12857 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
another completely different matter is for him to refuse to allow Orlais ( pardon the Chantry ) to decide Fereldan's internal policy regarding mages and thus leading into a war.

It's not Ferelden's internal policy. This is Chantry policy that no monarch has a right to interfer in.
DG said that the Chantry will say no to the Circle boon and that's that. It's within their jurisdiction.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Tell me, what would you do if Celene threatened you with war unless you stopped building your navy for instance?

Different situation all together. This on the otherhand is Ferelden internal policy.
And no I wouldn't back down. But I would compromise and make it look less threatening, for the moment, if it's necessary.
If she continues to push herself, then the alliance with Nevarra would be accelerated (whereas Nevarra would not be hardpressed to assist a nation that goes against the Chantry and religion as much).

If she really wants to start a war over it, then so be it. But she would be the clear aggressor. I wouldn't risk starting a war that doesn't need to happen in the immediate future, but I am perfectly willing to fight one if Orlais is really that desperate to go to war (which I don't think is the case).

EDIT: furthermore, I wouldn't focus on a military navy so soon. It's rather a merchant navy I am interested in, in the immediate future. Once Ferelden gets back on its feet, then we can focus on a military navy, and take a hardline less compromising position.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 18 novembre 2010 - 02:52 .

[Giggles_Manically]

Fereldan also lost tons of people to emmigration.

Many people packed up and fled to Kirkwall.



So the Civil war, and Blight are not the only drains on manpower here.



The other thing to consider is that most allies go home and have no treaty to help anymore.

Redcliffe soldiers: Follow Arl Eamon, and he will not probably sign up when most of his arldom is in shambles.

Dwarves: Go back to Orzamar and try routing the darkspawn.

Golems: Get shut off after a few years when Branka goes fully crazy, and are no longer available. Bhelen is also the only one who has them since he tries to shut her down for not making them JUST for him.

Werewolves: Go violent later on, and run off into hiding, so no one finds them.

Dalish: Aren't intrested in a war that dosent involve them.



The Mages might still be available, after they fix the tower though.



That really dosent leave you with a large body of troops then.

[Costin_Razvan]

Knight: I think you are looking at this from a modern political perspective rather then a Medieval One. The Chantry's power comes from the support it has from the population just like the Medieval Church did. Yes the Church did have ( In theory ) the power to order Monarchs around but it didn't work out so well practice.



Just like Fredrick I believed, so do I believe that in all matters the power of the state should be higher then the powers of the Church. The way I see it ( and the way Loghain would likely see it in my opinion ) is that if the Chantry tried to force the issue then I would refuse even to the point of war. ( which I think of as inevitable anyway if Fereldan seeks to increase it's power ).



But enough of my plans, let's talk of yours. You seek to prevent Orlais from invading by allying Nevarra and having that alliance work as a deterrent. The problem with that in my eyes is that you would be too heavily dependent on your alliance with Nevarra when the only reason that Nevarra has to ally you is due to both of you opposing Orlais.



But that isn't much of a reason to aid Fereldan if Orlais invades and Fereldan has a weak military. Yes I did argue that I could convince Nevarra to aid me in my situation, but my plan is for the establishment of a very strong military compared to the one Fereldan has in the aftermath of the Blight, which would have the capability to stand toe to toe against the Chevalier Legions. You however dismiss the mages, the dwarves and even potentially the Dalish.



Celene does not invade Fereldan after the Blight because while Fereldan is a thorn in her side, the fact remains that Anora and Alistair do not make changes that would make Fereldan a real threat to Orlesian Dominance, your plans however do exactly that. So why shouldn't she invade? I hear you speak a lot about economic changes, but what about military ones?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Just like Fredrick I believed, so do I believe that in all matters the power of the state should be higher then the powers of the Church.

Now you are confusing an early modern European context with a medieval one. Frederick was not a medieval monarch and Prussia was not a medieval state and kingdom. The political context he was in was very different than what was in the pre-modern era.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
But enough of my plans, let's talk of yours. You seek to prevent Orlais from invading by allying Nevarra and having that alliance work as a deterrent. The problem with that in my eyes is that you would be too heavily dependent on your alliance with Nevarra when the only reason that Nevarra has to ally you is due to both of you opposing Orlais.

This is a necessary measure for the immediate future. This is a mutually dependent alliance, thougn naturally Ferelden being weaker, will be more dependent in the time being. This is just a political reality that cannot be ignored.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
But that isn't much of a reason to aid Fereldan if Orlais invades and Fereldan has a weak military. Yes I did argue that I could convince Nevarra to aid me in my situation, but my plan is for the establishment of a very strong military compared to the one Fereldan has in the aftermath of the Blight, which would have the capability to stand toe to toe against the Chevalier Legions. You however dismiss the mages, the dwarves and even potentially the Dalish.

Because the dwarves have no reason to want to fight a surface war, we've been through this a million times. Nor do I see the Dalish willing to fight such a war. However, I see them as economic allies and assets. And later on, potential military assets. 

And you don't establish a powerful military overnight, with a very weak and poor country. The establishment of a proffesional standard, not feudal army is a highly expensive endeavour that takes time, ressources and an adequate infrastructure and political system that Ferelden does not have.

EDIT: and I am not dimissing the mages. I would plan on allying with the Lucrosians and have the Circle Tower become more of an economic actor. That would be a way of increasing political influence while being subtle. The power of money is grossly underestimated.

Ultimately, I plan on having them build enchantements for the navy. Fire resistance enchantements and the like to ships would be awesome. Add to that dwarven technology and dalish crafting.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Celene does not invade Fereldan after the Blight because while Fereldan is a thorn in her side, the fact remains that Anora and Alistair do not make changes that would make Fereldan a real threat to Orlesian Dominance, your plans however do exactly that. So why shouldn't she invade? I hear you speak a lot about economic changes, but what about military ones?

Any threat my plans might pose are for the long term. Orlais has too much to think about currently to launch a preventative war, the Qunari invasion being one and Nevarran encroachement in the north. Ferelden currently would be the least of their problems.

Military development comes later. It is precisely deciding not to focus on overt military development that would keep Orlesian attention off of Ferelden. At  least that is a higher probability. Once Ferelden becomes stable internally, and its economy expanding, can we focus on military development alongside gradual political reforms.
A merchant navy is less likely to frighten Orlais as a complete focus on a military navy that can block the waking sea traffic would.

I am no pacifist and I firmly believe in the importance of the military, and I know the benefits of war. And yes my ambitions for Ferelden to become a major power IS going to lead to a war or two. That is axiomatic, no major power is established without wars.  However, I deem Ferelden not in a position to do this as of yet. Military might must work in tantem with economic power, if Ferelden is going to be a major power. And this is not a modern conception. This has been the case going back to Antiquity.

I am not looking for a huge military expansion that eventually amounts to very little. Ferelden is not similar to say Mongolia, or the Arab Peninsula, for it to do this and then after conquering, start developping itself as a real major power culturally, economically and militarily. Andraste and Maferath's military exploits failed in that regard except vis a vis the expansion of the religion itself, which was ultimately appropriated by Orlais, and freeing Ferelden from the Imperium (but remaining fractured and disunited).

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 18 novembre 2010 - 05:18 .

[Costin_Razvan]

 

Now you are confusing an early modern European context with a medieval one. Frederick was not a medieval monarch and Prussia was not a medieval state and kingdom. The political context he was in was very different than what was in the pre-modern era.  

I talk of Fredrick I the Holy Roman Emperor, not Fredrick the Great.

This is a necessary measure for the immediate future. This is a mutually dependent alliance, thougn naturally Ferelden being weaker, will be more dependent in the time being. This is just a political reality that cannot be ignored.  

And it puts you in a very unfavorable position. Because you are basically becoming a protectorate for Nevarra ( for a time anyway ).

And you don't establish a powerful military overnight, with a very weak and poor country. The establishment of a proffesional standard, not feudal army is a highly expensive endeavour that takes time, ressources and an adequate infrastructure and political system that Ferelden does not have.

I've made my view on the Dwarves and Dalish perfectly clear, and I am sticking to them. Period.
With that in mind. I can make a strong military overnight. Orzammar is pivotal to that in regards to armor and weapons ( and retaking ground in the Deep Roads gives you more quality ore ). The mages are also pivotal in regards to weapon enhancments, and as a elite force of my military.
I have also said my plans in regards to the City Elves. So yes, I do have the resources to build up a strong military overnight that can and will combat the Chevaliers.

Any threat my plans might pose are for the long term. Orlais has too much to think about currently to launch a preventative war, the Qunari invasion being one and Nevarran encroachement in the north. Ferelden currently would be the least of their problems. 
Military development comes later. It is precisely deciding not to focus on overt military development that would keep Orlesian attention off of Ferelden. At  least that is a higher probability. Once Ferelden becomes stable internally, and its economy expanding, can we focus on military development alongside gradual political reforms. A merchant navy is less likely to frighten Orlais as a complete focus on a military navy that can block the waking sea traffic would.  

And that plan goes to hell once the Qunari invade the Free Marches and set up a blockade that would collapse your sea trade, and while Orlais cannot ignore the Qunari neither can you. If Fereldan's military is not streghtened and the Qunari decide to invade then you will be crushed.

However, I deem Ferelden not in a position to do this as of yet. Military might must work in tantem with economic power, if Ferelden is going to be a major power. And this is not a modern conception. This has been the case going back to Antiquity. 
I am not looking for a huge military expansion that eventually amounts to very little. Ferelden is not similar to say Mongolia, or the Arab Peninsula, for it to do this and then after conquering, start developping itself as a real major power culturally, economically and militarily. Andraste and Maferath's military exploits failed in that regard except vis a vis the expansion of the religion itself, which was ultimately appropriated by Orlais, and freeing Ferelden from the Imperium (but remaining fractured and disunited).  

My plans amount to conquering Orlais and destroying the Chantry, that's it and I do not consider that a huge military expansion. Long term is stabilizing the region and making Fereldan the superpower of Thedas ( to replace Orlais ), there is also the complete annihilation of Darkspawn on the table.
Even if the Qunari decide to not invade Fereldan, ( and I say IF ), then they would most certainly not ignore your ships. Your Navy would be either destroyed or held in port for 10 years ( the duration of DA2 and the invasion I assume ), which would slow your progress considerably. 

I think I should also make this perfectly clear to what I am planning: Total War against Orlais. The concept of Total War is to use ALL the possible resources of the state to completely destroy your enemy. In regular wars you don't see that happen.

The reason why the Allies won against the Germans is that the Germans did NOT embrace the concept of Total War until it was too late. This is why the German armies could not take Moscow, they simply lacked the supplies to do it while the Russians did not. This is also the reason Shi Huang and Ghenkis Khan were so succesful 

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 18 novembre 2010 - 06:49 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
I talk of Fredrick I the Holy Roman Emperor, not Fredrick the Great.

Ah. Well even he was in a different context and it's something he can afford doing. The Roman catholic church did not have a superpower backing it up like the Chantry does vis a vis Orlais.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
And it puts you in a very unfavorable position. Because you are basically becoming a protectorate for Nevarra ( for a time anyway ).

Not necessarily. Becoming a protectorate means losing all independence regarding foreign policy, which is certainly not my intention. It's an alliance. Nevarra would be the dominant actor by virtue of its strength and that's unavoidable and they will have influence.  But that's the "lesser of two evils", and it does not have to translate to Nevarran dominance.
It's a necessary defensive / deterring posture for the time being.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
I've made my view on the Dwarves and Dalish perfectly clear, and I am sticking to them. Period.

So have I.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
With that in mind. I can make a strong military overnight.

Good luck with that.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
And that plan goes to hell once the Qunari invade the Free Marches and set up a blockade that would collapse your sea trade, and while Orlais cannot ignore the Qunari neither can you. If Fereldan's military is not streghtened and the Qunari decide to invade then you will be crushed.

If they invade shortly after Origins, the sea trade would not have been developped for it to be crushed anyways. 
And no where did I say that I will ignore the military. But it needs economy with it first, and I don't believe this can be accomplished overnight easily like you believe.
Furthermore, this would be the perfect time to ally with Orlais and show them that Ferelden having a strong navy is to both their benefits.

And at the end of the day:
"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must".

Even if the Qunari decide to not invade Fereldan, ( and I say IF ), then they would most certainly not ignore your ships. Your Navy would be either destroyed or held in port for 10 years ( the duration of DA2 and the invasion I assume ), which would slow your progress considerably.

Sure, it would. It would also justify the presence of a navy.
In the mean time, if the Qunari do install a blockade, the army would be on standby for any possible invasion attempt, and I would ally with Orlais and Nevarra to destroy them. Not one of them benefits from the Waking Sea being blocked. And in the process, convince them that Ferelden having a strong navy would deter the Qunari in the future, in collaboration with those two powers.

Plus, I think I can rival Qunari tech, with dwarven tech, dalish crafting and magical enchantements.

I think I should also make this perfectly clear to what I am planning: Total War against Orlais. The concept of Total War is to use ALL the possible resources of the state to completely destroy your enemy. In regular wars you don't see that happen.

Total war requires a centralised bureaucracy capable of managing and mobalising the totality of your ressources though, something Ferelden does not have. It's not equipped to wage a total war, barring rebellions on its own soil and even then, Maric's rebellion doubfully mobalised all of society.

And Gengis Khan was certainly not waging a total war as we know it at all. 

BTW, just when I thought Bannon redeemed himself, they show us flashbacks of how annoying he was

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 18 novembre 2010 - 07:10 .

[Costin_Razvan]

BTW, just when I thought Bannon redeemed himself, they show us flashbacks of how annoying he was

Just wait till I upload more of em ( I am surprised you watched em all though ). It's hard to NOT hate him.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

BTW, just when I thought Bannon redeemed himself, they show us flashbacks of how annoying he was

Just wait till I upload more of em ( I am surprised you watched em all though ). It's hard to NOT hate him.

Malachenko might be brainwashed like a sheep and a bit coucou in the head, but he is not as annoying as Bannon. I lol everytime Sawyer (and occasionally you lol) tell him to shut up. 

And yea, I'e watched all of them and I'll probably get the game when I get my new pc. It looks good. Too bad the USSR has only 6 missions. And its counter-insurgency mission was meeh. The Russians were fighting like guerrillas and the Americans like brutes in that mission, which kind of kills the purpose.

[phaonica]

You don't care about honor in any sense, and neither does Loghain ( I think to a certain degree ), but I cannot see him as a person who would back down on his word just for convenience.

I don't see him sticking to his word if it puts Ferelden in danger. Now, hypothetically speaking, if I believed that Ferelden did have the manpower/resources/ability to not only win a war against Orlais, but even enough to crush them... I still don't think Loghain would do it. Loghain fights to protect Ferelden, and honor be damned, but I see him fighting defensively, mostly, though, not offensively. I don't remember him ever expressing a desire to get back at the Orlesians for what they'd done to Ferelden, only to stop them and prevent them from doing it again. If Ferelden could crush Orlais, then they aren't a threat and there's no reason to destroy them. Not even to keep a promise.

If Orlais was no threat, then the Chantry would have less manpower against Ferelden, and Ferelden could potentially grant a greater measure of autonomy to it's mages, but I don't see Loghain going to war with Orlais to *make* Orlais not a threat just for the mages.

I still think that Loghain was not dealing with a full deck, which would explain alot of his bizarre and normally OOC behavior in Origins

I don't share this interpretation of Loghain. I think that since his first contact with Maric, it's been practically Loghain's job to be calculating and suspicious. He seemed to be winning most of his battles, in Origins. It was the politicking that he was bad at. And just because he's bad at it, doesn't mean he's minorly insane.

Modifié par phaonica, 18 novembre 2010 - 07:29 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Bannon: Come you commie bastards, come and die!

Sawyer: Spare us your comments Bannon.



"Chuckle".

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Bannon: Come you commie bastards, come and die!
Sawyer: Spare us your comments Bannon.

"Chuckle".

Haha yep, that made me laugh.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

phaonica wrote...

I still think that Loghain was not dealing with a full deck, which would explain alot of his bizarre and normally OOC behavior in Origins

I don't share this interpretation of Loghain. I think that since his first contact with Maric, it's been practically Loghain's job to be calculating and suspicious. He seemed to be winning most of his battles, in Origins. It was the politicking that he was bad at. And just because he's bad at it, doesn't mean he's minorly insane.

Winning his battles means nothing, he is, after all, a highly skilled general.

I''m talking about his epic fail descisions: declaring himself regent and taking the reins of power, allying with Howe and being pretty apathetic towards the threat he posed to Anora, selling the elves into slavery (again, I don't think this is something Loghain would be doing if he had all his marbles).

Ultimately, Loghain ended up practicing the similar tactics and brutality that the Orlesians once did. I think a fully sane Loghain would have stopped and thought about just what the hell it was that he was doing.

The fact that he even tried politicking also makes me suspect his mental cohesion, since he has always been one who prefered to work as a right hand man.

[Giggles_Manically]

I agree with Skadi.



Loghain lost it,and kept saying:

I will just bend this one last rule and win, then things go back to normal!



Well no not really, every time he did that Howe got more power, more people hated him, and as much as I think Eamon is a bastard I agree with him that Loghain was pretty much deleting what it was to be Fereldan to protect people from his paranoia.



I think at the Landsmeet its at its peak really, you can see him really lose it when the Landsmeet turns on him. In my games he only ever gets the one vote form Bann Piglet.



From reading TST, and the Calling the Loghain we see in Origins has gone of his rocker and its not until the end where you see him emerge from under his paranoia.

[phaonica]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

I''m talking about his epic fail descisions: declaring himself regent and taking the reins of power, allying with Howe and being pretty apathetic towards the threat he posed to Anora, selling the elves into slavery (again, I don't think this is something Loghain would be doing if he had all his marbles). 

I'm not convinced to judge any of his actions as insane. Desperate, maybe, but not insane. Unless we're using that word differently, or unless, by these same standards, Cailan is insane for making epic fail decisions trying to become a legend. To me, 'insane' requires a severe disconnect from reality, and I don't find Loghain's paranoia or mistrust to be so misplaced that I perceive it as a disconnect from reality.

Ultimately, Loghain ended up practicing the similar tactics and brutality that the Orlesians once did.

 I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to (other than the slavery).

The fact that he even tried politicking also makes me suspect his mental cohesion, since he has always been one who prefered to work as a right hand man.

He ruled Ferelden in Maric's absence on several occasions. It's not completely beyond him.

[Giggles_Manically]

Loghain still should have known better than to try and ORDER the bannorn into line.

But as Sun Tzu said:

"Generals should not lead nations since they are to harsh, and Politicans should not lead armies since they are too soft"



Loghain is a great general, but a horrible politician.

[CalJones]

Perhaps she is referring to the press gangs, putting down the riots that occurred and so forth. There are snippets if you listen to the various gossips in game. Not that he didn't have reason to do all those things, of course.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

phaonica wrote...

I'm not convinced to judge any of his actions as insane. Desperate, maybe, but not insane. Unless we're using that word differently, or unless, by these same standards, Cailan is insane for making epic fail decisions trying to become a legend. To me, 'insane' requires a severe disconnect from reality, and I don't find Loghain's paranoia or mistrust to be so misplaced that I perceive it as a disconnect from reality.

His behavior in Landsmeet shows a major disconnection from reality. His one line:

"Stand with me, and together, we will defeat even the Blight itself!"

Listening to that line, as well as the rest of Landsmeet, his behavior at defeat, ect...he really lost it mentally. Talking to Eamon before the Landsmeet too shows a mental disconnect. Even Cauthrien eventually admits it, and if you persuade her, wants you to go easy on him because he isn't in his right mind.

I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to (other than the slavery).

His hamfisted crushing of opposition, press ganging people, and the removal of opposing voices through suspicous means....you can argue he had his reasons, but the reality is, it was really no different than what the Orlesians were doing. Makes it even worse when your oppressor is a hero of Ferelden who drove them out.

He ruled Ferelden in Maric's absence on several occasions. It's not completely beyond him.

Sitting in for the king during brief periods of absence, during periods when there wasn't some major internal crisis, is not the same as running the country yourself and taking direct control during a major crisis with the country on the edge of revolt, is a totally different ballgame.

[phaonica]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

His behavior in Landsmeet shows a major disconnection from reality. His one line:

"Stand with me, and together, we will defeat even the Blight itself!"

Listening to that line, as well as the rest of Landsmeet, his behavior at defeat, ect...he really lost it mentally. 

When the Landsmeet sides with Loghain, do you consider them all to be insane? 

His hamfisted crushing of opposition, press ganging people, and the removal of opposing voices through suspicous means....you can argue he had his reasons, but the reality is, it was really no different than what the Orlesians were doing. Makes it even worse when your oppressor is a hero of Ferelden who drove them out.

But are soldier conscription and putting down riots examples of distinctly Orlesian brutality? Are they un-Ferelden? Does resorting to these things makes someone insane? Maric defiled a Chantry and displayed severed heads at the palace during the occupation. Is that lowering himself to the Orlesians' level? Does that make him as bad as the Orlesians?

Sitting in for the king during brief periods of absence, during periods when there wasn't some major internal crisis, is not the same as running the country yourself and taking direct control during a major crisis with the country on the edge of revolt, is a totally different ballgame.

That's fine, but who else in Ferelden is qualified to do it? No one alive has ever fought a Blight. Anora might have done it, but she supported getting help from the Orlesians.

[alschemid]

Hmmm... just to lighten the mood... I was playing around with some pics and got a new wallpaper.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

phaonica wrote...


When the Landsmeet sides with Loghain, do you consider them all to be insane?

Yes. But  I think they are even when they side with you.

But are soldier conscription and putting down riots examples of distinctly Orlesian brutality? Are they un-Ferelden? Does resorting to these things makes someone insane? Maric defiled a Chantry and displayed severed heads at the palace during the occupation. Is that lowering himself to the Orlesians' level? Does that make him as bad as the Orlesians?

Yep. It was a major turning point in my opinion of Maric. An oppresor of your own "people" is not preferable to a foreign one. What is the point of expelling an occupation if the new form of government is pretty much the same?

That's fine, but who else in Ferelden is qualified to do it? No one alive has ever fought a Blight. Anora might have done it, but she supported getting help from the Orlesians.

Anora, who was perfectly fine, doing a fine job until her rather mad father decided to jump in and seize the reins. She didn't necessarily support Orlesian help, she brought up the question to her father to find out if it was really true, because at that point, Anora was starting to doubt her father's mental state and handling of things.

[Sarah1281]

Skadi, I think you're throwing around the word 'insane' a bit too lightly if you're now accusing the entire Landsmeet of being it. Making stupid decisions does NOT mean you have to be insane.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...
His hamfisted crushing of opposition, press ganging people, and the removal of opposing voices through suspicous means....you can argue he had his reasons, but the reality is, it was really no different than what the Orlesians were doing. Makes it even worse when your oppressor is a hero of Ferelden who drove them out.

Did Loghain give his men the right to rape anyone they want?
Did he extract from them unreasonable taxes for his own greed?
Did he practise slavery for his own greed or for non-survivalist reasons?

Comparing him to Orlesians is superficial at best and not nuanced.
It may sound good and dramatic, but it's detached from the context.

The state Ferelden was in, was that of an emergency of the highest order. Desperate times call for desperate measures. All that Loghain did, he did not do out of an imperialist ambition, or for reasons of material exploitation, or what have you. Everything he's done, in his mind, is for the survival of Ferelden as a nation and a people. The Orlesians did not oppress out of need, certainly not an immediate need. They did because that's how their system works, irrespective of war and peace, and they didn't realise it's non-functional in Ferelden.

Ferelden under Loghain was at war however, and a pretty messy one. To suggest that a nation as weak as it can afford to stick to ideals in front of an existential threat, is unrealistic. To suggest that Loghain must not do what he believes has to be done, simply because doing so might make him a bit similar to Orlesians and thus might hurt his feelings, is unrealistic.

Like it or not, some "Orlesian" methods (in quotations because the Orlesians are certainly not the only ones) are efficient. What was the best course of action in Amaranthine when dealing with the nobles? Taking hostages.
What was the best method to deal with peasant riots? Intimidate them. Second best? Kill them now, or be forced to kill them later on.

Yes, ideals and identity matter, and Fereldens would like to distance themselves as much as they can from Orlais, Loghain first amongst them. But when your existence is threatened, such concerns don't matter. Better live like an "Orlesian" (if using some tactics to survive is enough to be called that, but let's assume) than not live at all.

The "must we sacrifice everything that we are to save it" is nothing but political BS, that Eamon himself evidently does not really believe as he is willing to start a massacre at the Landsmeet when it votes against him. And I don't blame him. Whatever it takes. 

So this "Loghain became like the Orlesians!" is melodramatic.
He adopted similar methods (that are used by everyone not only Orlesians), harsh and desperate fitting the context he was in. And while doing so, he did not go as far as to provide his men the right to have their way with peasants, nor did he use slavery to feed his greed....etc  

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 18 novembre 2010 - 11:21 .

[phaonica]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...
Yes. But  I think they are even when they side with you.

Well. I don't. I think they're desperate, but I don't think of them as insane. Is there anyone that you *don't* consider to be insane?

Yep. It was a major turning point in my opinion of Maric. An oppresor of your own "people" is not preferable to a foreign one. What is the point of expelling an occupation if the new form of government is pretty much the same?

But it wasn't. Maric might have used brutal tactics to win the war, but he did not rule his people brutally.

Anora, who was perfectly fine, doing a fine job until her rather mad father decided to jump in and seize the reins. She didn't necessarily support Orlesian help, she brought up the question to her father to find out if it was really true, because at that point, Anora was starting to doubt her father's mental state and handling of things.

I think she supports them. Howe said they were running out of troops, and that's when Anora brought up the Orlesians, like she was saying there were perfectly willing troops that they weren't using. She also says "We need help, Father. We cannot face this crisis alone." Her VO notes about it say : "putting forward what she belives is a reasonable suggestion even though she knows it will be shot down".

[phaonica]

alschemid wrote...

Hmmm... just to lighten the mood... I was playing around with some pics and got a new wallpaper.

Ooh, I like that. With the blood spatter and the little Gwaren stamp.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


Did Loghain give his men the right to rape anyone they want?
Did he extract from them unreasonable taxes for his own greed?
Did he practise slavery for his own greed or for non-survivalist reasons?

Do the reasons matter when he did it? (Aside from the raping of women)

To the people who were victims of his policies, the reasons matter not. When someone is selling your neighbors into slavery, or taxing the crap out of you when you can barely afford it, whether they are doing it for their own benefit, or some belief in some greater good, in the end, that they do it is all that matters.

Comparing him to Orlesians is superficial at best and not nuanced.
It may sound good and dramatic, but it's detached from the context.

The state Ferelden was in, was that of an emergency of the highest order. Desperate times call for desperate measures. All that Loghain did, he did not do out of an imperialist ambition, or for reasons of material exploitation, or what have you. Everything he's done, in his mind, is for the survival of Ferelden as a nation and a people. The Orlesians did not oppress out of need, certainly not an immediate need. They did because that's how their system works, irrespective of war and peace, and they didn't realise it's non-functional in Ferelden.

Again, the reasons matter not, only that the same thing is done. To the people at the recieving end of these drastic measures, the end result is the same.

Ferelden under Loghain was at war however, and a pretty messy one. To suggest that a nation as weak as it can afford to stick to ideals in front of an existential threat, is unrealistic. To suggest that Loghain must not do what he believes has to be done, simply because doing so might make him a bit similar to Orlesians and thus might hurt his feelings, is unrealistic.

A war Loghain himself helped in the creation of. Against a percieved threat that was minor, compared to the actual threat. Loghain can justify whatever reasons he thinks he needs. It does not change the fact that the end result is the same.

Like it or not, some "Orlesian" methods (in quotations because the Orlesians are certainly not the only ones) are efficient. What was the best course of action in Amaranthine when dealing with the nobles? Taking hostages.
What was the best method to deal with peasant riots? Intimidate them. Second best? Kill them now, or be forced to kill them later on.

The best? No, the best is to root out the conspiracy with the help of the Dark Wolf. The nobles learn you can play their games better are more dangerously. Esmerelle kills herself, "accidents" happen. Conspirators foiled, and your Warden's image unblemished. Sure, taking hostages might make the conspirators back off, but it punishes non-conspirators as well, not maiing people very happy, making you look like a Tyrant.

As far as the peasant riots go, it seems that's standard operating procedure with anyone.

Yes, ideals and identity matter, and Fereldens would like to distance themselves as much as they can from Orlais, Loghain first amongst them. But when your existence is threatened, such concerns don't matter. Better live like an "Orlesian" (if using some tactics to survive is enough to be called that, but let's assume) than not live at all.

The "must we sacrifice everything that we are to save it" is nothing but political BS, that Eamon himself evidently does not really believe as he is willing to start a massacre at the Landsmeet when it votes against him. And I don't blame him. Whatever it takes. 

So this "Loghain became like the Orlesians!" is melodramatic.
He adopted similar methods (that are used by everyone not only Orlesians), harsh and desperate fitting the context he was in. And while doing so, he did not go as far as to provide his men the right to have their way with peasants, nor did he use slavery to feed his greed....etc  

Minus the violation of women, as I said before, the motives don't matter, the end result does.

I could kick some poor guy's head in that's laying on the sidewalk in front of me, and I could claim any sort of reason, even for his own good, as opposed to doing it for my own amusement. I doubt my reasons mean much to the guy getting his head kicked in. He probably is wishing I'd just stop.