84 réponses à ce sujet

[Eudaemonium]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

I forgot about the mercs in the Deep Roads. I'd have to replay that bit to remember the dialogue...always possible they were hired by an allied House, though.

For some reason I just don't see Harrowmont as the sort to hire assassins. He seems to rely on his 'good' reputation too much for that. (I could, naturally, be completely wrong, heh.)

Of course, if you're double-crossing one of the parties (pretending to work for both), then no mercs show up at all! This also means you get attacked by 6 bunches of fanatics rather than 3 though, which makes up for the XP loss.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

That's hardly fair, considering one of the men was lied to and led to believe that Harrowmont was conceding when no such thing was occuring, and the other was blackmailed by threatening the woman he loved. Once the truth was revealed (or, in the case of the second, not going to be revealed), both were eager to fight.

While I'll give you Baizyl on this one, I think Gwiddon really should have checked up on what he was told somehow regardless of who told him. The fact he instantly believed the information means that, at the very least, he considered Harrowmont as the type of man who *would* step down after the Proving to save face. I can't see many of Bhelen's men believing a similar story, if only because they would assume that was something Bhelen wouldn't do, due to his character.

Modifié par Eudaemonium, 23 août 2010 - 01:11 .

[Elhanan]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Yes it does. I for one do not consider the use to fanatics to eliminate opposition to be a bad thing in that context.

The few always bear the burden. It's better than having the majority bear the burden which is what Harrowmont's leadership will lead.

Of course your opinion is valid. But I certainlty hope that you never have a say in who leads my country, no offense. I prefer results. Not subjective ideas that don't bring results.

And it is my hope that you do not teach children, and as morality and ethics continue to slide, so goes the world. Money is not the standard of excellence I prefer to see.

[Sarah1281]

CalJones wrote...

Ah yes... Of course, if you support Harrowmont they are sent by Bhelen instead. Still, anyone who has played through the DN origin knows the backstabbing and double dealing that goes on in dwavern politics. It's necessary to survival in that arena. Harrowmont won't have risen as far as he has without getting his own hands dirty, much as he likes to come across as the more honorable choice.

Given his opposition was Bhelen, he would almost have to be the more honorable choice. That doesn't mean he has to be particularly honorable, though. It's like comparing virtually any Ferelden politician with Howe or Vaughan.

[Dean_the_Young]

Eudaemonium wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

That's hardly fair, considering one of the men was lied to and led to believe that Harrowmont was conceding when no such thing was occuring, and the other was blackmailed by threatening the woman he loved. Once the truth was revealed (or, in the case of the second, not going to be revealed), both were eager to fight.

While I'll give you Baizyl on this one, I think Gwiddon really should have checked up on what he was told somehow regardless of who told him. The fact he instantly believed the information means that, at the very least, he considered Harrowmont as the type of man who *would* step down after the Proving to save face. I can't see many of Bhelen's men believing a similar story, if only because they would assume that was something Bhelen wouldn't do, due to his character.

Wouldn't Gwiddon's failure to check up on what he was told be on, well, Gwiddon? In and of itself, the story isn't unreasonable: it did come from a source who would be in a position to know/have heard, and the story itself is plausible. That it isn't true is irrelevant.

You might turn around and say 'well Harrowmount shouldn't have such reliance on stupid people, yadayadaya,' but people have to work with the allies they have, not who they want to have. If relying on people easy to fool made one a horrible leader, then Alistair and the other companions you can lie to damns the Warden.

[Last Darkness]

*Sigh* this is just sad.

No one can win this argument because neither side is correct/ right. There is no right answer only two wroung answers.



Harrowmont is a weak leader who clings to traditions that are detrimental to his people, he also resists all notions to change this. All the other Nobles/Ruling party the majority agree with this view.



Bhelen is a ambitious leader willing to do whatever it takes to improve his lot and the status of his people. He has to get his hands very dirty to succeed in Dwarvern politics because they ARE NOT CIVIL OR MORAL.



The main bias I often see on there forums is two sided. Either one has never played the Dwarf Noble and so dosnt have a inside view of events so they take Bhelen and Harrowmont at face value and their word. If your going with a "Good guy" Harrowmont seems like it even though he is most likly lieing through his teeth. If you play the Dwarf Noble then you are heavily biased aginst Bhelen and are blinded by what hes trying to achive. What he did is considered normal in dwarvern politics but strikes a personal chord with players to be vehemently against him without consideration or understanding. A fact no one here has mentioned is that you as the Noble can be 100% Guilty of killing Trian and Bhelens claims aginst you are 100% true. Suddenly hes the "good" guy of that scenario in a sense LOL



To many of you are taking the game far out of context when the answer is staring you right in the face. As ive stated theres no right answer, there is a most correct one as dictated by the game epiloge. Bhelen as King with the Anvil destroyed, no help for Burkel, and no help for Dagna prevents the largest amount of issues and benefits the dwarvern people most. (Technicaly have mages would probably be a trade off by helping dagna either way maybe). The fact still remains both endings /epiloges for Orzamaar with Harrowmont as King are bad to very bad for them. They are a dying people they really do need the change Bhelen brings despite his personal shortcummings and being a murderer like the rest of the Dwarvern nobility. Dwarvern Nobles are hardly Noble.



Too many people here are Prejudiced to even consider there other options then what they belive.

[Sarah1281]

A fact no one here has mentioned is that you as the Noble can be 100% Guilty of killing Trian and Bhelens claims aginst you are 100% true. Suddenly hes the "good" guy of that scenario in a sense LOL

The default for non-DN's (as you find out if you betray Bhelen right before Jarvia) is Bhelen having Trian killed. Even if your DN does it yourself, he sends mercenaries after you (as you find out in the same betrayal quest if you killed Trian) and was the one to talk you two into it in the first place. It might make him LESS culpable (though I doubt it as either way he sends someone off to kill Trian and plans for your exile/death) but hardly a 'good guy.'



Personally, I have played the DN game and I also love Bhelen. I'm not the only one. We're not talking about if there is a 'right' answer here but rather if it is possible to give the dwarves a good ending. Some people think yes as Bhelen's morality won't stop him from being a good king and allowing the dwarves as a whole to prosper and some think that Bhelen's morals are too crippling of an issue to allow him to be the good ending. No one's really saying that Harrowmont is the good ending.



How are we really 'letting our prejudices prevent us from considering other options'? There are four options: Bhelen w/ Anvil, Bhelen w/out Anvil, Harrowmont w/ Anvil, and Harrowmont w/out Anvil and we've considered all of them. We've also considered whether Burkel and Dagna's epilogues affect things. I think we've gotten pretty thorough.

[Last Darkness]

Sarah1281 wrote...

A fact no one here has mentioned is that you as the Noble can be 100% Guilty of killing Trian and Bhelens claims aginst you are 100% true. Suddenly hes the "good" guy of that scenario in a sense LOL

The default for non-DN's (as you find out if you betray Bhelen right before Jarvia) is Bhelen having Trian killed. Even if your DN does it yourself, he sends mercenaries after you (as you find out in the same betrayal quest if you killed Trian) and was the one to talk you two into it in the first place. It might make him LESS culpable (though I doubt it as either way he sends someone off to kill Trian and plans for your exile/death) but hardly a 'good guy.'

Personally, I have played the DN game and I also love Bhelen. I'm not the only one. We're not talking about if there is a 'right' answer here but rather if it is possible to give the dwarves a good ending. Some people think yes as Bhelen's morality won't stop him from being a good king and allowing the dwarves as a whole to prosper and some think that Bhelen's morals are too crippling of an issue to allow him to be the good ending. No one's really saying that Harrowmont is the good ending.

How are we really 'letting our prejudices prevent us from considering other options'? There are four options: Bhelen w/ Anvil, Bhelen w/out Anvil, Harrowmont w/ Anvil, and Harrowmont w/out Anvil and we've considered all of them. We've also considered whether Burkel and Dagna's epilogues affect things. I think we've gotten pretty thorough.

Im trying to not name names but a few people on the BSN have posted several times about this issue not just in this thread that are downright fanatical about their views.

[Elhanan]

I would agree that Bhelen is ambitious, but would say that Harromont is a good leader; just not as a politician as he is not adept at dirty Dwarven politics. For example, the Assembly is deadlocked, so if Bhelen were seen as the clear choice to lead the city, there would be no need to interceed for the Warden. And ca.50% of the Assembly is on the take from Bhelen per Gorim, so Harrowmont must be doing siomething right to make this an even race.



Where I differ greatly is that I do not see Bhelen as a good King even if the nation prospers, as I decline to allow money be my standard for excellence. Now some of my Wardens may see this as a good thing, though they would prefer to see the gold in their own purses. But even then, this is not what I would call a good conclusion.

[Last Darkness]

Elhanan wrote...

I would agree that Bhelen is ambitious, but would say that Harromont is a good leader; just not as a politician as he is not adept at dirty Dwarven politics. For example, the Assembly is deadlocked, so if Bhelen were seen as the clear choice to lead the city, there would be no need to interceed for the Warden. And ca.50% of the Assembly is on the take from Bhelen per Gorim, so Harrowmont must be doing siomething right to make this an even race.

Where I differ greatly is that I do not see Bhelen as a good King even if the nation prospers, as I decline to allow money be my standard for excellence. Now some of my Wardens may see this as a good thing, though they would prefer to see the gold in their own purses. But even then, this is not what I would call a good conclusion.

I agree to dis-aggree I generaly pick Bhelen and Branka soly for their superior military gain for my Wardens ccause. Its also why I pick teh Werewolves, and mages too. Also Anora and conscript Lohgaine.

[Sarah1281]

Elhanan wrote...

I would agree that Bhelen is ambitious, but would say that Harromont is a good leader; just not as a politician as he is not adept at dirty Dwarven politics. For example, the Assembly is deadlocked, so if Bhelen were seen as the clear choice to lead the city, there would be no need to interceed for the Warden. And ca.50% of the Assembly is on the take from Bhelen per Gorim, so Harrowmont must be doing siomething right to make this an even race.

Where I differ greatly is that I do not see Bhelen as a good King even if the nation prospers, as I decline to allow money be my standard for excellence. Now some of my Wardens may see this as a good thing, though they would prefer to see the gold in their own purses. But even then, this is not what I would call a good conclusion.

I see most of Harrowmont's allies in the noble caste siding with him so they can finally get House Aeducan off of the throne. They realize Harrowmont isn't even trying to be a strong leader (which he will readily tell you) and thus not only will the Assembly have more power under him but another House can take the throne in the few years it takes him to die of natural causes - if that death isn't sped up any.