12857 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Monica21 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It's said that after the fourth blight, most people don't think there is ever going to be a blight anymore. Loghain is hardly the only person who is skeptical of the Wardens. And for good reason, as Costin said.

And it's actually stated somewhere that the Wardens were the ones who told people there was never going to be another Blight. Probably to alleviate fears because the fourth Blight was so devastating. So you have a group of Wardens 400 years ago who said there was never going to be another, and a small, recently arrived, group of Ferelden Wardens who see some darkspawn and claim it's a Blight. There are lots of reasons to be skeptical of the Wardens.

Oh they did? I didn't know that.

[Costin_Razvan]

How does the history of the Blights give me any damned reason to believe the Wardens when all they are willing to tell me is that a Blight is coming. If they had told the whole truth about the Calling and how exactly a warden can sense the Archdemon, then yes I would have gone with them if I had been Loghain. Hell I would have brought an army with me.

Also, if it is really that important then how come Genevieve only goes to Fereldan with a small cadre of Wardens? The Order in Orlais is supposed to have hundreds of members and she brings less then a dozen with her to try and stop a Blight from starting?

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 20 octobre 2010 - 03:29 .

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It's said that after the fourth blight, most people don't think there is ever going to be a blight anymore. Loghain is hardly the only person who is skeptical of the Wardens. And for good reason, as Costin said.

And it's actually stated somewhere that the Wardens were the ones who told people there was never going to be another Blight. Probably to alleviate fears because the fourth Blight was so devastating. So you have a group of Wardens 400 years ago who said there was never going to be another, and a small, recently arrived, group of Ferelden Wardens who see some darkspawn and claim it's a Blight. There are lots of reasons to be skeptical of the Wardens.

Oh they did? I didn't know that.

Erm, I recall Loghain saying the opposite, that Wardens tried to convince people there were Blights when there weren't.  Sort of a crying wolf situation.  Why in the world would Wardens discount the reason for their existence as an order??

[KnightofPhoenix]

You can't use results that only we know about that Loghain could not have known to judge him. It seems weak to me. You can certainly use it in a consequentialist argument to prove that his actions were not good actions. Certainly. But you can't use that argument to judge Loghain as a person. He could not have known what the Wardens are claiming. Whatever Flemeth told Maric, Loghain was not told the same. Faced with his ignorance, you are asking him to make leaps of faith. Sometimes, making a leap of faith is necessary, but that's not Loghain. He can't, he needs something concrete to work with, something that the Wardens are not providing him. So why should he risk his life or let his king risk his life, in other words risk Ferelden interests, based on no evidence?

His actions were wrong in hindsight and it's very easy for us to judge people that way. With what he was confronted with however, he had the choice between listening to a band of strangers that provide no evidence or proof to their claims, or not. In his position, I might not have been as non-trusting, but I would certainly have liked them to convince me, with facts.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 20 octobre 2010 - 03:34 .

[Addai]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

How does the history of the Blights give me any damned reason to believe the Wardens when all they are willing to tell me is that a Blight is coming. If they had told the whole truth about the Calling and how exactly a warden can sense the Archdemon, then yes I would have gone with them if I had been Loghain. Hell I would have brought an army with me.

Also, if it is really that important then how come Genevieve only goes to Fereldan with a small cadre of Wardens? The Order in Orlais is supposed to have hundreds of members and she brings less then a dozen with her to try and stop a Blight from starting?

On a stealth mission?

Maric believes Flemeth's prophecy, for one thing, or at least he is doubtful enough and the risk is great enough that he thinks he has to take it seriously.  That is probably his weakest point.  Which in the end proves to be Ferelden's salvation.  Which once again demonstrates that the writers think, even if you guys don't, that sometimes the intangible wins.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...
 That is probably his weakest point.  Which in the end proves to be Ferelden's salvation.  Which once again demonstrates that the writers think, even if you guys don't, that sometimes the intangible wins.

But this in hindsight.
In the moment, no one could have predicted this and in the moment, no one rational could have agreed with it as readily.

[Monica21]

Addai67 wrote...
Erm, I recall Loghain saying the opposite, that Wardens tried to convince people there were Blights when there weren't.  Sort of a crying wolf situation.  Why in the world would Wardens discount the reason for their existence as an order??

I don't recall Loghain saying the Wardens were crying wolf. The only thing I remember is "This is no true Blight, Anora. Only Cailan's vanity demanded it be so."

As for why they would claim it's a Blight when it isn't, well, this is an order that has long been gone from Ferelden and are trying to establish themselves as relevant. Loghain has reason to doubt that they are altruistic in their motives. Maybe they just want to boost recruitment numbers or maybe it's something else. In either case, there are, again, reasons to believe it's not a Blight.

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

You can't use results that only we know about that Loghain could not have known to judge him. It seems weak to me. You can certainly use it in a consequentialist argument to prove that his actions were not good actions. Certainly. But you can't use that argument to judge Loghain as a person. He could not have known what the Wardens are claiming. Whatever Flemeth told Maric, Loghain was not told the same. Faced with his ignorance, you are asking him to make leaps of faith. Sometimes, making a leap of faith is necessary, but that's not Loghain. He can't, he needs something concrete to work with, something that the Wardens are not providing him. So why should he risk his life or let his king risk his life, in other words risk Ferelden interests, based on no evidence?

His actions were wrong in hindsight and it's very easy for us to judge people that way. With what he was confronted with however, he had the choice between listening to a band of strangers that provide no evidence or proof to their claims, or not. In his position, I might not have been as non-trusting, but I would certainly have liked them to convince me, with facts.

Yeah, ok.  I am not trying to work up a "Loghain is a bad person" argument.  Who said I was?  Although it seems to me y'all do think Maric is a bad person.  At least a weak one, and you're not acknowledging his strengths as strengths or Loghain's weaknesses as weaknesses.

Oh, and re what you said in the Alistair thread:  I also think it's disingenuous to pretend that Loghain did not act out of emotion as well as calculation regarding the Orlesian threat.  Sometimes I get the feeling you guys (you and Costin, at least) have a Loghain in your heads who is your archetype and not the actual Gaider/ Kirby character.

[phaonica]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

No, it's not necessarily. By "crossing the line" I mean doing something unnecessary or easily avoidable if you think about it enough, that doesn't provide the best possible results.

If an action is clearly beneficial for the majority and is necessary, then it's not crossing the line for me. It might be for the majority, but they lack the perspective of those in power. Either the ruler imposes it and the people will thank him for it later, or the ruler gives it a better image so it can be accepted. but the problem here is not the act itself but how it is perceived by the majority that often doesn't think enough and doesn't have the perspective necessary to think enough. They don't think about the long term.

When it comes to Maric and Loghain, it always made more sense to me that Maric didn't so much pull Loghain away from his pragmatic conclusions, but rather smoothed out the rough edges for the eyes of the public (which clearly Loghain is not so good at). That isn't to say that Loghain is the one pulling the strings, or that Maric doesn't have the brains to lead, just that I didn't believe Maric 'balanced' Loghain in that he helped 'fix' Loghain's 'bad' decisions. I figured that Maric really agreed with Loghain for the most part.

That's the impass here. For me "crossing the line" is not a sentimental concern as in me being sad about something (sentiments I can share). It's doing something that is unnecessary and excessive. And I can't object to that with emotion and be taken seriously. But I can object to that rationally and explain why it's excessive.

Ok, yeah, I agree with that interpretation of crossing the line. When I think about someone 'crossing the line' for me, it almost always has to do with them stepping into the area of excess or illogic.

[Addai]

Monica21 wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
Erm, I recall Loghain saying the opposite, that Wardens tried to convince people there were Blights when there weren't.  Sort of a crying wolf situation.  Why in the world would Wardens discount the reason for their existence as an order??

I don't recall Loghain saying the Wardens were crying wolf. The only thing I remember is "This is no true Blight, Anora. Only Cailan's vanity demanded it be so."

In The Calling, when he's arguing with Maric, I believe he says that the Wardens are manufacturing threats in order to scare people into believing their order is still relevant.  I don't have the book in front of me to check.

As for why they would claim it's a Blight when it isn't, well, this is an order that has long been gone from Ferelden and are trying to establish themselves as relevant. Loghain has reason to doubt that they are altruistic in their motives. Maybe they just want to boost recruitment numbers or maybe it's something else. In either case, there are, again, reasons to believe it's not a Blight.

This doesn't make sense.  In order to establish their relevance, they would want people to think a Blight is coming, not the reverse.  I'm not saying it didn't happen somewhere along the line, I would just need to see the chapter and verse where that was stated.

[phaonica]

Addai67 wrote...

phaonica wrote...

I agree that Loghain was a hothead near the beginning of ST. But I also think that the Loghain at the beginning of the Calling has changed. However, the Maric I see at the beginning of the Calling is the same one that he was throughout ST.

See, I think Loghain is at least equally hampered in TC.  All he sees is "Orlesian" and not the real threat that the Wardens are bringing before them.

A threat that the actual organization of Wardens didn't believe in.

Whether or not there actually was a threat in hindsight doesn't affect how I rate his motivations in the first place. If there had turned out to be no threat at all, I would rate his motivations just the same.

Uh... ok.  I guess it is a question of whether he did the right thing for the right reasons or not.  I would say some of his reasons were better than others, for sure.  I suppose I find it harsh to think that because he had a sense of malaise, and did the right thing anyway, that somehow his funk invalidates what he actually accomplished.

It just seems like it's like saying .. If I spend all my money on lottery tickets and force my family to live in poverty, and I happen to win, does that excuse forcing my family to live in poverty all that time?

Well, maybe that's not as well thought out as I'd like it to be, but I've gotta go to class. I'll bbl.

Modifié par phaonica, 20 octobre 2010 - 05:19 .

[Costin_Razvan]

On a stealth mission?

Maric believes Flemeth's prophecy, for one thing, or at least he is doubtful enough and the risk is great enough that he thinks he has to take it seriously. That is probably his weakest point. Which in the end proves to be Ferelden's salvation. Which once again demonstrates that the writers think, even if you guys don't, that sometimes the intangible wins.

It's a rescue mission for all intents and purposes, how does stealth work as a Grey Warden anyway? The Darkspawn can sense you.

I cannot say that I fault Maric's thinking for going there because of what Flemeth said ( nor was I trying to do so ), but I also cannot fault Loghain for refusing to believe the Wardens. I do however disagree with anyone who would have helped the Wardens with just the scant proof they present.

As for what the writers believe, you will excuse me if I don't consider that as some good argument. The writers have done nothing special in Dragon Age in my opinion, save for how they fleshed out individual characters in the game.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 20 octobre 2010 - 03:46 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...
Yeah, ok.  I am not trying to work up a "Loghain is a bad person" argument.  Who said I was?  Although it seems to me y'all do think Maric is a bad person.  At least a weak one, and you're not acknowledging his strengths as strengths or Loghain's weaknesses as weaknesses.

I never said he was a bad person and I never said he was weak. He isn't, imo, as strong or as intelligent as I thought he would be or how I would view an ideal leader.

And Loghain has weaknesses and I said many many times that I would never consider Loghain as a good ruler.
He is an excellent general, but he can't be a good or great ruler. He could be a decent one though, just not "great".

Maric and Loghain together compensate for each other. Individually, I think both can't do much outside their specific fields (Maric as figurehead, Loghain as general).

Addai67 wrote...
Oh, and re what you said in the Alistair thread:  I also think it's disingenuous to pretend that Loghain did not act out of emotion as well as calculation regarding the Orlesian threat.  Sometimes I get the feeling you guys (you and Costin, at least) have a Loghain in your heads who is your archetype and not the actual Gaider/ Kirby character.

Fair enough, I was arguing against the idea that Loghain only acted from his feelings, which I do not believe was the case. The situation was murky enough that Loghain's fears had basis.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 20 octobre 2010 - 03:59 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

phaonica wrote...
When it comes to Maric and Loghain, it always made more sense to me that Maric didn't so much pull Loghain away from his pragmatic conclusions, but rather smoothed out the rough edges for the eyes of the public (which clearly Loghain is not so good at). That isn't to say that Loghain is the one pulling the strings, or that Maric doesn't have the brains to lead, just that I didn't believe Maric 'balanced' Loghain in that he helped 'fix' Loghain's 'bad' decisions. I figured that Maric really agreed with Loghain for the most part..

Indeed, I agree. I think Maric made Loghain's decisions "prettier" and more acceptable. I don't think he disagreed with him on anything fundamentally.

Maric is the perfect figurehead and legitmiser. That's how I view him at least.
Loghain thinks, but he doesn't have the same gift to make his actions look acceptable, that was Maric.

[Monica21]

Addai67 wrote...
In The Calling, when he's arguing with Maric, I believe he says that the Wardens are manufacturing threats in order to scare people into believing their order is still relevant.  I don't have the book in front of me to check.

Well, that's a bit different from them crying wolf over a Blight, considering that there was no Blight in TC.

This doesn't make sense.  In order to establish their relevance, they would want people to think a Blight is coming, not the reverse.  I'm not saying it didn't happen somewhere along the line, I would just need to see the chapter and verse where that was stated.

Do you mean in Origins or TC? Because they were trying to establish that a Blight was coming in Origins. They just did a poor job of it.

[Costin_Razvan]

Oh, and re what you said in the Alistair thread: I also think it's disingenuous to pretend that Loghain did not act out of emotion as well as calculation regarding the Orlesian threat. Sometimes I get the feeling you guys (you and Costin, at least) have a Loghain in your heads who is your archetype and not the actual Gaider/ Kirby character.

I never did state that Loghain did not act because of what the felt regarding Orlais, however I believe he was right in what he believed from the very start ( and I was proven right ).

I know Loghain makes mistakes...but my consideration of mistakes would include not killing Eamon outright, not assassinating Cailan before the battle of Ostagar and possibly killing Anora so that he would gain the throne. It may sound harsh, but if he had done these 3 things, or at leas assassinated Cailan, then the Civil War might have been averted altogether.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 20 octobre 2010 - 04:14 .

[Addai]

Monica21 wrote...

Do you mean in Origins or TC? Because they were trying to establish that a Blight was coming in Origins. They just did a poor job of it.

I'm referring to where you said Wardens once tried to convince people there were no Blights coming.  Unless I'm misquoting you or misunderstood.

[Addai]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
I never did state that Loghain did not act because of what the felt regarding Orlais, however I believe he was right in what he believed from the very start ( and I was proven right ).

Eh.  You can't say anything was proven.  All we know is Cailan wanted to marry Celene, not that he would have followed through, the LM would have let him, or that Orlais really has imperial designs on Ferelden any longer.  All of those things are still unknown.   I know you think they're givens, but they really aren't.

So Loghain may or may not have been justified in the severity of his mistrust.  For the record, I agree he had every right to expect the worst from Orlais and do everything in his power to see that Ferelden remain independent, up to the time that a much greater existential threat presents itself.  That is the Blight.  His inability to recognize it as the threat it is, how big a failing that is is up for debate. 

You said the writers hadn't done anything remarkable other than characterization, but that's a pretty big but.  All of these characters acting out of understandable limitations and mixed motives leads to a pretty compelling story IMO.  Nothing is clear-cut, which is why we're still talking about it.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
I know Loghain makes mistakes...but my consideration of mistakes would include not killing Eamon outright, not assassinating Cailan before the battle of Ostagar

On those two, I agree.

I also think his major mistake is his heavy handed method against the bannorn. Being heavy handed against one, two, three invidiual banns. That's alright. But to do that on the whole Bannorn? Too much.
The bannorn is divisive by nature, Loghain could have taken advantage of that. Instead, he gave them common cause to unite them. Against him.

I know Loghain does not have the paitence to deal with political bs when he sees his nation under threat from the south and west. But I think he got carried away here. He could have made the civil war much smaller in scale and less destructive.

[Costin_Razvan]

You said the writers hadn't done anything remarkable other than characterization, but that's a pretty big but.

Maybe, but I personally would prefer a game with a vastly stronger plot then stronger characters in a weak plot.

   I know you think they're givens, but they really aren't.

It's almost equal to common sense for me that Cailan would have done it and that Celene had plans.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 20 octobre 2010 - 04:18 .

[Addai]

Sorry Costin, your opinion is just your opinion and doesn't equal "common sense." Stories take turns you don't always expect or see coming. A lot of people think Morrigan is an evil temptress out to destroy, for instance, whereas I hope she's going to end up saving our butts. And if the Warden hadn't been so miraculously badass, Ferelden's old tormentor might have saved it from the Blight and then gone home. That would have been an interesting story, too.



I'm reminded of this TV show, I forget the name atm, where nukes get dropped and people in a rural town see Chinese fighter jets overhead. For a long time you think the Chinese are the bad guys until the writers reveal they were there dropping food aid.

[KnightofPhoenix]

@ Addai. But we can, from the knowledge we have, maps and codexes, have strong reason to believe that Orlais has interests in having Ferelden under its influence. We can't predict in political science. But we can, using international theories / paradigms, have a basic idea of what *might* happen. Now DA is a fantasy world and something out of the ordinary might happen that we can't account for. And sometimes we can't account for all variables, especially when it comes to the personality of leaders and how that affects their decision making.

While we don't know for a fact what Celene is planing, I think it's much easier to argue that she was planing to further Orlesian interests at the possible expense of Ferelden interests, than to argue that her marriage with Cailan was strictly non-instrumental. It's entirely possible, but I find it unlikely (and even if it, the consequences of such a marriage still need to be accounted for).

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 20 octobre 2010 - 04:27 .

[Costin_Razvan]

It is an opinion based on common sense, logic and reason. So you will have to excuse if I do firmly believe that Celene indeed had plans, just exactly as I believed from the moment I read those letters at Ostagar.



To quote TIM again: "The simple-minded focused on the holes in the story; they needed an explanation for every loose end. The intelligent filled in the holes themselves, using logic, reason, and creative thinking" not trying to sound offensive or anything, but that's how I feel regarding the matter.

[Addai]

KoP, sometimes imperial powers simply tire of being imperial. Or they decide that less heavy-handed methods are better all around. The fact that Celene wanted an alliance with Ferelden that could avert future wars doesn't mean she's teh ebul. She is obviously looking out for her own, but in many ways it would also benefit Ferelden.



Now, personally, if I was a Fereldan I wouldn't want Orlais' money or even a promise of peace in exchange for Fereldan autonomy. Too high a price. I'm much more Loghain at heart about such things (cue William Wallace crying "freeeeedooom!"). The fact that Ferelden will continue to live in opposition to Orlais will not be without consequences, however.

[Addai]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

It is an opinion based on common sense, logic and reason. So you will have to excuse if I do firmly believe that Celene indeed had plans, just exactly as I believed from the moment I read those letters at Ostagar.

To quote TIM again: "The simple-minded focused on the holes in the story; they needed an explanation for every loose end. The intelligent filled in the holes themselves, using logic, reason, and creative thinking" not trying to sound offensive or anything, but that's how I feel regarding the matter.

Yeah well, that quote isn't any more true or applicable just because you keep repeating it.