1092 réponses à ce sujet

[phaonica]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Is someone at the battlefield supposed to send a separate signal to whomever is already up at the beacon to light it?

Yes. Someone is supposed to send a signal that Duncan doesn't explain at all ("Oh, Alistair knows what it is") and Alistair doesn't see it but he thinks that they must have missed it since they're so late and lights the beacon.

Ok, so the person at the beacon only needs to be 'qualified' enough to see a signal from the battlefield and light the beacon. If Loghain wanted someone up there to not light the beacon in case the battle was lost (or in case Loghain just decides to leave and needs an excuse), then he needs not only somone up there who can actually assess the battlefield, but also someone who can actually see enough of the battlefield to make that assessment . (or perhaps just someone who can see a separate signal from Loghain to not light the beacon?).

[TJPags]

Separate signal, probably . . . which leaves, how does Loghain know the battles going poorly so he can send the "don't light the beacon" signal . . . if he can see the field, no need for tower . . .if he can't see the field, how can he know whether to light or not?

[phaonica]

TJPags wrote...

Separate signal, probably . . . which leaves, how does Loghain know the battles going poorly so he can send the "don't light the beacon" signal . . . if he can see the field, no need for tower . . .if he can't see the field, how can he know whether to light or not?

I'm not going to say 'probably' just yet.

If Loghain wanted his own men at the beacon so that they could ignore the signal from the battlefield if the battle was already lost, we'd have to assume that you can actually see the battle rather good from up there, enough to assess that the battle is lost.

If you cannot see the battlefield well from up there, then Loghain would know that, and he wouldn't have sent anyone up there to determine if the battle was lost... because there would be no reasonable way for them to tell if they couldn't see. In which case either he wanted them up there to watch for his own signal (And if he couldn't see the battlefield himself, then the only reason for him to signal would be because he had decided to leave, no matter what was going on on the field). Or because the beacon was so vital ... again because if the beacon is *never* lit, is he just supposed to wait forever? Or is he supposed to decide when too long is too long and engage anyway, not knowing why the beacon wasn't lit, and not having any idea what is going on on the field? 

Modifié par phaonica, 18 août 2010 - 02:25 .

[Persephone]

Tirigon wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

Persephone wrote...


Wouldn't have been a glorious victory at that point. Just how I see it.

Then you need to play Rome Total War. The darkspawn horde were only about 3 times more than the defenders, but I know from TW-experience that you can easily defeat a 5 times stronger force with a flank attack.

I have played that game. So? Different in nearly every way.

You either lie or you fail at Rome TW. otherwise you would KNOW that the Fereldans Could have won at Ostagar.

Watch your tone, please.

Different armies, different cultures, different leaderships. Nobody can "know" that Ostagar could have been won. Cailan himself disagrees. As does Loghain and several others. I've played RTW for hours. Comparing ancient Rome's armies to a pseudo Medieval one (DAO) makes no sense. And such comparisons don't prove a thing. In my opinion Ostagar was a lost cause from the start. You disagree. Fine. Lets leave it at that.

[TJPags]

phaonica wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Separate signal, probably . . . which leaves, how does Loghain know the battles going poorly so he can send the "don't light the beacon" signal . . . if he can see the field, no need for tower . . .if he can't see the field, how can he know whether to light or not?

I'm not going to say 'probably' just yet.

If Loghain wanted his own men at the beacon so that they could ignore the signal from the battlefield if the battle was already lost, we'd have to assume that you can actually see the battle rather good from up there, enough to assess that the battle is lost.

If you cannot see the battlefield well from up there, then Loghain would know that, and he wouldn't have sent anyone up there to determine if the battle was lost... because there would be no reasonable way for them to tell if they couldn't see. In which case either he wanted them up there to watch for his own signal (And if he couldn't see the battlefield himself, then the only reason for him to signal would be because he had decided to leave, no matter what was going on on the field). Or because the beacon was so vital ... again because if the beacon is *never* lit, is he just supposed to wait forever? Or is he supposed to decide when too long is too long and engage anyway, not knowing why the beacon wasn't lit, and not having any idea what is going on on the field? 

Well, we KNOW a signal was supposed to be sent.

So, why would they need one if Loghain, a good general, can see and determine from where he is?  This leads me to believe his view is, at best, limited.

From this, we have to now wonder, how was he going to decide whether to leave or attack (assuming he had not already decided to just leave, as I think he did).  By time?  By the number of screams?  By what little he could see (assuming he could see anything)?

A lot of questions, for which we really don't seem to have answers, do we?

[Giggles_Manically]

@Tirigon, you are honestly quoting Rome Total War as an reliable historical example for Ostagar, when they were fighting darkspawn monsters, and had mages on their side.



Mayhaps you should read the Art of War, by Sun Tzu before you go off on military tactics.

[Persephone]

DragonRacer13 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

2 reasons: Firstly, I KNOW Alistair will leave without metagaming because he says so if you don´t dismiss the idea outright. Secondly, The Wardens are supposed to be glorious and heroic. They can´t fulfill this duty if they have a traitor as one of them.
Lastly, it´s really dumb to trust Loghain at this point, and if Loghain would think a bit like me the Warden would die the first time he fights at Loghain´s side.

The bolded part made me cringe. Perhaps that's how Alistair views the Grey Wardens - like chivalrous knights -- but the Grey Wardens really are more of a "stop Blights by any and all means necessary" group... which is not necessarily glorious at all. Riordan flat-out says they have among their ranks: blood mages, carta thugs, traitors, bandits, kinslayers, etc.

Exactly. There is nothing glorious or heroic about the Wardens. (In general) Even Alistair's über-hero Duncan did not become a GW because of any good deeds. (Read The Calling to find out) The Wardens committed treason, endangered King Maric's life, used blood magic...compromised their supposed neutrality... They are a "victory, no matter the cost!" group (Remind me of Cerberus in the ME universe) , not knights in shining armor. The fact that Alistair doesn't even know just how Duncan ended up in the GW (Otherwise he'd never say "Joining the Wardens is an honor, not a punishment!") ...shows just how honesty went on there.

Modifié par Persephone, 18 août 2010 - 02:37 .

[Sarah1281]

Maybe the guy sending the signal is the one making the judgement call based on Loghain's 'this is winnable'/'this is a lost cause' criteria. He sends one signal to light the beacon and one not to so no one around him wonders why he's not sending the signal and does it for him.

[Sarah1281]

Persephone wrote...

DragonRacer13 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

2 reasons: Firstly, I KNOW Alistair will leave without metagaming because he says so if you don´t dismiss the idea outright. Secondly, The Wardens are supposed to be glorious and heroic. They can´t fulfill this duty if they have a traitor as one of them.
Lastly, it´s really dumb to trust Loghain at this point, and if Loghain would think a bit like me the Warden would die the first time he fights at Loghain´s side.

The bolded part made me cringe. Perhaps that's how Alistair views the Grey Wardens - like chivalrous knights -- but the Grey Wardens really are more of a "stop Blights by any and all means necessary" group... which is not necessarily glorious at all. Riordan flat-out says they have among their ranks: blood mages, carta thugs, traitors, bandits, kinslayers, etc.

Exactly. There is nothing glorious or heroic about the Wardens. (In general) Even Alistair's über-hero Duncan did not become a GW because of any good deeds. (Read The Calling to find out) The Wardens committed treason, endangered King Maric's life, used blood magic...compromised their supposed neutrality... They are a "victory, no matter the cost!" group (Remind me of Cerberus in the ME universe) , not knights in shining armor. The fact that Alistair doesn't even know just how Duncan ended up in the GW (Otherwise he'd never say "Joining the Wardens is an honor, not a punishment!") ...shows just how honesty went on there.

See, whenever I say that people get all pissy and say, "Not all of us RP the same way. Some of us RP that the Wardens live up to Alistair and Wynne's idealistic view of them."

Modifié par Sarah1281, 18 août 2010 - 02:56 .

[Persephone]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

DragonRacer13 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

2 reasons: Firstly, I KNOW Alistair will leave without metagaming because he says so if you don´t dismiss the idea outright. Secondly, The Wardens are supposed to be glorious and heroic. They can´t fulfill this duty if they have a traitor as one of them.
Lastly, it´s really dumb to trust Loghain at this point, and if Loghain would think a bit like me the Warden would die the first time he fights at Loghain´s side.

The bolded part made me cringe. Perhaps that's how Alistair views the Grey Wardens - like chivalrous knights -- but the Grey Wardens really are more of a "stop Blights by any and all means necessary" group... which is not necessarily glorious at all. Riordan flat-out says they have among their ranks: blood mages, carta thugs, traitors, bandits, kinslayers, etc.

Exactly. There is nothing glorious or heroic about the Wardens. (In general) Even Alistair's über-hero Duncan did not become a GW because of any good deeds. (Read The Calling to find out) The Wardens committed treason, endangered King Maric's life, used blood magic...compromised their supposed neutrality... They are a "victory, no matter the cost!" group (Remind me of Cerberus in the ME universe) , not knights in shining armor. The fact that Alistair doesn't even know just how Duncan ended up in the GW (Otherwise he'd never say "Joining the Wardens is an honor, not a punishment!") ...shows just how honesty went on there.

See, whenever I say that people get all pissy and say, "Not all of us RP the same way. Some of us RP that the Wardens live up to Alistair and Wynne's idealistic view of them."

Well, that's their call. But even in the most paragon (Me2 influence again) DAO playthrough, there are some nasty, not so neutral things involved. 

[Sarah1281]

Persephone wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

DragonRacer13 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

2 reasons: Firstly, I KNOW Alistair will leave without metagaming because he says so if you don´t dismiss the idea outright. Secondly, The Wardens are supposed to be glorious and heroic. They can´t fulfill this duty if they have a traitor as one of them.
Lastly, it´s really dumb to trust Loghain at this point, and if Loghain would think a bit like me the Warden would die the first time he fights at Loghain´s side.

The bolded part made me cringe. Perhaps that's how Alistair views the Grey Wardens - like chivalrous knights -- but the Grey Wardens really are more of a "stop Blights by any and all means necessary" group... which is not necessarily glorious at all. Riordan flat-out says they have among their ranks: blood mages, carta thugs, traitors, bandits, kinslayers, etc.

Exactly. There is nothing glorious or heroic about the Wardens. (In general) Even Alistair's über-hero Duncan did not become a GW because of any good deeds. (Read The Calling to find out) The Wardens committed treason, endangered King Maric's life, used blood magic...compromised their supposed neutrality... They are a "victory, no matter the cost!" group (Remind me of Cerberus in the ME universe) , not knights in shining armor. The fact that Alistair doesn't even know just how Duncan ended up in the GW (Otherwise he'd never say "Joining the Wardens is an honor, not a punishment!") ...shows just how honesty went on there.

See, whenever I say that people get all pissy and say, "Not all of us RP the same way. Some of us RP that the Wardens live up to Alistair and Wynne's idealistic view of them."

Well, that's their call. But even in the most paragon (Me2 influence again) DAO playthrough, there are some nasty, not so neutral things involved. 

I just don't see how it's their call that the entire GW order that includes many people besides the PC is an order of saints.

[phaonica]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Maybe the guy sending the signal is the one making the judgement call based on Loghain's 'this is winnable'/'this is a lost cause' criteria. He sends one signal to light the beacon and one not to so no one around him wonders why he's not sending the signal and does it for him.

Ahh, I didn't think about that guy making the assessment. In that case you'd have someone who could see the field well enough to assess it, and you would still not have to be able to see the battlefield well from the beacon. 

However, there was still surely some kind of Plan B in case the beacon for some legitimate reason wasn't lit. Unless Loghain was counting on Cailan being too ... distracted... to realize that if the beacon wasn't lit, that that'd mean Loghain wouldn't engage (in which case, that would be Bad for Loghain to do that).

If the beacon wasn't lit, was Loghain supposed to assume the battle was lost? Or was he supposed to decide at some point to engage without the lit beacon? And if so, if he was supposed to engage even with an unlit beacon, would that not mean that the only way for him to know the battle was lost was because he waited to long for the beacon to be lit? If he was supposed to engage even with an unlit beacon, what would the beacon being "late" matter?

[Monica21]

jln.francisco wrote...
It's really not all that surprising. Is the USMC noble and heroic? Is medicine a noble and honorable profession? Are firefighters brave? Are paramedics heroes? It's just the way people view organisations that serve vital roles in their society. In Thedas Wardens stop the Blights no matter the cost to them in manpower. I think that's noble even if it leads to some misguided and reprehensible decisions.

I think it's noble, especially considering the cost, but it's not the same as referring to Wardens as "glorious and heroic." That's where all this started.

Edited to add, it's also one thing to think the order performs a noble deed and quite another to say that each member of the order is individually beyond reproach.

Modifié par Monica21, 18 août 2010 - 03:20 .

[phaonica]

I can perhaps picture this in my head:

The battle hasn't begun yet, and Loghain is settling the army in it's position of cover. Then he waits. From his positition, he *can* see the darkspawn army pass him as they head towards Cailan's frontline. As they pass him, before they even get to the "battlefield" he starts to realize that the horde is too big, that this plan isn't going to work, and he doesn't have time, or he doesn't think anyone could get around the approaching darkspawn to warn the frontline.  From his view, the battle is lost before it even started, and when the beacon is late... he knows that's because the darkspawn were more overwhelming than anticipated. He decides to salvage who he can, and that does not include Cailan's frontline.

I know there is nothing in the game to support any of this theorizing, but I felt like if the beacon was truely needed, then it would be because Loghain couldn't see the field well enough to know when to engage, and if he couldn't see the field well enough to engage, then he couldn't see the field well enough to claim that the battle was lost.

[Elhanan]

Monica21 wrote... *snip*

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but how could the cure be considered as bad as the disease? If Howe and Vaughan are the only two people left who can stop the blight, you must understand that they're still people and not darkspawn, right? If no one stops the blight then there are simply no people left. Everyone dies. How is that better?

Hypothetical situations drawing away from the other discussion, but I will bite again: Let one die to stop the Blight; execute the other. Spoon!

Loghain is wonderfully created character, and possibly my fave villain since Charlton Heston portrayed Cardinal R in The Three Musketeers. And yes, if you keep him alive after the Landsmeet, you can discover more of his motivations, and see some redeeming qualities, Too bad he decided to taint his once shining reputation thru repeated crimes.

He killed Cailan, all but two of Ferelden's Wardens, and probably the majority of the army by retreating from the field. He tried to have Eamon killed, allowed Howe to kill House Cousland and then chose the vermin as an advisor, sold his countrymen into slavery to pay for his poor choices, paid to have the survivng Warden's killed, and much, much more.

Now we have this thread to discuss that he is simply misunderstood? That his retreat at Ostagar was actually a proper tactical choice? And then some of the posters here choose to berate and ridicule others of opposing POV over a fictional character?

Sad; ain't it?

[Dean_the_Young]

jln.francisco wrote...

Mayhaps you should read the Art of War, by Sun Tzu before you go off on military tactics.

**** Sun Tzu. His advice amounts to 'smart people tend to win.' 'Don't **** up,.'

**** him.

If you want to know about war or making difficult decisions about ruling your state, read anything by Hobbes or Machiavelli. Don't take everything they say to heart (they were lacking in the ethics department) but they are much better reading then Sun Tzu.

Sun Tzu goes far more than 'Don't **** up'. The Art of War goes into a number of valid points true regardless of the age of warfare, from the differences/advantages of differing types of terrain, the importance of not comitting what you can't afford to lose if you don't have to, the proper role of generals in relation to their men and their rulers, the costs of wars and the benefits of peace, the importance of intelligence both of terrain and enemy character, and more.

Someone who flips off what he writes is flipping off what amounts to a major part of modern Western military culture and style.

[nos_astra]

phaonica wrote...

I can perhaps picture this in my head:

The battle hasn't begun yet, and Loghain is settling the army in it's position of cover. Then he waits. From his positition, he *can* see the darkspawn army pass him as they head towards Cailan's frontline. As they pass him, before they even get to the "battlefield" he starts to realize that the horde is too big, that this plan isn't going to work, and he doesn't have time, or he doesn't think anyone could get around the approaching darkspawn to warn the frontline.  From his view, the battle is lost before it even started, and when the beacon is late... he knows that's because the darkspawn were more overwhelming than anticipated. He decides to salvage who he can, and that does not include Cailan's frontline.

I know there is nothing in the game to support any of this theorizing, but I felt like if the beacon was truely needed, then it would be because Loghain couldn't see the field well enough to know when to engage, and if he couldn't see the field well enough to engage, then he couldn't see the field well enough to claim that the battle was lost.

You know what is very likely? Everyone was aware that the next fight might be lost. From RTO we know even Cailan was aware of it, so was Loghain.

They fought because if they didn't the horde would advance and it would not be easier to keep it in check. They could have delayed the battle for a couple of days, maybe two weeks, but eventually it was inevitable. They had a large portion of the army gathered at a strategic position and waiting could also have meant losing the advantage of terrain.

Is this agreeable so far?

Now. Loghain is extremely displeased with Cailan and his idea of asking the Orlesians for help. Cailan is a fool and expandable. He makes a half-hearted attempt to keep Cailan from the frontlines but Cailan refuses. Loghain is not going to lose any sleep over it.

The battle starts. Loghain is not in a position to judge the size or progress of the horde because obviously he needs the beacon to know when to charge. He's already half of a mind to teach Cailan a lesson, to get rid of the Wardens but he still has not decided yet. He's a man of honor and knows full well that straying from the battle plan will be considered treason.

The tower is overun, the signal is delayed. Maybe he hopes at this point that the signal is not going to be lit at all, giving him an out without compromising his honor. But the beacon is lit. At this moment Loghain needs to make up his mind, follow the original plan or ignore the signal. He subsequently convinces himself that the battle would have been lost anyway (which may be true or not, Loghain can't know that but he won't admit this, probably not even to himself).

That's exactly what we saw in the cutscenes. Loghain is no monster, he's really a tragic figure to decide something like that, but not a villain. It's still treason, though.

Modifié par klarabella, 18 août 2010 - 01:29 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

I'm inclined to take klarabella's view. Loghain can take the 'letter of the law' by saying he was not to charge until the signal was lit, but can also take the practical defence of claiming by the time it happened it was too late to save anyone. Basically covering his ass on both fronts (and having the Wardens to blame for the delay to boot).

[Dean_the_Young]

I'm wondering how Loghain's attempts to keep Cailan from the front were only half-hearted, considering the implications he's argued it time and time again. What would people consider a sincere attempt: kidnapping?

[CalJones]

I'd go with that, Klarabella. Apart from the not losing sleep part - he clearly does, judging by the dark circles under his eyes.