12857 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarah1281]

TJPags wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

You all also immediately assume Caillan was selling out Ferelden. While he may have been, there are many ways marriage contracts can be made - certainly it's not inconceivable that such a marriage between Caillan and Celene would include a clause that keeps Orlais out of Ferelden. And, since the Landsmeet must apparently approve every new monarch, clearly, Ferelden had a way to keep the half Orlesian son of Caillan off the throne.

It won't matter if Ferelden has a King or not because it will be a puppet and the real ruler will be the half-Orlesian Emperor son of Cailan. And no, I don't think that Loghain knew this.

What are the rules of succession in Orlais?  Do we know?  Is there already an Orlesian heir?  Could there not be 2 kids, one ruling each country?

And which part are you saying "I don't think Loghain knew this" about?

If one of Cailan's Orlesian children did manage to become King of Ferelden they would still be Orlesian raised and have Orlais' best interests in mind. And Loghain did not know about Cailan's plans to marry Celene. He's too outraged in Ostagar for that.

[TJPags]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Loghain was supposed to have known in the original version. In-game, he only knew at RtO. So no, he did not know before Ostagar. But his instincts of an Orelsian plot were correct.

In game, there's no evidence Eamon wasn't supposed to die.

But that's been argued by people as a mitigating factor in what Loghain did.

Gaider said (and how I hated  - and still hate - those words) that Loghain knew about the marriage alliance before Ostagar.  If "Gaider said" is valid to justify his actions, then "Gaider said" is valid to question them, as well.

[Sarah1281]

Gaider said (and how I hated - and still hate - those words) that Loghain knew about the marriage alliance before Ostagar. If "Gaider said" is valid to justify his actions, then "Gaider said" is valid to question them, as well.

He said he was SUPPOSED to have found out about it in the unimplemented storyline.

[KnightofPhoenix]

TJPags wrote...

What are the rules of succession in Orlais?  Do we know? 

It's heridetary, coupled with assassinations. The exact same way Celene got herself on the throne.

[TJPags]

Sarah1281 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

You all also immediately assume Caillan was selling out Ferelden. While he may have been, there are many ways marriage contracts can be made - certainly it's not inconceivable that such a marriage between Caillan and Celene would include a clause that keeps Orlais out of Ferelden. And, since the Landsmeet must apparently approve every new monarch, clearly, Ferelden had a way to keep the half Orlesian son of Caillan off the throne.

It won't matter if Ferelden has a King or not because it will be a puppet and the real ruler will be the half-Orlesian Emperor son of Cailan. And no, I don't think that Loghain knew this.

What are the rules of succession in Orlais?  Do we know?  Is there already an Orlesian heir?  Could there not be 2 kids, one ruling each country?

And which part are you saying "I don't think Loghain knew this" about?

If one of Cailan's Orlesian children did manage to become King of Ferelden they would still be Orlesian raised and have Orlais' best interests in mind. And Loghain did not know about Cailan's plans to marry Celene. He's too outraged in Ostagar for that.

As to the children - why do you assume they would be "Orlesian raised"?  Why do you assume they would have Orlias' best interests at heart, rather then Fereldens?  These are your assumptions, and may be valid, but there'e no basis at ALL for them.

And, umm, see above - Gaider said Loghain DID know before Ostagar.  So, he did.

[KnightofPhoenix]

TJPags wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Loghain was supposed to have known in the original version. In-game, he only knew at RtO. So no, he did not know before Ostagar. But his instincts of an Orelsian plot were correct.

In game, there's no evidence Eamon wasn't supposed to die.

But that's been argued by people as a mitigating factor in what Loghain did.

Gaider said (and how I hated  - and still hate - those words) that Loghain knew about the marriage alliance before Ostagar.  If "Gaider said" is valid to justify his actions, then "Gaider said" is valid to question them, as well.

No, he said he knew in the original version, when Celene was supposed to be in Denerim.

[TJPags]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Gaider said (and how I hated - and still hate - those words) that Loghain knew about the marriage alliance before Ostagar. If "Gaider said" is valid to justify his actions, then "Gaider said" is valid to question them, as well.

He said he was SUPPOSED to have found out about it in the unimplemented storyline.

He also said that it's NOT in the game that Eamon wasn't supposed to die, but you quote that as gospel.

How is this different?

[Monica21]

Oh, for the love of....

TJPags wrote...
So, Loghain had reason to want Caillan dead, Gaider (the voice of God, remember?) uses a sarcastic tone to state that it did NOT influence Loghain's actions.

You all cry that this justifies his actions.  I think (and go ahead, flame away) this points to the fact that his plans for Caillans death were made in advance of the beacon lighting, making it premeditated.  It also sheds new light on why he wanted Eamon out of the way - he feared Eamon's influence would exceed his own (as it seems it did) more so with his daughter no longer the Queen.

Actually, Gaider has said that Loghain didn't plan to leave Ostagar until after the beacon was lit. He was wavering, but that was not his intention going in. As for Eamon, if he's telling his nephew to divorce his wife because he needs an heir, and that wife happens to be Loghain's daughter, then yes, I'm fine with that. Remember too that the poison wasn't supposed to kill Eamon and Eamon didn't die.

You all also immediately assume Caillan was selling out Ferelden.  While he may have been, there are many ways marriage contracts can be made - certainly it's not inconceivable that such a marriage between Caillan and Celene would include a clause that keeps Orlais out of Ferelden.  And, since the Landsmeet must apparently approve every new monarch, clearly, Ferelden had a way to keep the half Orlesian son of Caillan off the throne.

I can't believe this actually needs a response, but apparently it does. Scenario: the King of Ferelden marries the Empress of Orlais and they have a child. Even if Ferelden is given a period of independence, the child is the heir to two thrones. Orlais and Ferelden will have the same ruler. That is a defacto absorption of Ferelden by Orlais. It's much less messy than an invasion but serves the same purpose. With a Theirin on the throne and Chevaliers on the ground in Ferelden, dissolving the Landsmeet is easy enough.

Really, this puts it much more in the power grab light, to me.  And moreover, the WAY he did the power grab - allowing so many soldiers to die, rather than just executing Caillan - seems so much worse, to me.

So you would rather he just executed Cailan? Noted.

Also, if this is the way it was - he found out BEFORE Ostagar - why did he seem so shocked and surprised ahen he sees the letters during RtO?  And why does he never mention this little nugget of information ONCE during the game?  Seems to me, a man doing whatever it takes to keep Ferelden strong would be PROUD of taking this action, especially given what to him is PLENTY of valid reason - and may even be valid reason to me.  Instead, he does it in such a way as to slaughter half the Ferelden army, comes up with a scapegoat to hide his actions, and never mentions his reasons.

Who is he going to tell, Anora? "Oh yes, I let Cailan die because he was going to divorce you." He is still a father after all. It is easier to let Anora hate him than hate her husband.

And haven't we talked enough about the horde being larger than anyone anticipated for the "slaughter half the Ferelden army" comments to stop?

[KnightofPhoenix]

TJPags wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

Gaider said (and how I hated - and still hate - those words) that Loghain knew about the marriage alliance before Ostagar. If "Gaider said" is valid to justify his actions, then "Gaider said" is valid to question them, as well.

He said he was SUPPOSED to have found out about it in the unimplemented storyline.

He also said that it's NOT in the game that Eamon wasn't supposed to die, but you quote that as gospel.

How is this different?

No, he said it's not shown in game (nor is it disproven). He did not say it's not in-game, just that it wasn't shown.

Here, he was talking about a script that never made it. RtO took some of that plot back, but not all of it.

[Sarah1281]

TJPags wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

Gaider said (and how I hated - and still hate - those words) that Loghain knew about the marriage alliance before Ostagar. If "Gaider said" is valid to justify his actions, then "Gaider said" is valid to question them, as well.

He said he was SUPPOSED to have found out about it in the unimplemented storyline.

He also said that it's NOT in the game that Eamon wasn't supposed to die, but you quote that as gospel.

How is this different?

 Easy. It is not specifically stated in the game but the way they were thinking about it was that Eamon was not intended to die. It is not specifically stated in the game because they did not have time to add the plot of Celene being in Denerim (in fact, she's not) and thus it's not actually what happened and Loghain did not find out.

[Monica21]

TJPags wrote...
As to the children - why do you assume they would be "Orlesian raised"?  Why do you assume they would have Orlias' best interests at heart, rather then Fereldens?  These are your assumptions, and may be valid, but there'e no basis at ALL for them.

And, umm, see above - Gaider said Loghain DID know before Ostagar.  So, he did.

Easy, Cailan is weak. Anora was the real ruler and everyone knew it. If Cailan marries Celene and provides an heir, he's probably dead within weeks of the child's birth. Celene can rais the child however she wants, and she's unlikely to raise it to respect Ferelden independence.

[Zjarcal]

Addai67 wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

You all also immediately assume Caillan was selling out Ferelden. While he may have been, there are many ways marriage contracts can be made - certainly it's not inconceivable that such a marriage between Caillan and Celene would include a clause that keeps Orlais out of Ferelden. And, since the Landsmeet must apparently approve every new monarch, clearly, Ferelden had a way to keep the half Orlesian son of Caillan off the throne.

It won't matter if Ferelden has a King or not because it will be a puppet and the real ruler will be the half-Orlesian Emperor son of Cailan. And no, I don't think that Loghain knew this.

So, I thought I'd better come over here to eat crow. 

Hearing Gaider confirm that Cailan meant to divorce Anora and marry Celene makes me revise my opinion about him.  I don't think it's "traitorous," but I think it's stupid and would have backfired in a big way.  No way Ferelden was ready for a marriage alliance with Orlais.  I also feel sorry for Anora, which is a major feat.

Doesn't revise my opinion of Loghain any.  Treason is still treason, he still sold slaves and all the rest, he'll still die in all my games because I don't want to see him in my camp and couldn't enjoy my game if he didn't get his just like Howe.  But I'm sad to have lost a favorite character in Cailan.  Not that anyone here cares.  LOL

Sorry that you lost a favorite character. See, someone cared about your post amidst all this chaos!

[TJPags]

See, this is why I just can't discuss this with you anymore.



Eamon's poisoing/not supposed to die never made it into the game, but it's gospel, it's true, we're supposed to factor that into our opinion of Loghain's actions.



Loghain wavering about whether to leave the battle or not is not presented in game, but it's gospel, we need to keep that in mind when considering his actions.



In game, we're not told the darkspawn horde is much greater than they expectd, but it's gospel, we need to keep that in mind in determing whether Loghain could have won the battle.



Here, we're told by Gaider - the same person who gave us those nuggets above - that they intended Loghain to know about the marriage alliance before Ostagar, but since they didn't put it in the game, ignore it - except to point to it when saying, Loghain was right, there WAS an Orlesian conspiracy.



Well, I can't argue with that.

[Merilsell]

DragonRacer13 wrote...

Mmm, yes, and some folks in the Alistair thread think the political country merge would be a good thing or that the marriage wouldn't absorb Ferelden?

Hoo boy.

Umm no. I beg to differ, really. I never cared much about Cailan and the first time I saw him he was declared as an eternal idiot by me. Guess my female instinct proved me right. That however doesn't mean that I instantly (have to) like Loghain now. He had done something right with letting Cailan wearing the red shirt BUT the way he did it -- total fail in my eyes. It cost a lot of soldiers and almost all Grey Warden's their life (which would have doomed Ferelden completely). And how Addai had said before it doesn't excuse the things he did after it. At all.

[Addai]

Zjarcal wrote...

Sorry that you lost a favorite character. See, someone cared about your post amidst all this chaos!

Aww, thank you. 

Modifié par Addai67, 06 septembre 2010 - 03:21 .

[Sarah1281]

Here, we're told by Gaider - the same person who gave us those nuggets above - that they intended Loghain to know about the marriage alliance before Ostagar, but since they didn't put it in the game, ignore it - except to point to it when saying, Loghain was right, there WAS an Orlesian conspiracy.

Had he known about the marriage, though, which this quote makes it clear he didn't:

Loghain: The cheating bastard!

Wynne: Watch your mouth, Loghain Mac Tir, unless you have forgotten the company you now keep!

Loghain: It's not my company I worry about, madam, but my former son-in-law's! Do you see the familiar tone with which the empress writes him, as if my daughter were not already his wife?

Wynne: Cailan loved Anora with every ounce of his heart. It was plain for all to see. The only thing that ever stood between them was you.

Loghain: Are you blind, old woman? The plot is plain as day within this letter! Love or no, Cailan was going to cast my daughter aside and wed himself to that ****, Celene. In a single vow, Orlais would claim all that they could never win by war! And what would Ferelden gain? Our fool of a king could strut about and call himself an emperor.

Wynne: And what of peace? Would it not bring us that, at least?

Loghain: Peace? I would have thought your age might have granted more wisdom, madam. Peace just means fighting someone else's enemies in someone else's war for someone else's reasons.

then he wouldn't have just been paranoid about Orlais. He would have been absolutely correct that they were plotting against Ferelden's independence (with Cailan complicit in this). Although he still did make mistakes in the game, I'm not denying that.

[Sarah1281]

Merilsell wrote...

DragonRacer13 wrote...

Mmm, yes, and some folks in the Alistair thread think the political country merge would be a good thing or that the marriage wouldn't absorb Ferelden?

Hoo boy.

Umm no. I beg to differ, really. I never cared much about Cailan and the first time I saw him he was declared as an eternal idiot by me. Guess my female instinct proved me right. That however doesn't mean that I instantly (have to) like Loghain now. He had done something right with letting Cailan wearing the red shirt BUT the way he did it -- total fail in my eyes. It cost a lot of soldiers and almost all Grey Warden's their life (which would have doomed Ferelden completely). And how Addai had said before it doesn't excuse the things he did after it. At all.

That post doesn't seem to be saying that everyone must love Loghain now. It just says that some people (and at least Axe is) are saying that the merger would be a good thing for Ferelden.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I am goihng to spell it out very very slowly for you.

TJPags wrote...

Eamon's poisoing/not supposed to die never made it into the game, but it's gospel, it's true, we're supposed to factor that into our opinion of Loghain's actions.

Gaider never said this was never made it into the gamne. He said that game didn't show it. Why do you htink Eamon did not die when the demon that supposeddely was keeping him alive died? Because the demon was lying and she did not keep Eamon alive. So the poison was never meant to kill him. 

TJPags wrote...

Loghain wavering about whether to leave the battle or not is not presented in game, but it's gospel, we need to keep that in mind when considering his actions.

It's the word of God.

TJPags wrote...

In game, we're not told the darkspawn horde is much greater than they expectd, but it's gospel, we need to keep that in mind in determing whether Loghain could have won the battle.

Word of God.

TJPags wrote...

Here, we're told by Gaider - the same person who gave us those nuggets above - that they intended Loghain to know about the marriage alliance before Ostagar, but since they didn't put it in the game, ignore it - except to point to it when saying, Loghain was right, there WAS an Orlesian conspiracy.

Gaider said that never made in in the game as the script was abandonned, not that it wasn't shown. Because if you listen properly, he said that the original script had Celene be in Denerim during the game and that's how Loghain knows. This never happened, so he never knew.

What Gaider said that proven Loghain right was that RtO was a callback on that original idea of marriage. While the original version didn't make it, the same idea of marriage did.

[phaonica]

Ugh, I can't believe RL pulled me away at a time like this. Lol. Now i have to play catch - up

[Monica21]

I can agree partially with TJPags' point. There is entirely too much about Loghain that was left out. If this had made it into the game, then he would potentially be the most complex character to exist in gaming history. (Okay, that's an exaggeration.)

I wish that Gaider didn't need to fill in the blanks because it would make so much of this discussion easier. I feel a little resentful for relying on outside knowledge to shape an opinion of a character I'm only supposed to know in-game. I believe Loghain acted correctly, but I should get that knowledge from things that happen in-game. And even without meta-gaming I can find reason to spare him, but if Eamon wasn't supposed to die, spell it out. If the horde was larger, have a Warden tell us. If Loghain wasn't sure what he was going to do at Ostagar, leave us clues. If Cailan was going to marry Celene, don't make us guess about it in a DLC.

[TJPags]

Word of God = what we want it to be. No different than any other religion.



You say there's a difference between what didn't make it into the game and what didn't make it into the game. I say there isn't.



You think Loghain is a hero - some of you 2x and 3x over - for killing Caillan and preventing an Orlesian invasion or political takeover.



Me, I think Loghain is a power hungry, treasonous, lysing, paranoid, slaver, regicide who deserves nothing more than to be beheaded in the throne room of the country he claims he loved and claims he served.



I'm just gonna keep beheading him. And avoid any discussion of it.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I don't like it either, but it's established and any out-game discussion has to take them into account. In-game, you don't have to think about those points (although I think there are clues for all these points in-game. They are not explicitly spelled out)

[Zjarcal]

Monica21 wrote...

I can agree partially with TJPags' point. There is entirely too much about Loghain that was left out. If this had made it into the game, then he would potentially be the most complex character to exist in gaming history. (Okay, that's an exaggeration.)

I wish that Gaider didn't need to fill in the blanks because it would make so much of this discussion easier. I feel a little resentful for relying on outside knowledge to shape an opinion of a character I'm only supposed to know in-game. I believe Loghain acted correctly, but I should get that knowledge from things that happen in-game. And even without meta-gaming I can find reason to spare him, but if Eamon wasn't supposed to die, spell it out. If the horde was larger, have a Warden tell us. If Loghain wasn't sure what he was going to do at Ostagar, leave us clues. If Cailan was going to marry Celene, don't make us guess about it in a DLC.

Couldn't agree more with this point. As much as I love Loghain, there's not enough information in the game for a character who knows nothing about him to come to the conclusions that we come on the forums. It's part of the reason why I almost always (keyword, almost) end up executing him, because it's what my characters would do, even if I love the character I'm executing.

What I would give for all those blanks to have been filled in game.

[KnightofPhoenix]

TJPags wrote...

Word of God = what we want it to be. No different than any other religion.

That's...quite ridiculous.
Gaider is the lead writer of a story he created. If he says something about it, then it is.

If he said that Loghain decided to retreat when the beacon was lit, then that's what happened.

TJPags wrote...
You say there's a difference between what didn't make it into the game and what didn't make it into the game. I say there isn't.

Eum, because you are saying the same thing.
What I am saying is that there is a difference between what didn't *make it* in the game and what wasn't *shown* in the game.

TJPags wrote...
And avoid any discussion of it.

Good for you. No more reason for you to be here.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 06 septembre 2010 - 03:38 .

[Monica21]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I don't like it either, but it's established and any out-game discussion has to take them into account. In-game, you don't have to think about those points (although I think there are clues for all these points in-game. They are not explicitly spelled out)

I agree that they need to be taken into account, but it would be a far simpler discussion if we could point to in-game evidence. The closest is the elf in Redcliffe, and he kind of hints at why he's there, but for whatever reason never states it. I just see a missed opportunity with creating an in-game character who's as interesting and layered as he is out-game.