him in a duel.  That he surrenders and you then kill him means you're executing him after he has surrendered, not killing him in a duel.

[SupidSeep]

I would consider mercy if Loghead had yielded without a duel when the Landsmeet voted against him. Being so self-righteous that you have to be forcible taken down from your usurped seat of power ...



Having been a hero doesn't qualify him for mercy in my book. I would consider mercy for anyone if it was just a momentary slip up, such as a single unwarranted killing in the heat of the moment. Loghead's actions cost thousands of lives, the lives that could have been saved at Ostagar instead of being left to be overwhelmed and butchered, the lives lost as the Darkspawn marched on to Redcliffe and Denerium, the lives taken by his lackeys.



Being a hero also means taking responsiblity for your own actions, including accepting punishment for the crimes you commit without being prompted by others. Loghead had to be brought to the point of death before he would submit.



Anora can cry a river for all I care - good riddance I say. I have no interest in marrying such a stinking excuse of a female even to gain the throne of Feraldon.

[erlenro]

Sending the whining annoying Alistar to his death felt so satisfying that it was almost worth it to have to put up with him for so long.



The joys of playing an evil pragmatic character.

[Auraad]

I am so glad I did not read the book ... so, coming from the game only it's an eeeasy decision ...

[syllogi]

Auraad wrote...

I am so glad I did not read the book ... so, coming from the game only it's an eeeasy decision ...

I read both books, and I honestly believe that the Loghain we met in the Stolen Throne would NEVER have spared an adversary like the Loghain we meet in the game.  It would make no sense to him.