294 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarah1281]

You could argue that Zathrian has the right to seek vengeance on those that killed his children. But what about their descendents and just random people (including Danayla from his own clan) who are innocent and did nothing to deserve the curse that Zathrian put on centuries ago? How can that possibly be justified?

[Eudaemonium]

I killed Connor for the first time yesterday, well actually I had Isolde kill Connor. I always do a ritual, but this time I was like 'no - cannot trust Jowan's intentions, and the Circle is too far away [I actually deliberately didn't pick the options which led to this suggestion]). It was heartwrenching, but I actually think it was the most emotionally satsfying ending to the quest-line, simply in terms of impact.
Killing/Sparing Loghain, particularly if you're 'friendly' with Alistair. Its just the way he turns and says to you 'I thought you were my friend'. I love Alistair, I can't do that to him. On the other hand, I think Loghain can be redeemed and deserves that chance. I don't usually spare him, though.
KIlling the Werewolves. I know most people think 'siding with werewolves' is the evil option, but IMHO the truly evil option is siding with Zathrian and killing them. Like Sara1281 said, these werewolves have absolutely nothing to do with what happened to Zathrian's family - they are just poor innocents inflicted with an infectious, maddening disease, created by him no less.

Modifié par Eudaemonium, 16 juillet 2010 - 06:04 .

[lizzbee]

Sarah1281 wrote...

You could argue that Zathrian has the right to seek vengeance on those that killed his children. But what about their descendents and just random people (including Danayla from his own clan) who are innocent and did nothing to deserve the curse that Zathrian put on centuries ago? How can that possibly be justified?

Perhaps, but did they give the Warden that same benefit of the doubt, even though they know the Warden is completely innocent?  You can persuade away, try to speak reason and to seek the truth of what happened to them, but they choose not to give it to you.  And they choose not to give you the benefit of the doubt either when you bring Zathrian to them unless you very deliberately turn on Zathrian.  At least Zathrian tries to talk to them, even through a haze of rage and skepticism.  That's far more than I can say for the werewolves.  Plus Swiftrunner decided to infect innocent Dalish just to bring Zathrian to them-- is that an act of innocence?  I'd have far more compassion for them if they'd shown even a modicum of concern for the Dalish whose lives they chose to destroy, or if they'd been even slightly willing to tell my Warden the truth.  Instead, they prefer to have the Warden slaughter of their fellow "innocents" just for the sake of vengeance and destroy far more innocent lives in the process.

I've only once sided with Zathrian, and the rest of the time, I persuade him to stand down.  But it still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

[Gnoster]

Several choices have made me think twice during my playthroughs.

First and foremost as many here my hardest choice is killing Loghain or not at the Landsmeet. As many I end up killing him for Alistair's sake, but I can't help but feel that if Alistair actually had a higher sence of duty, then he would see that more wardens is needed. In the playthrough I just started with a HMN warrior, who shall take the throne with Anora, I played through the entire Ostagar playthrough twice, and I started to notice a small change in Loghain's voice acting at the meeting after the Joining. When first I meet Loghain he sounds resigned and worried, really worried about Ferelden's future, but when he turns around at the meeting at agrees with Cailan with the words "Yes Cailan, a glorious moment for us all", I noticed a more calculative voice. I think at that moment, he resigned to the fact that Cailan could not be saved. I know, maybe it's just my imagination, but I honestly think his voice really does sound differently. And for me it is really easy to see, that Arl Howe is the evil one, where as I think Loghain felt he got pushed into doing what he thought was right for his beloved Ferelden. So this time around Alistair dies (partly for desertion and partly because as king I cannot allow a contender to live).

My second hardest is always the Templar and Desire Demon in the Tower. I mostly end up letting them go, but I can't help feel that I allowed a demon to be loose in the world. It's not so much a question about saving the templar, to me he is already dead, it's more question of can I really allow a demon to roam the human world. The answer really should be no ...but mostly it's "bah, go then".

The Orzammar situation is difficult too for the reasons many have said. I think both Harrowmont and Bhelen are victims of the dwarven political way, it is like a whirlwind which you can't really fight. Harrowmont seems more becomming and knowing the Dwarf Noble origin Bhelen really is bad news. Then again Harrowmont does cheat as well and he is undoubtedly worse for the dwarven kingdom. Bhelen I am starting to compare to the roman emperor Octavian, who were one of the most ruthless emperors during wartime, but he was the most beloved emperor during peacetime (read: Bhelen knows how to bring the dwarven kingdom into a better time, but he has to do some God awful things to get into a position to do so, so for the good of the kingdom...). I have actually never taken Bhelen's side, but I will in my current playthrough.

Another hard choice for me is letting Vaughn out of prison as any other class than City Elf. It is quite clear that the man is bad news and honestly deserves to die, but at that time I need help for the Landsmeet, so for the good of Ferelden I let him out and retake his position thus in truth allowing him to continue raping elf women at his leisure. It sits really bad with me everytime, since his speech shows how bad news he is, but still I need his help.

There are a lot more, but these are among my hardest decisions.

[Corker]

Gnoster wrote...

Another hard choice for me is letting Vaughn out of prison as any other class than City Elf. It is quite clear that the man is bad news and honestly deserves to die, but at that time I need help for the Landsmeet, so for the good of Ferelden I let him out and retake his position thus in truth allowing him to continue raping elf women at his leisure. It sits really bad with me everytime, since his speech shows how bad news he is, but still I need his help.

The way I figured it, if he's dead, he can't vote against me, either.

[Sarah1281]

lizzbee wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

You could argue that Zathrian has the right to seek vengeance on those that killed his children. But what about their descendents and just random people (including Danayla from his own clan) who are innocent and did nothing to deserve the curse that Zathrian put on centuries ago? How can that possibly be justified?

Perhaps, but did they give the Warden that same benefit of the doubt, even though they know the Warden is completely innocent?  You can persuade away, try to speak reason and to seek the truth of what happened to them, but they choose not to give it to you.  And they choose not to give you the benefit of the doubt either when you bring Zathrian to them unless you very deliberately turn on Zathrian.  At least Zathrian tries to talk to them, even through a haze of rage and skepticism.  That's far more than I can say for the werewolves.  Plus Swiftrunner decided to infect innocent Dalish just to bring Zathrian to them-- is that an act of innocence?  I'd have far more compassion for them if they'd shown even a modicum of concern for the Dalish whose lives they chose to destroy, or if they'd been even slightly willing to tell my Warden the truth.  Instead, they prefer to have the Warden slaughter of their fellow "innocents" just for the sake of vengeance and destroy far more innocent lives in the process.

I've only once sided with Zathrian, and the rest of the time, I persuade him to stand down.  But it still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

Oh, you mean after Zathrien sends you to the forest to kill Witherfang and then they unfairly accuse you of being sent by the Dalish to kill Witherfang? Given that they're totally right is it really unreasonable that they don't buy it if you tell them you've decided not to kill her? Especially since you don't know she's anything but a rabid werewolf at the time? The Lady explains attacking the Dalish, too. Ever since she started to calm the werewolves, which seems like it happened awhile ago, she has been trying to get Zathrien to meet with her but he refused. She was desperate at that point and hoped that by tying the fate of Zathrien's people to hers that, as a responsible and non completely selfish leader, the Keeper would have no choice but to break the curse in order to save his people which is what he should have done. Instead, he ignored those dead, pretended those infected were dead, and sent you after her in the hopes she'd kill you off so he could get out of the treaty.

And what's this about not being willing to tell you the truth? The minute you get far enough into the ruins they take you to the Lady who is the only one who does. She wants to meet with you but the others - corredctly deducing that you've been sent to kill Witherfang - don't want to give you the chance to do so. They don't attack you out of vengeance but to try and protect her and Witherfang does need to be talked into seeking vengeance...which, by the way, you have to bring up. It doesn't really occur to her to just wipe out the Dalish because that won't solve anything.

You know why they don't give Zathrien the benefit of the doubt? Because for centuries he's refused to so much as acknowledge them and only appears once you and the attacks (the attacks alone weren't even enough) force his hand. Swiftrunner does have problems controlling his bestial nature but whose fault is that? The one who gave it to them. And notably he doesn't act on his aggression. They just want to be cured and they're willing to do some morally questionable things to do it. If you really think turning the Dalish into werewolves is ruining their lives then you can surely understand why the werewolves who must've been born like that would resort to such drastic measures with no other hope for release but death. They are willing to talk to Zathrien who basically goes 'I don't want to be here, no I won't cure you, I'm willing to have everyone in my clan die so you'll stay cursed, oh look, Warden, they're pissed for some reason. I can't imagine why when I'm being so reasonable. Clearly this means they are savage beasts that can't be trusted. Kill them for me, would you?'

The werewolves aren't attacking the Dalish for the lulz; Zathrien gave them no other choice if they wanted to be free of the curse he inflicted on their ancestors. What's so morally questionable about saving them?

[Alien1099]

Sarah1281 wrote...

the murder of your nearly entire family if you're a human noble (he allows howe to steal Highever),

This probably doesn't make it any better but...Loghain had nothing to do with the Couslands deaths. Your character can't know that but it's Word of God. Still, he did allow Howe to get away with it which is still rage-inducing. Maybe as a non-HN Loghain doesn't know for sure that Howe was behind it or buys his 'it's the Orlesians fault' excuse but as a HN he heard about it straight from you.

It may or may not be official "canon" or part of the story, but Sir Gilmore and Mother Mallol's bodies are at Fort Drakon, presumably tortured to death. I'm sure Loghaine was well aware of what was going on, condoned it, and was an accomplice. Howe claims that he believed the Noble Human's father to be consorting with the Orlesians. I'm sure that when told this by Howe, Loghaine gave him his blessing.

Modifié par Alien1099, 16 juillet 2010 - 02:19 .

[Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams]

I'm sorry, I know Alistair is angry with Loghain, but he is just so painfully unreasonable if you want Loghain to live and fight against the blight. I usually let Loghain live and usually tell Anora to spare Alistair. If I'm playing a more totalitarian minded character I have Anora execute him.



Probably the hardest choice for me is Anvil of the Void. Seriously, that golem army is damn enticing.

[CalJones]

Hmm, I always took Loghain's "a glorious moment for us all" as sarcasm driven by irritation, rather than the moustache twirling some others insist it is. He's obviously fed up with Cailan and his Warden infatuation (bear in mind Cailan has been boozing it up with the Wardens instead of working on strategies with Loghain, so naturally Loghain sees him as a kid who doesn't take the battle seriously. Which appears correct, in fact).



As far as the Highever massacre goes, then we know Loghain wasn't initially aware of it but I agree that Howe must likely fed him some Orlesian conspirator bull and Loghain, being the paranoid fellow that he is, swallowed it.



Anvil of the Void is a tough one. It feels as though there is no right decision. Kill Caradin and Shale gets upset; kill Branka and Oghren gets upset. I feel it's best not to keep the anvil, given what it represents, but on the other hand... It's a bit like deciding whether or not to keep the Collector Base in ME2. There's arguments for and against.

[R-F]

As my Mage character i regretted what happened to Jowan, and how his life went progressively downhill. I had to fight myself on the topic of freeing him, in the end i couldn't do it.

[Thiefy]

hm the only choice where I didn't have a pretty good idea of what I wanted to do from the beginning was killing Loghain. Not that I didn't think he deserved punishment but it was more of a "right here? right now?" kind of thing...



Playing as a Cousland who was close to her family, my PC didn't want to put another daughter through the agony of having to watch her father die, even if he needed to be served justice (and this is with me not even liking Anora).

[OBakaSama]

Ah..missed the discussion on the desire demon and the templar. My apologies. (I read through everything too...)

On Loghain: I tend to execute him. It certainly depends on how you play the game. Are you playing as your character or meta-gaming? Also disregarding what David Gaider may have conveyed to the community as well and sticking with what is in the game suggests Loghain's actions are more sinister. While Loghain does suggest Cailan shouldn't be on the frontlines his intentions at Ostagar suggest he never planned to enter into battle. As soon as the signal arrives he orders retreat. Later in the game in Denerim's dungeons we learn that his forces withdrew before Cailan's forces were overwhelmed. It almost seems deliberate on Loghain's part to allow so many to die at Ostagar. (It was a ploy so he commands the power whether or not Cailan lived. It would probably have been easier if Cailan had lived so Loghain could say "I told you so".)

His poisoning of Arl Eamon is also questionable as during the game we learn that Arl Eamon is poisoned before the events at Ostagar. I could understand why Loghain might try it after Ostagar to try and incapacitate a potential opponent but not before. Loghain planned this before Ostagar whatever his reasoning may be.

Given that the Warden learns these two things during their travels from close sources to respective events, the Warden can only assume that Loghain had planned a lot before Ostagar. Now, how the Warden reacts will depend on their character. Also Loghain lies about the Wardens, and accuses them of treachery which is completely unfounded and self-fabricated possibly to try and justify his own actions.

Not to mention Loghain deliberately denies the help of the Orlesian Wardens and has them turned back at the border. His blind hatred had made him do stupid things, perhaps even immoral things, but it hardly justifies his actions. Cauthrien tries to justify the elven slave trade as he had to secure a war chest to fight Arl Eamon and the Warden (which sounds like more was going in Ferelden than the game was telling us).

Riordan's suggestion that he should go through the Joining may give the Warden pause for thought. Given that the Wardens essentially sacrifice anything to fight the darkspawn it would be clear that having Loghain go through the Joining is the sensible option. Anora's argument for that is sensible. Alistair is blinded by his own hatred for Loghain because of what had happened, and not without justification either. Justice (no, not he of Awakenings though he probably would) may demand that Loghain be executed, but a Grey Warden would choose the bigger picture and induct Loghain into the fold. If only to show him how wrong he is about the Wardens.

As a Warden the question of where your loyalties lie comes up: are you loyal to the Wardens such that you know sacrifices have to be made? or are you loyal to (depending how you play your game) your friend Alistair, who has been with you through thick and thin?

Truthfully (wild conjecture theory alert), if the story is ever canonised I would expect a hardened Alistair marrying Anora. Alistair being reasoned with to see that letting Loghain go through the Joining is a good idea (sort of happens in the game but still too negative on Alistair's part) and all enter the final battle after having performed the dark ritual with Morrigan. (No, I don't mean they all do the dark ritual with Morrigan. Clean thoughts people. ) Alistair becomes king. Loghain stays as the main recruiter of new Wardens in Ferelden, and the Warden is free to track down Morrigan.

On Zathrian: again an issue of hatred, and hard to justify. Killing those responsible may be deemed justice. But all those after and more suffering coming out of his curse is not. I tend to get him to see the error of his ways and get the curse lifted. While the wolves also have a case to enact revenge on Zathrian, the choice to do so is perhaps badly handled with the dialogue option. It seems too abrupt and comes out of nowhere in a way, to me at least.

The Anvil: tricky one. The Anvil itself is used to enslave souls to create golems, but truthfully the problem is with the user and not the tool which the Anvil is. If it could have been used as Caradin intended, i.e., only volunteers are used to make golems then it may be justifiable to keep it. Personally I was disappointed with there being no middle option of trying to keep the Anvil but only using volunteers as Caradin originally intended.

Harrowmont or Bhelen: meta-gaming, depending on one's own opinions, I would be sure that most would agree that Orzammar's future is better under Bhelen than Harrowmont. The Warden may differ though, and it depends on their background and character. Harrowmont seems like an honest man, though even he attempts to buy votes such is the way of dwarven politics. Bhelen is just ruthless, but is more open to equality. Regardless of the Warden you've created, the game already has info suggesting that Bhelen would push for reforms to Orzammar. As a dwarf commoner Warden, I would side with Bhelen for Rica's sake. Family-wise with that origin it seems difficult to justify siding with Harrowmont, unless as a casteless you are also a staunch traditionalist which is hard to believe. As a dwarf noble...that's trickier. My first playthough as a dwarf noble I had only thoughts of revenge for what Bhelen did and sided wih Harrowmont. For my intended second playthrough I intend to support Bhelen. Why? Because he played the dwarven political game far better than Trian and myself. Plus they want the throne to belong to the Aeducans. It could go either way. To me the decision comes down to choosing a seemingly decent man but is not much of a king or a dislikeable man who actually makes a good king. Meta-gaming I always choose the latter.

Right, I've rabbled on long enough. Buggering off now.

[Omen72]

Dumping the bodies in the well was maybe the most uncomfortable thing to do, certainly one of the more distasteful things you are asked to do.



Decision wise it has to be trying to whether to kill Connor, sacrifice Isolde, or seek help from the mage tower as I didn't want to harm the kid, but neither did I want to be forced to sacrifice his mother for his sake.



I disagree about Logain, to be honest I had no sympathy for him in the end, he made his bed when he turned on Cailan and then backstabbed and lied through his teeth to usurp power, and his daughter is no better so I had no problem letting Alister finish him off in front of her, personally after the way she turned on the Grey Warden (having them rescue her only for you to find out that was a con) I'd have done more that lock her in the tower for her treason. You have to bear in mind at the beginning of the game when you are with Alistair and Duncan you're preparing to fight the Darkspawn, without Logain's betrayal who is to say how quickly the blight would have been ended, or, how fast if at all it would have spread North, or if Lothering could have been saved,

[lizzbee]

Sarah1281 wrote...
The werewolves aren't attacking the Dalish for the lulz; Zathrien gave them no other choice if they wanted to be free of the curse he inflicted on their ancestors. What's so morally questionable about saving them?

I'm not going to dispute a lot of what you've said.  There's no question that what Zathrian did is wrong, and there's no question that the werewolves have some right to be suspicious.  *On the other hand,* they aren't blameless, and they had other choices than to spread their suffering, especially to innocents.  I have little or no respect for people who have suffered in some fashion, who should know better than to turn their suffering and pain onto others, but who do it anyway.  The werewolves weren't innocent of the desire for revenge, and they had few qualms about infecting the Dalish, who did *nothing* to tthem.  Where was the compassion they should have shown those who had nothing to do with Zathrian's decision?  Nowhere.  Instead, they infected away, knowing that they were spreading the very same misery that they suffered.  And with relish, not regret.  <--- The Lady of the Forest isn't included in that statement.

Again with the Warden: Swiftrunner, right off the bat, calls you ignorant, but won't even try to enlighten you.  He could quite easily have omitted Witherfang's location and at least have told you a somewhat censored version of the truth, so you could confront Zathrian.  Instead, no matter what you do, he has his fellow werewolves attack you.  It's only after you've killed a good amount of their number, completely unnecessarily, I might add, and you've slaughtered your way into the heart of their ruin, that they even begin to tell you what's going on.  Maybe it's just me, but when you taunt someone who approaches you with an open hand, and then don't bother to engage with them at all, you lose a lot of your moral authority.  Why would you sacrifice your fellows so easily when there might be an easier way to achieve your goal?  But they eagerly threw themselves into the fight, until the Lady decided they'd lost too many.

And their willingness to turn on you after you bring them Zathrian *as they requested,* isn't exactly a sign of moral rightness either.  You did as they asked, and that should imply some small modicum of trust, but they're just as willing to slaughter you as they are Zathrian.  Do they really deserve my defense after that?  My own personal thoughts, were it actually me in the situation, would be to stand aside and let them take care of each other.  None of them are completely innocent, Zathrian or the werewolves, but the werewolves could have taken the higher road in refusing to infect others with their curse and in sharing even a hint of the truth with the Warden.  The only real innocents are the Dalish.

[Sarah1281]

It may or may not be official "canon" or part of the story, but Sir Gilmore and Mother Mallol's bodies are at Fort Drakon, presumably tortured to death. I'm sure Loghaine was well aware of what was going on, condoned it, and was an accomplice. Howe claims that he believed the Noble Human's father to be consorting with the Orlesians. I'm sure that when told this by Howe, Loghaine gave him his blessing.

It does look an awful lot like them, I'll admit, but that only makes it likely Loghain knew after the fact (you do tell Cailan who tells him as a HN but he might buy Howe's BS about Orlesian treachery if you're not) and we, though not the HN, know that he didn't beforehand.

While Loghain does suggest Cailan shouldn't be on the frontlines his intentions at Ostagar suggest he never planned to enter into battle. As soon as the signal arrives he orders retreat.

Yes, but it's metagaming if you factor that into your decision as your character was on top of a tower and no one in the game ever refers to Loghain leaving just as the beacon was lit. For all you know, he gave up waiting when you were hopelessly late, assumed that you were an Orlesian spy that didn't bother lighting it, and retreated then.

His poisoning of Arl Eamon is also questionable as during the game we learn that Arl Eamon is poisoned before the events at Ostagar. I could understand why Loghain might try it after Ostagar to try and incapacitate a potential opponent but not before. Loghain planned this before Ostagar whatever his reasoning may be.

He did it before for the same reason you said: to eliminate a potential opponent. He had planned to confront Cailan at some point and Eamon was Cailan's biggest supporter. If you believe that Loghain allied with Howe and asked him to find some way to weaken the Couslands so they're support would be less meaningful while he dealt with Cailan and Howe translated this into 'massacre them all and blame Orlesian treachery' then it would certainly explain why Howe felt he could get away with it but also why Loghain didn't expect it.

Also Loghain lies about the Wardens, and accuses them of treachery which is completely unfounded and self-fabricated possibly to try and justify his own actions.



Not to mention Loghain deliberately denies the help of the Orlesian Wardens and has them turned back at the border. His blind hatred had made him do stupid things, perhaps even immoral things, but it hardly justifies his actions. Cauthrien tries to justify the elven slave trade as he had to secure a war chest to fight Arl Eamon and the Warden (which sounds like more was going in Ferelden than the game was telling us).

I think he honestly does believe them to be Orlesian traitors but remember: he's not rational about Orlais. Also, remember what happened in the Calling. Maric almost got himself killed by treacherous Orlesian Wardens. And the Civil War going on had to be expensive, not to mention dealing with the Blight he just realized was going on.

As a Warden the question of where your loyalties lie comes up: are you loyal to the Wardens such that you know sacrifices have to be made? or are you loyal to (depending how you play your game) your friend Alistair, who has been with you through thick and thin?

For me it wasn't really about loyalty as I didn't really care about the Wardens but still let Loghain live. At first it was so we'd have an extra Warden but when Alistair said he'd quit I realized that there was a good chance if he fought in the final battle he'd die (even without knowing about the Warden sacrifice) and so Loghain joining meant we wouldn't be weakened by losing him and the King would survive.

Alistair becomes king. Loghain stays as the main recruiter of new Wardens in Ferelden, and the Warden is free to track down Morrigan.

For all of six months before he's sent to Orlais.

The Warden may differ though, and it depends on their background and character. Harrowmont seems like an honest man, though even he attempts to buy votes such is the way of dwarven politics. Bhelen is just ruthless, but is more open to equality. Regardless of the Warden you've created, the game already has info suggesting that Bhelen would push for reforms to Orzammar. As a dwarf commoner Warden, I would side with Bhelen for Rica's sake. Family-wise with that origin it seems difficult to justify siding with Harrowmont, unless as a casteless you are also a staunch traditionalist which is hard to believe.

You say that like buying votes is a bad thing and in today's world it has to be hidden but in Orzammar...it's a matter of public record. It's completely legal, completely morally acceptable...hell, even Vartag asks how else the deshyrs will know who to vote for and he's Bhelen's man through and through. And I don't believe a casteless would EVER be a traditionalist since tradition dictates they don't exist, should never have been born, and since they were they should have died young.



@ lizzbee: Several of the Dalish admit that they had an idea that Zathrian was doing that so I don't think they're completely innocent though I don't believe they deserved to be slaughtered for that. Still, if you were one of the werewolves who had been cursed for generations because of what your ancestors did and had difficulty controlling your bestial nature at the best of times and could do nothing without Witherfang but your countless attempts to at least meet with the one person who could end your constant suffering was blatantly ignored, what would you do? I'm not saying they did a good thing but I honestly don't see what else they could have done once Zathrian chose to ignore their every effort to seek him out. If they had done nothing then Zathrian wouldn't have even sent you after them and so you couldn't have gotten a chance to help them. If they did nothing they'd continue to suffer and Zathrian would continue to be unrepentent and feel perfectlyl justified in his vengeance. He wouldn't live forever and so sooner or later he'd die and leave them trapped forever. Being saints would have doomed them for sure in this case.

[Zjarcal]

lizzbee wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...
The werewolves aren't attacking the Dalish for the lulz; Zathrien gave them no other choice if they wanted to be free of the curse he inflicted on their ancestors. What's so morally questionable about saving them?

I'm not going to dispute a lot of what you've said.  There's no question that what Zathrian did is wrong, and there's no question that the werewolves have some right to be suspicious.  *On the other hand,* they aren't blameless, and they had other choices than to spread their suffering, especially to innocents.  I have little or no respect for people who have suffered in some fashion, who should know better than to turn their suffering and pain onto others, but who do it anyway.  The werewolves weren't innocent of the desire for revenge, and they had few qualms about infecting the Dalish, who did *nothing* to tthem.  Where was the compassion they should have shown those who had nothing to do with Zathrian's decision?  Nowhere.  Instead, they infected away, knowing that they were spreading the very same misery that they suffered.  And with relish, not regret.  <--- The Lady of the Forest isn't included in that statement.

Again with the Warden: Swiftrunner, right off the bat, calls you ignorant, but won't even try to enlighten you.  He could quite easily have omitted Witherfang's location and at least have told you a somewhat censored version of the truth, so you could confront Zathrian.  Instead, no matter what you do, he has his fellow werewolves attack you.  It's only after you've killed a good amount of their number, completely unnecessarily, I might add, and you've slaughtered your way into the heart of their ruin, that they even begin to tell you what's going on.  Maybe it's just me, but when you taunt someone who approaches you with an open hand, and then don't bother to engage with them at all, you lose a lot of your moral authority.  Why would you sacrifice your fellows so easily when there might be an easier way to achieve your goal?  But they eagerly threw themselves into the fight, until the Lady decided they'd lost too many.

And their willingness to turn on you after you bring them Zathrian *as they requested,* isn't exactly a sign of moral rightness either.  You did as they asked, and that should imply some small modicum of trust, but they're just as willing to slaughter you as they are Zathrian.  Do they really deserve my defense after that?  My own personal thoughts, were it actually me in the situation, would be to stand aside and let them take care of each other.  None of them are completely innocent, Zathrian or the werewolves, but the werewolves could have taken the higher road in refusing to infect others with their curse and in sharing even a hint of the truth with the Warden.  The only real innocents are the Dalish.

I think you're forgetting one thing about the werewolves... they're werewolves. The curse imposed upon them makes it hard, if not impossible, for them to suppress their rage.

Consider Athras' wife, Danyla. When you encounter her she's still capable of reasoning and moderately control her inner rage. She begs you to end her life but is willing to withstand the pain a bit longer to share information with you. Eventually though, the rage will take over and she will attack you. She's not to blame for the violent act, the curse is.

It's the same with all the other werewolves. You can't expect them to be entirely reasonable when their very nature, which was forced upon them, prevents them from being reasonable.

[Chuvvy]

Bahlgan wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

Bahlgan wrote...

Having Lady Isolde sacrifice herself to save her son. It was a noble decision and Alistair was very whiny about the whole situation, but honestly I still felt horrible.

It was her fault anyway. She let all those people in that village and in the castle die, for one life. Anyone could have ended it with a stab to the kids heart. He even talks about cutting off the elves ears and feeding them to the dogs. That's not a tipping point? Sometimes I go to the tower save the mages bring them to redcliffe and then run up and kill Conner just to troll her.

Killing Connor discredits everything else you just said. No offense, but you don't take an innocent life, especially not to teach a lesson <_<

Me being an **** to a fake child discredits truth? Hmm. Here I thought facts were facts no matter the situation. Also I highly recommend doing that, it's awesome. To bad there's no Trollface dialog option.

[Sarah1281]

Slidell505 wrote...

Bahlgan wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

Bahlgan wrote...

Having Lady Isolde sacrifice herself to save her son. It was a noble decision and Alistair was very whiny about the whole situation, but honestly I still felt horrible.

It was her fault anyway. She let all those people in that village and in the castle die, for one life. Anyone could have ended it with a stab to the kids heart. He even talks about cutting off the elves ears and feeding them to the dogs. That's not a tipping point? Sometimes I go to the tower save the mages bring them to redcliffe and then run up and kill Conner just to troll her.

Killing Connor discredits everything else you just said. No offense, but you don't take an innocent life, especially not to teach a lesson <_<

Me being an **** to a fake child discredits truth? Hmm. Here I thought facts were facts no matter the situation. Also I highly recommend doing that, it's awesome. To bad there's no Trollface dialog option.

Well if you're going that route then why bother 'punishing' fake!Isolde for getting her fake!son possessed and the subsequent possible mutilation and definite death of fake!castle staff and fake!villagers? 

[maxernst]

I get tired of this "Alistair leaves because he wants Loghain to die." argument. It's more than just that. You're expecting him to camp with him and work with him day in and day out...possibly for years. It's not like you're throwing him in a dungeon or exiling him to Orlais, or even sending him to fight with the Legion of the Dead, any of which Alistair might have been willing to allow Besides, Alistair being immature doesn't mike Loghain sane or trustworthy.

I think it strains credulity to believe that Howe just happened to eliminate the other most senior noble in the Kingdom at the same time as Loghain is poisoning Eammon. And then after taking a horrible risk, Howe comes up smelling like roses because Loghain just happens to betray Callen and need him. And then there's Loghain's curious obsession with eliminating two junior wardens to the extent of spending his credibility on lies that hardly anybody believes--it's just a fluke that one of those wardens happens to be a potential claimant to the throne.

And I laugh to hear "metagaming" thrown at the Ostagar decision when Loghain's backers are constantly pulling out the "David Gaider said x on the forums" card. Note that on the subject of whether anyone can kill the archdemon after the DR, Gaider wrote:

"I remember our thinking at the time was that the Archdemon's essence had to enter a Grey Warden first-- and that the Dark Ritual would effectively "pull" the essence from the Grey Warden into the child...Seeing as it was never mentioned, however, you can opt for whichever explanation you prefer." Shouldn't the same apply to other things for which there is no proof in the game like when Loghain made his decisions and when Howe's alliance with him began?

What I really think is that after the game was completed, David Gaider saw that Loghain comes across as a blacker villain than he intended and he backpedaled to try and keep the character's behavior in keeping with the books. But based on just what my PC sees in the game, he's either a totally evil tyrant bent on doing anything for power or he's insane (which both Anora and Ser Cauthrien seem to think). Sorry, I'll take immature over crazy any day.

Modifié par maxernst, 17 juillet 2010 - 01:58 .

[Sarah1281]

Believe me, the 'Alistair really hates Loghain and wants him to die so you're a horrible person for deeply betraying him for not killing a man' is equally annoying. And it's not like the game gives you an option to lock him up or exile him. And Alistair protests and demands that you kill him when it IS just 'okay, I won't kill you' and before Riordan suggests making him a Warden so no, he was not willing to allow it.



As you said, the knowledge of Loghain's intentions comes from metagaming and as it isn't in the game you CAN ignore it and if you just RP then even without ignoring the metagaming you still wo uldn't know that since your character wouldn't. The metagaming knowledge about Howe and his decision to retreat (and for that matter, the circumstances of his retreat since the Warden doesn't get a cutscene of him ordering Cauthrien to leave) are not reasons that your Warden should or should not spare Loghain, it's more for trying to figure out how evil/paranoid he was.

[Bahlgan]

Annie_Dear wrote...

Master Shiori wrote...

Killing Connor.

No matter what kind of character I play I can never resort to killing children.

Also, the scene where you let Isolde do it is painful as hell. No mother should ever have to kill her own child to spare him the suffering...

I did it once and boy did I feel bad about it.

Also, the way Connor sounds when you tell him you've come to kill him.... it broke my heart, really.

Never again.

THIS. But I can think of one thing that's even worse, is convincing his own mother to kill him. Oh yea, I ended up deciding not to kill him, leading his mother to do so instead. She was soul-less afterwards.... 

Me being an **** to a fake child discredits truth? Hmm. Here I thought facts were facts no matter the situation. Also I highly recommend doing that, it's awesome.

...Well.. So much for saying "no offense"...

Seriously though, I would really hate to have your mentality as well as those who agree with you. Are you telling me you would have a child in real life suffer  (in this case to murder him)  for the sins of another? I do not know if truth is the correct word you should be using, but rather paradox, that indeed your logic is rather morbid and far from what nice people consider true. It's too bad that there are many people who hate Alistair and Isolde for minor qualities that can be easily overlooked. I understand that some people can get annoying, but to want to kill them because of that? Tsk tsk tsk.

To bad there's no Trollface dialog option.

I agree with this. It's also too bad Bioware refused to upload an ignore option on here. Anyone who would dare justify the murdering of innocents due to teaching a lesson to another person is not what I could call human.

Modifié par Bahlgan, 17 juillet 2010 - 04:15 .

[Chuvvy]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

Bahlgan wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

Bahlgan wrote...

Having Lady Isolde sacrifice herself to save her son. It was a noble decision and Alistair was very whiny about the whole situation, but honestly I still felt horrible.

It was her fault anyway. She let all those people in that village and in the castle die, for one life. Anyone could have ended it with a stab to the kids heart. He even talks about cutting off the elves ears and feeding them to the dogs. That's not a tipping point? Sometimes I go to the tower save the mages bring them to redcliffe and then run up and kill Conner just to troll her.

Killing Connor discredits everything else you just said. No offense, but you don't take an innocent life, especially not to teach a lesson <_<

Me being an **** to a fake child discredits truth? Hmm. Here I thought facts were facts no matter the situation. Also I highly recommend doing that, it's awesome. To bad there's no Trollface dialog option.

Well if you're going that route then why bother 'punishing' fake!Isolde for getting her fake!son possessed and the subsequent possible mutilation and definite death of fake!castle staff and fake!villagers? 

Because it's ****ing awesome.

[Chuvvy]

Bahlgan wrote...

...Well.. So much for saying "no offense"...

Seriously though, I would really hate to have your mentality as well as those who agree with you. Are you telling me you would have a child in real life suffer  (in this case to murder him)  for the sins of another? I do not know if truth is the correct word you should be using, but rather paradox, that indeed your logic is rather morbid and far from what nice people consider true. It's too bad that there are many people who hate Alistair and Isolde for minor qualities that can be easily overlooked. I understand that some people can get annoying, but to want to kill them because of that? Tsk tsk tsk.

To bad there's no Trollface dialog option.

I agree with this. It's also too bad Bioware refused to upload an ignore option on here. Anyone who would dare justify the murdering of innocents due to teaching a lesson to another person is not what I could call human.

Of course I wouldn't do it in real life. Video games are an escape from real life. I also run around in crackdown jumping off of buildings and blowing up cars with handheld rocket launchers, I don't do that in real life. Although it would be rather awesome.

[Costin_Razvan]

What I really think is that after the game was completed, David Gaider saw that Loghain comes across as a blacker villain than he intended and he backpedaled to try and keep the character's behavior in keeping with the books. But based on just what my PC sees in the game, he's either a totally evil tyrant bent on doing anything for power or he's insane (which both Anora and Ser Cauthrien seem to think). Sorry, I'll take immature over crazy any day.

Oh? So anyone who plays the game and makes the choice based on IN-GAME knowledge cannot have a bloody reason to spare Loghain?



Did you ever for a ****ing second think that those of that do spare Loghain did it on our first playthroughs with NO FORUM KNOWLEDGE, No RTO and NO novel knowledge and even only half of what In-Game Knowledge they now posses?. Did it ever occur in your closed mind that there are good solid reasons as to why people would spare Loghain on their first playthrough?



Let me list them, very bloody simply. I do not give a **** if you agree to them or not, it's not the point. I simply list my reasons for it.



1) Mercy. Yes mercy. If you cannot find it in you to find the mercy to spare him, then please don't insult those of that can.



2) Not being influenced by Alistair. Friendship is one thing, but I would not consider someone a friend or a lover if they asked me, no wait DEMANDED, of me to kill another person. I would consider my friendship with them null at that point and yes I was at friendly level with Alistair and no I did not ( and still don't ) find him annoying.



3) Respect for a defeated foe.



4) Using him against the Blight. Loghain is a general whom we hear several people mention in game that is skilled. At the Landsmeet he is a skilled enough fighter. He is a useful tool to have. ( or so I think )



Those are the main points why I sparred him. I did not know about the Cousland massacre at the time and in all honesty using the Cousland massacre as a reason is metagaming because you ignore the other Origins, as we do not know what happened in Highever in the others save for a RUMOR by two gossips.



Anora and Cauthrien really gave me a good opinion about him. By the time of the duel I realized that he was doing this for something more then power, and that he was not insane. Even Eamon spoke with respect for him ( despite what happened to him at Redcliffe ) so that really got me thinking.



Yes, I did know I could spare him before I started the game, but I did not know what reasons I could find for doing that or what kind of villain he was going to be. The fact that Riordan who knew Duncan for about 2-3 decades is the one to suggest it, then that REALLY should get one thinking about the whole thing.

[KnightofPhoenix]

There are enough reasons to pick either decision concerning Loghain, even as a Cousland. After dozens of Loghain debates, I've decided to ignore those who can't possibly find a reason to spare or execute him. When you can't see some validity in the other position, then there is no point discussing it.