497 réponses à ce sujet

[FiliusMartis]

Will someone please refresh my memory as to what exactly Loghain wanted Cailan to do? I know the flank was Loghain's plan, one he made a backup to abandon by attempting to have his men or Uldred light the torch. The main thing I remember Loghain saying was 'stop relying on the Grey Wardens.' The horde was coming-- they would have sieged Ostagar and trapped Ferelden's king inside. Did they have enough food and supplies to last two weeks? What was Loghain's plan?

[phaonica]

TJPags wrote...

Also, I let him live, and stay near him.  I never have any doubt about my ability to kill him, and frankly, had he done something against my characters wishes, he'd have been killed for it.

You could potentially do exactly the same thing with Loghain. (the game doesn't actually let you do this, but you can leave him in camp and pretend you did).

For Sten, I'll say that what he may have done while a soldier at war are not for me to judge.

But what Loghain does as a general at war is for you to judge?

 Also, crimes committed by either outside my jurisdiction is not mine to judge.

Exactly when did they come to be under your jurisdiction? When they came to Ferelden? You don't know what else they did in Ferelden. When they came into your party? If that's your jurisdiction, Loghain doesn't do anything bad while there, either.

When?  When I have a knife to his throat after he loses the Landsmeet AND the duel?  Up until the Landsmeet, he accepts no guilt.  IN the Landsmeet, he accepts no guilt.

Zevran expresses no guilt unless you recruit him, either. What's the difference?

There is no option not to execute Loghain.  The option is execute him, or make him a Grey Warden.  That's it.  He can't be imprisoned, he can't be exiled, he can't be publicly whipped.  Execute, or allow to join the Wardens, which in some eyes is a pardon, since he never faces any penalty for his crimes.  That's the games fault, not mine.

I do concede that there are no options other than to kill him or to bring him into the party. There is no imprison him and deal with him later option. I would prefer that option myself. But given that he was once the Hero of Ferelden, that I don't believe he set out to purposely destroy the country, and that I don't think his mistrust in Cailan, the Orlesians, or the Wardens was misplaced, I prefer to give him a second chance.

Modifié par phaonica, 02 août 2010 - 07:11 .

[Persephone]

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Imaginary how? I don't believe Empress' Celene's sugary lines for a second. Do you REALLY think Orlais wasn't counting on the possibility of playing Cailan for the fool he was? Without Anora, Ferelden would be in a chaos anyway.

But Loghain didn't know about what she wrote until he read the letters in RTO.  In fact, I don't think WE knew anything about that until we meet Riordan, and/or read those RTO codex's ourselves.  I remember being VERY confused my first time through - without benefit of RTO - when Loghain kept railing on during the game and at the Landsmeet about Orlais, foreigners, etc - I was a HN warrior, I kept thinking "who the hell is he calling a foreigner????"

My guess is this: Loghain AND Anora knew of letters being sent back and forth, but not about the content. It isn't hard to guess, though. I do believe Bioware should have explained this more. Or they should have let the Landsmeet trigger sooner (As originally planned), so the character could develop more deeply.

[Persephone]

Khavos wrote...

Persephone wrote...
Imaginary how?

Here's how, in two easy yes/no questions:

Was there a Blight ravaging southern Ferelden?

Was there an Orlesian invasion anywhere in Ferelden?

Generally speaking, invading armies don't stop at the border when they're told they're not welcome, as the chevaliers with Riordan did.  They cease to be invading armies when they don't, you know, invade. 

If only things were as black and white and easily understood. Nobody but the Wardens dream of Archie. To everyone else it (Including glory hungry Cailan who WANTS it to be a Blight!!!!!!!!) it seems like a larger DS raid. For a long time. Orlesian invasions need not be happening to be feared. How long do you think Spain plotted against England (& vice versa) before sending the Armada? Do you think Elizabeth I. would listen to your "But they are not invading now, so why worry?" idea? Hardly.

[Persephone]

[quote]TJPags wrote...

[quote]Giggles_Manically wrote...



[quote]Also this Loghain hate is funny,since even with Gaider writing what happened people plug their ears and say "MY VERSION IS CANON!"[/quote]

No, As I pointed out before, Gaider wrote his OPINION, and admitted that, if there was no evidence in the game to support it, his opinion was NOT canon.[/quote]

Let me ask you this: Who knows the character better: The man who created/wrote it or the fans? 

[Persephone]

TJPags wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

Everyone known to be of the royal family was killed by the Orlesians in the occupation. 

We're told that, yes, but they missed Maric - and given how long the occupation lasted, his parents, too - so I just think it's possible they missed others, especially if the connection was far enough removed.

Not very important though, just nit picking.

Maric's mother, the Rebel Queen, was killed by Fereldan nobles who were in Orlais' pocket. That is how Loghain & Maric met.

[Persephone]

Xandurpein wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

Happens when a military man tries to go into politics.

That is the truth. Loghain is the perfect example of why generals should stay out of politics.

With this I agree in Loghain's case. However, some generals were brilliant politicians. I.E, Julius Caesar.

[Khavos]

Persephone wrote...

If only things were as black and white and easily understood. Nobody but the Wardens dream of Archie. To everyone else it (Including glory hungry Cailan who WANTS it to be a Blight!!!!!!!!) it seems like a larger DS raid. For a long time. Orlesian invasions need not be happening to be feared. How long do you think Spain plotted against England (& vice versa) before sending the Armada? Do you think Elizabeth I. would listen to your "But they are not invading now, so why worry?" idea? Hardly.

That's not my idea, actually.  My idea would be expressed thusly: you don't ignore the French army rolling through northern England just because you're worried that the Spanish might get involved too.  Again, just because Loghain wasn't convinced it was an actual Blight doesn't mean he didn't have to deal with it.  Even if it was just a "larger darkspawn raid" he lost entire bannorns to it in the south and STILL insisted on doing nothing to fight it while rambling about Orlesians.  

[Khavos]

Sarah1281 wrote...
I really hate it when people insist that he should have charged just because the King told him to regardless of what the consequences were. If Cailan had ordered them all to surrender to the darkspawn should Loghain have followed that order, too, just because the King gave it? At some point you need to stop being mindlessly loyal and make a judgement call.

Cailan didn't order them all to surrender to the darkspawn.  Cailan ordered them to follow the plan that Loghain himself came up with.  In the modern world, we have rules that allow military leaders to not follow illegal orders; we do not have rules that allow military leaders to not follow orders they deem to be too risky.  In the Middle Ages, they didn't even have that. 

It's all rather moot, though, as Loghain supporters still seem intent on glossing over Gaider's confirmation that Loghain put the plan to abandon Cailan in place and take power in a coup before he ever saw the battlefield at Ostagar. 

[FiliusMartis]

Right, it's more of an 'ignoring the French' thing to me too. The Darkspawn are taking over the south, Orlais miiiiight be doing something (except they're not) and Loghain, the great general, makes no headway against either in a two year time span. If the horde was so overpowering at Ostagar that Loghain had a legitimate reason to withdraw, then that should have convinced him that something was going on-- that the darkspawn were a real, current, and growing threat.

[Addai]

FiliusMartis wrote...

Will someone please refresh my memory as to what exactly Loghain wanted Cailan to do? I know the flank was Loghain's plan, one he made a backup to abandon by attempting to have his men or Uldred light the torch. The main thing I remember Loghain saying was 'stop relying on the Grey Wardens.' The horde was coming-- they would have sieged Ostagar and trapped Ferelden's king inside. Did they have enough food and supplies to last two weeks? What was Loghain's plan?

He didn't seem to have a long-term plan that I can tell.  Apparently it was to continue to chip away at the darkspawn using incremental attacks, a more defensive strategy, whereas Cailan wanted to draw the horde in for a full-on assault by massing the Grey Wardens up front.  Loghain's main objection was that Cailan also wanted to be on the front lines for that and trusted the prowess of the Wardens- and his own, probably- to withstand the assault.  Also, probably, the reputation of Ostagar as a defensive fortress.

[Pandinos]

After 2 playthroughs i recruited Loghain,because i had time to think the whole situation through.My Main is a human noble, and for me it was sweet revenge forcing Loghain to join the very order he detested. Also, were I in Loghain's shoes, i'd propably do the same as him. As far as the DR since my char romanced Morrigan i wanted that last night with her. i don't care about later on, but if the OGB turned out to be a menace,i'd propably join him/her, especially if it meant being with Morrigan again.

[FiliusMartis]

He didn't seem to have a long-term plan that I can tell. Apparently it was to continue to chip away at the darkspawn using incremental attacks, a more defensive strategy, whereas Cailan wanted to draw the horde in for a full-on assault by massing the Grey Wardens up front. Loghain's main objection was that Cailan also wanted to be on the front lines for that and trusted the prowess of the Wardens- and his own, probably- to withstand the assault. Also, probably, the reputation of Ostagar as a defensive fortress.

I understand that, what I'm saying is if you talk to Loghain before the battle he says something about wanting the King to see reason. People are making it out like his abandonment was a split second necessary decision, when really they were backed into a corner before the battle started. The horde was coming, Loghain wouldn't work with Orlais, and he'd already poisoned Eamon. But yes, I agree with you. Loghain didn't seem to have another plan.



On another note, it's pretty obvious that Cailan probably doesn't belong on the front lines and is not a brilliant tactician. But is there any evidence that he was a bad King?

i don't care about later on, but if the OGB turned out to be a menace,i'd propably join him/her, especially if it meant being with Morrigan again.

If Morrigan serves as an example for her child, there's no guarantee that the OGB wouldn't later turn on his/her parents were he/she a menace. It's one of those weighing things... what's more important to your warden... the fate of the world and perhaps his beloved or that of a child born from a blood magic ritual who he's never really known?

[Sarah1281]

Khavos wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...
I really hate it when people insist that he should have charged just because the King told him to regardless of what the consequences were. If Cailan had ordered them all to surrender to the darkspawn should Loghain have followed that order, too, just because the King gave it? At some point you need to stop being mindlessly loyal and make a judgement call.

Cailan didn't order them all to surrender to the darkspawn.  Cailan ordered them to follow the plan that Loghain himself came up with.  In the modern world, we have rules that allow military leaders to not follow illegal orders; we do not have rules that allow military leaders to not follow orders they deem to be too risky.  In the Middle Ages, they didn't even have that. 

It's all rather moot, though, as Loghain supporters still seem intent on glossing over Gaider's confirmation that Loghain put the plan to abandon Cailan in place and take power in a coup before he ever saw the battlefield at Ostagar. 

I know that he didn't. People have insisted that no matter how stupid the order was (and I'm not calling the order stupid so no need to defend it), no matter how likely it was to get everyone killed, even if that order was to surrender and have everyone be dragged underground to become broodmothers or fed upon, Loghain should have followed that order because the King gave it to him and there were no protocols for ignoring illegal orders. I believe that if Cailan's order for Loghain to charge would have led to everyone at Ostagar dying still, everyone in Loghain's army dying as well, and the darkspawn and their superior numbers not getting stopped then that's good cause to not follow that order no matter who gives it. Whether that actually would have been the case is irrelevent in this situation because if that were the scenario some people feel he owed it to his King to damn his country and I do not.

I see that confirmation not as 'Loghain was definitely going to abandon Cailan' but as 'Loghain had severe doubts that the plan would work, even though he helped come up with it, but Cailan insisted and so he had a backup plan ready.' The only thing I don't really get is that DG said that Loghain wanted Uldred or one of his men stationed at the tower in case the situation would be so dire that he wasn't going to charge and thus didn't want the beacon lit. But...we don't really know what the signal was so how would one of Loghain's men know that Loghain wanted them to ignore the signal? Of course, since Alistiar never sees the signal and assumes we must have missed it perhaps it's arranged that the signal is never given so they'd know not to light it.

[Sarah1281]

On another note, it's pretty obvious that Cailan probably doesn't belong on the front lines and is not a brilliant tactician. But is there any evidence that he was a bad King?

Well, Anora claims everyone knew that she was the one actually doing the ruling and not Cailan later when she's making her claim that she should be Queen and Eamon, far from her biggest supporter, doesn't disagree. He admits she was an able administrator for Cailan's lands but doesn't think he should have them. Is he a bad King for leaving all of his ruling duties to Anora while he makes secret plans with Orlais and rides off to battle?

If Morrigan serves as an example for her child, there's no guarantee that the OGB wouldn't later turn on his/her parents were he/she a menace. It's one of those weighing things... what's more important to your warden... the fate of the world and perhaps his beloved or that of a child born from a blood magic ritual who he's never really known?

That seems like an awful choice but not necessarily a difficult one. You simply CANNOT put one person (or two if Morrigan counts) above every other thing on the planet. It doesn't matter who that person is or how much you love them, one or two people cannot come before however many people exist in the DA world.

[CalJones]

There's no confirmation that Cailan was a bad king; just a note in the Codex that Anora was more respected by pretty much everyone.
In the light of the correspondance from Return to Ostagar, you can look at it in a number of ways. Cailan was either a visionary who was trying to build bridges to Orlais, or he was a naive fool or, worse, a traitor, who was willing to sell Fereldan out in order to become emperor.
Ultimately, we don't know what sort of king he would have become, but from my impression of him, I tend to think that's a good thing.

Modifié par CalJones, 02 août 2010 - 05:36 .

[FiliusMartis]

I was getting at whether or not an alliance with Orlais would have been the disaster some think. Anora was a competent administrator and well respected, but that doesn't mean that Cailan couldn't have been. I understand with background and such why some characters would not like the idea, but I'm wondering if the player and/or some wardens would have any concrete reason to mistrust Cailan's judgement.

That seems like an awful choice but not necessarily a difficult one. You simply CANNOT put one person (or two if Morrigan counts) above every other thing on the planet. It doesn't matter who that person is or how much you love them, one or two people cannot come before however many people exist in the DA world.

Beg pardon? That is exactly the impression I got from the quote I initially responded to-- that the person's warden would go off with a "menace OGB" and Morrigan. So yes, if you're sufficiently powerful enough you CAN say screw the world. You shouldn't, but with god-like power who is going to stop you?

[Sarah1281]

FiliusMartis wrote...

That seems like an awful choice but not necessarily a difficult one. You simply CANNOT put one person (or two if Morrigan counts) above every other thing on the planet. It doesn't matter who that person is or how much you love them, one or two people cannot come before however many people exist in the DA world.

Beg pardon? That is exactly the impression I got from the quote I initially responded to-- that the person's warden would go off with a "menace OGB" and Morrigan. So yes, if you're sufficiently powerful enough you CAN say screw the world. You shouldn't, but with god-like power who is going to stop you?

I didn't mean literally 'it is not possible for you to make that choice' but rather, anyone with any ounce of decency, morality, a conscience, ect. should not make that choice. It's not even a smaller scale sort of thing like 'oh, you can save a busload of orphans or your girlfriend who tried to kill them in the first place' but rather the whole ****ing world. I can't think of anything that could possibly justify placing one or two people above everything else that exists.

[FiliusMartis]

I understand you better now. I agree, it wouldn't even be much of a consideration, but I was replying to what someone else said they would do. A menace OGB doesn't necessarily have to be destroying the world over to be considered a menace, either. I wonder where that particular warden would draw the line is all.



Maybe it's blind optimism (when did I get that?!) but I really don't see the God of Beauty turning into a bloodthirsty monster without the taint.

[Nerevar-as]

FiliusMartis wrote...

I understand you better now. I agree, it wouldn't even be much of a consideration, but I was replying to what someone else said they would do. A menace OGB doesn't necessarily have to be destroying the world over to be considered a menace, either. I wonder where that particular warden would draw the line is all.

Maybe it's blind optimism (when did I get that?!) but I really don't see the God of Beauty turning into a bloodthirsty monster without the taint.

We don´t know really what the Old Gods were to be certain of anything. The Chantry is not exactly a reliable source of information.  For that matter, even if Morrigan tries to raise it (she? - dragons looking as the archdemon are female) so it doesn´t become dangerous to the world, I doubt her skills as a mother having been raised by Flemeth herself.

[FiliusMartis]

I'm sorry, but you've lost me. Are you saying that your money is on the child going evil or otherwise 'menacing' in some way? Earlier you said your warden would join the child even if it was a menace; I was simply curious what would be TOO much for your warden to take. At what point would you say, sorry god-baby, but I can't let you keep doing this.

[Nerevar-as]

Being an option and not fixed canon, I´m betting on the child somehow affecting whatever Flemeth´s plan is. For certain no change that would mean big vhanges to future games plot or gameplay.

[TJPags]

Persephone wrote...
Let me ask you this: Who knows the character better: The man who created/wrote it or the fans? 

The person who created something SHOULD certainly know it better then the fans.  I give you that.

But, I've seen instances where authors ask their fans to provide them with information that they themselves have forgotten or misplaced.  I've seen where authors admit that something in the book, because of cuts, doesn't explain something the way they intended.  I've seen authors admit they screwed up the timeline of their own novel.  So, creators can, in fact, get confused.

Here, Gaider stated (and I'm not going to quote it again) that he was giving his OPINION.  He was basing it on what he intended, yes.  But he admitted that what he intended may be contradicted by what actually made it into the game.  He went on to say that if there was, in fact, contradiction in the game, then his opinion was no more valid then anyone else's.

Bottom line, for me:  he may well have intended to show us something, to tell us something, or to lead us down a certain road.  Whether because it was cut, because time prevented them from adding it, or because of simple confusion or forgetting, he didn't.

Since he didn't, and since he is basing his OPINION on something that doesn't, in fact, exist anywhere except in his intentions, his opinion is just that, opinion, and as he said, no more valid then anyone else's.

[Khavos]

CalJones wrote...

There's no confirmation that Cailan was a bad king; just a note in the Codex that Anora was more respected by pretty much everyone.
In the light of the correspondance from Return to Ostagar, you can look at it in a number of ways. Cailan was either a visionary who was trying to build bridges to Orlais, or he was a naive fool or, worse, a traitor, who was willing to sell Fereldan out in order to become emperor.

It's worth noting that if Thedas sticks to the medieval notion of sovereignty, it's pretty much impossible for the king to be a traitor.