486 réponses à ce sujet

[Persephone]

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Even if one accepts the yield, then Alistair raises the points of the other crimes, Riordin steps in for another option, and you are still left with those two choices: death or the Joining. Thus, even by adhering to the rules of the Landsmeet, the final judgement is in the hands of the Warden, IMO.

And who made the Warden judge, jury and executioner all in one?

So basically, because nobody says "Warden, judge this man", you should NOT execute him? 

Yes. Wait for the Landsmeet to decide. Have a trial. Like you said, bad game mechanics.

[TJPags]

Persephone wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Even if one accepts the yield, then Alistair raises the points of the other crimes, Riordin steps in for another option, and you are still left with those two choices: death or the Joining. Thus, even by adhering to the rules of the Landsmeet, the final judgement is in the hands of the Warden, IMO.

And who made the Warden judge, jury and executioner all in one?

So basically, because nobody says "Warden, judge this man", you should NOT execute him? 

Yes. Wait for the Landsmeet to decide. Have a trial. Like you said, bad game mechanics.

I agree it's bad game mechanics, and I'd be okay with a "put him in prison until he can be tried" option.  But that option DOES NOT EXIST.  Not my fault.

[Persephone]

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Even if one accepts the yield, then Alistair raises the points of the other crimes, Riordin steps in for another option, and you are still left with those two choices: death or the Joining. Thus, even by adhering to the rules of the Landsmeet, the final judgement is in the hands of the Warden, IMO.

And who made the Warden judge, jury and executioner all in one?

So basically, because nobody says "Warden, judge this man", you should NOT execute him? 

Yes. Wait for the Landsmeet to decide. Have a trial. Like you said, bad game mechanics.

I agree it's bad game mechanics, and I'd be okay with a "put him in prison until he can be tried" option.  But that option DOES NOT EXIST.  Not my fault.

Which in my opinion does not make it right to play God, judge, jury and executioner. Not even Henry VIII executed people without a trial or AT LEAST an Act of Attainder. So MY Warden will not do what even Henry VIII, in all his depravity, did not dare to do. And therefore goes for the only option left that will leave my conscience (Or my Warden's conscience, rather) clear. Just how I see it.

[Monica21]

TJPags wrote...
It assumes you believe in a soul.  It also assumes his "soul" is destroyed by killing Archie without having done the DR.  Because without those, his "soul" is not destroyed, is it?  For that matter, if he doesn't kill Archie with the DR having been turned down, he doesn't even die.
 
And I think that's the difference between you and I.  You believe in redemption, which is admirable.  I don't, which I suppose is less admirable, but there it is.

Well, first, souls do exist in the DA universe. That's established. Second, if he doesn't kill the AD then he does still die. Everyone dies. He will actually die more quickly as the taint will spread more rapidly in his body due to age. I'd be surprised if he gets 10 years as a Grey Warden. He'll die alone and in the Deep Roads. Not a very pleasant death. No matter what your choice is, you're still sentencing him to death. One is just quicker than the other, and that's assuming he even survives the Joining, which you don't know when you make the decision.

You could even argue that making him a Warden and not allowing him to kill the AD is the worst punishment, because not only is he going to die at the hands of some random hurlock or genlock, but there is no redemption in that.

[TJPags]

Persephone wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Even if one accepts the yield, then Alistair raises the points of the other crimes, Riordin steps in for another option, and you are still left with those two choices: death or the Joining. Thus, even by adhering to the rules of the Landsmeet, the final judgement is in the hands of the Warden, IMO.

And who made the Warden judge, jury and executioner all in one?

So basically, because nobody says "Warden, judge this man", you should NOT execute him? 

Yes. Wait for the Landsmeet to decide. Have a trial. Like you said, bad game mechanics.

I agree it's bad game mechanics, and I'd be okay with a "put him in prison until he can be tried" option.  But that option DOES NOT EXIST.  Not my fault.

Which in my opinion does not make it right to play God, judge, jury and executioner. Not even Henry VIII executed people without a trial or AT LEAST an Act of Attainder. So MY Warden will not do what even Henry VIII, in all his depravity, did not dare to do. And therefore goes for the only option left that will leave my conscience (Or my Warden's conscience, rather) clear. Just how I see it.

And my PC will not let a man who (IMO) allowed his King to die, lied about it, framed innocent people, hired killers to dispose of those innocent people, turned a blind eye to the depravity of those under his control, and sold people into slavery walk away with punishment.  To do so would not leave me with a clear conscience,  Just how *I* see it.

And hence, we're back to - agree to disagree.

[Persephone]

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Even if one accepts the yield, then Alistair raises the points of the other crimes, Riordin steps in for another option, and you are still left with those two choices: death or the Joining. Thus, even by adhering to the rules of the Landsmeet, the final judgement is in the hands of the Warden, IMO.

And who made the Warden judge, jury and executioner all in one?

So basically, because nobody says "Warden, judge this man", you should NOT execute him? 

Yes. Wait for the Landsmeet to decide. Have a trial. Like you said, bad game mechanics.

I agree it's bad game mechanics, and I'd be okay with a "put him in prison until he can be tried" option.  But that option DOES NOT EXIST.  Not my fault.

Which in my opinion does not make it right to play God, judge, jury and executioner. Not even Henry VIII executed people without a trial or AT LEAST an Act of Attainder. So MY Warden will not do what even Henry VIII, in all his depravity, did not dare to do. And therefore goes for the only option left that will leave my conscience (Or my Warden's conscience, rather) clear. Just how I see it.

And my PC will not let a man who (IMO) allowed his King to die, lied about it, framed innocent people, hired killers to dispose of those innocent people, turned a blind eye to the depravity of those under his control, and sold people into slavery walk away with punishment.  To do so would not leave me with a clear conscience,  Just how *I* see it.

And hence, we're back to - agree to disagree.

And on that note the whole debate is back at its beginning. I wonder when the next round will begin.

[TJPags]

Monica21 wrote...

TJPags wrote...
It assumes you believe in a soul.  It also assumes his "soul" is destroyed by killing Archie without having done the DR.  Because without those, his "soul" is not destroyed, is it?  For that matter, if he doesn't kill Archie with the DR having been turned down, he doesn't even die.
 
And I think that's the difference between you and I.  You believe in redemption, which is admirable.  I don't, which I suppose is less admirable, but there it is.

Well, first, souls do exist in the DA universe. That's established. Second, if he doesn't kill the AD then he does still die. Everyone dies. He will actually die more quickly as the taint will spread more rapidly in his body due to age. I'd be surprised if he gets 10 years as a Grey Warden. He'll die alone and in the Deep Roads. Not a very pleasant death. No matter what your choice is, you're still sentencing him to death. One is just quicker than the other, and that's assuming he even survives the Joining, which you don't know when you make the decision.

You could even argue that making him a Warden and not allowing him to kill the AD is the worst punishment, because not only is he going to die at the hands of some random hurlock or genlock, but there is no redemption in that.

I'm not so sure that souls existing is a "given" in the DA universe, but let's accept that premise for now, since the game acts like it's a given.

Everyone dies eventually.  Him "maybe" dying in the joining can also be read as him "maybe" living.  And I don't think he SHOULD live.

I'm not sure he will die more quickly.  Honestly, I have no idea how old he is.  He doesn't SEEM old in Origins, given how he looks compared to, say, Eamon (who, as I understand the timeline from the books, is something like 10-15 years younger?).  He may be 60 - he may be 40.  He may live 10 years.  He may live 20.  He may live 5.  He may have died next week of a heart attack, or he may die during our assault on Denirim or Fort Drakon, and never make it to Archie.

Letting him live that long, while it may lead to a lonely, meanigless death, allows the chance for him to repeat what I see as his atrocities.  It also allows him to live for another 5, 10, 20 years, whatever.  Again, I don't go for redemption - to me, some people are beyond it.  He's one.  So why let him have that extra time?

[TJPags]

Persephone wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Even if one accepts the yield, then Alistair raises the points of the other crimes, Riordin steps in for another option, and you are still left with those two choices: death or the Joining. Thus, even by adhering to the rules of the Landsmeet, the final judgement is in the hands of the Warden, IMO.

And who made the Warden judge, jury and executioner all in one?

So basically, because nobody says "Warden, judge this man", you should NOT execute him? 

Yes. Wait for the Landsmeet to decide. Have a trial. Like you said, bad game mechanics.

I agree it's bad game mechanics, and I'd be okay with a "put him in prison until he can be tried" option.  But that option DOES NOT EXIST.  Not my fault.

Which in my opinion does not make it right to play God, judge, jury and executioner. Not even Henry VIII executed people without a trial or AT LEAST an Act of Attainder. So MY Warden will not do what even Henry VIII, in all his depravity, did not dare to do. And therefore goes for the only option left that will leave my conscience (Or my Warden's conscience, rather) clear. Just how I see it.

And my PC will not let a man who (IMO) allowed his King to die, lied about it, framed innocent people, hired killers to dispose of those innocent people, turned a blind eye to the depravity of those under his control, and sold people into slavery walk away with punishment.  To do so would not leave me with a clear conscience,  Just how *I* see it.

And hence, we're back to - agree to disagree.

And on that note the whole debate is back at its beginning. I wonder when the next round will begin.

I;m free Tuesday at 8pm EDT. 

[Giggles_Manically]

HE cant repeat his attrocities, his name is mud, his power gone, and his persona villified.

He has no base to act on anymore.



I dont think that people can fall too far from the light to be redeemed. Revan in Kotor did things that make anything Loghain did pale in comparison.



Also as a DC warden you are a mob man, pretty much everything youve done things as bad as what Loghain's cronies have done.

[Persephone]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

HE cant repeat his attrocities, his name is mud, his power gone, and his persona villified.
He has no base to act on anymore.

I dont think that people can fall too far from the light to be redeemed. Revan in Kotor did things that make anything Loghain did pale in comparison.

Also as a DC warden you are a mob man, pretty much everything youve done things as bad as what Loghain's cronies have done.

That's correct.

And Loghain is about 60 in DAO. He won't have many years left if he doesn't kill Archie.

[Monica21]

TJPags wrote...
I'm not so sure that souls existing is a "given" in the DA universe, but let's accept that premise for now, since the game acts like it's a given.

If the game acts like it's a given, then how is it under question?

Everyone dies eventually.  Him "maybe" dying in the joining can also be read as him "maybe" living.  And I don't think he SHOULD live.

Fair enough.

I'm not sure he will die more quickly.  Honestly, I have no idea how old he is.  He doesn't SEEM old in Origins, given how he looks compared to, say, Eamon (who, as I understand the timeline from the books, is something like 10-15 years younger?).  He may be 60 - he may be 40.  He may live 10 years.  He may live 20.  He may live 5.  He may have died next week of a heart attack, or he may die during our assault on Denirim or Fort Drakon, and never make it to Archie.

I can't remember if it's in The Calling or an in-game reference, but individuals who take the Joining at an older age don't get very long. And Loghain is early 50's, probably no older than 55. Eamon is younger, so I blame his appearance on the effects of the poison.

Letting him live that long, while it may lead to a lonely, meanigless death, allows the chance for him to repeat what I see as his atrocities.  It also allows him to live for another 5, 10, 20 years, whatever.  Again, I don't go for redemption - to me, some people are beyond it.  He's one.  So why let him have that extra time?

As Giggles said, how can he repeat what you consider to be his atrocities? He's a Grey Warden now. He's no longer a Teryn and no longer the commander of Ferelden's armies. He's an outsider. He can't do anything. To think that he can go around poisoning people and declaring war on Orlais is a misunderstanding not only of what Loghain did and why, but of what a Grey Warden is.

[TJPags]

Monica21 wrote...

TJPags wrote...
I'm not so sure that souls existing is a "given" in the DA universe, but let's accept that premise for now, since the game acts like it's a given.

If the game acts like it's a given, then how is it under question?

Everyone dies eventually.  Him "maybe" dying in the joining can also be read as him "maybe" living.  And I don't think he SHOULD live.

Fair enough.

I'm not sure he will die more quickly.  Honestly, I have no idea how old he is.  He doesn't SEEM old in Origins, given how he looks compared to, say, Eamon (who, as I understand the timeline from the books, is something like 10-15 years younger?).  He may be 60 - he may be 40.  He may live 10 years.  He may live 20.  He may live 5.  He may have died next week of a heart attack, or he may die during our assault on Denirim or Fort Drakon, and never make it to Archie.

I can't remember if it's in The Calling or an in-game reference, but individuals who take the Joining at an older age don't get very long. And Loghain is early 50's, probably no older than 55. Eamon is younger, so I blame his appearance on the effects of the poison.

Letting him live that long, while it may lead to a lonely, meanigless death, allows the chance for him to repeat what I see as his atrocities.  It also allows him to live for another 5, 10, 20 years, whatever.  Again, I don't go for redemption - to me, some people are beyond it.  He's one.  So why let him have that extra time?

As Giggles said, how can he repeat what you consider to be his atrocities? He's a Grey Warden now. He's no longer a Teryn and no longer the commander of Ferelden's armies. He's an outsider. He can't do anything. To think that he can go around poisoning people and declaring war on Orlais is a misunderstanding not only of what Loghain did and why, but of what a Grey Warden is.

Decorated war hero, father of the Queen, and he has no influence?  I'm a Grey Warden, and I get to put a Grey Warden on the throne (or not).  I also get to rule an Arling.  And I'm no war hero, at least not yet.  I may not even be human.

While he certainly seems resigned to his fate in his Awakening cameo, there's no guarantee at the time that he would be, and reasonable reason to believe he MAY have influence, or the opportunity to do more harm - see Sophia Dryden.

and PS - the one thing I've never accused him of is declaring war on Orlais. 

[Giggles_Manically]

There are comparisons to be made here, however YOU will ignore them.

I can say whatever I want and all you will do is go "Hurr Durr Loghain ist evilz" and declare all others retards for not seeing it how YOU see it.



Dont have time for that.

You and I see the game from VASTLY different POVs Mari, for which I am grateful.



Au revoir!

[TJPags]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

There are comparisons to be made here, however YOU will ignore them.
I can say whatever I want and all you will do is go "Hurr Durr Loghain ist evilz" and declare all others retards for not seeing it how YOU see it.

Dont have time for that.
You and I see the game from VASTLY different POVs Mari, for which I am grateful.

Au revoir!

Frankly, posts like this annoy me to no end.

You - and others - reduce everyone and anyone who wants to discuss Loghain to a blabbering idiot capable of only black and white decision making.  And then accuse them of doing so.

I've yet to see anyone post "I can say whatever I want, and all you'll do is say 'Duh, Loghain good, you moron' and ignore it".  Yet something like this is okay, from your point of view.

This is why I hate discussing this man anymore, and stopped for quite some time.  It seemed like this thread had progressed past that point.  I'm disappointed that it hasn't.

Modifié par TJPags, 26 septembre 2010 - 04:11 .

[Giggles_Manically]

TJPags wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

There are comparisons to be made here, however YOU will ignore them.
I can say whatever I want and all you will do is go "Hurr Durr Loghain ist evilz" and declare all others retards for not seeing it how YOU see it.

Dont have time for that.
You and I see the game from VASTLY different POVs Mari, for which I am grateful.

Au revoir!

Frankly, posts like this annoy me to no end.

You - and others - reduce everyone and anyone who wants to discuss Loghain to a blabbering idiot capable of only black and white decision making.  And then accuse them of doing so.

I've yet to see anyone post "I can say whatever I want, and all you'll do is say 'Duh, Loghain good, you moron" and ignore it.  Yet something like this is okay, from your point of view.

This is why I hate discussing this man anymore, and stopped for quite some time.  It seemed like this thread had progressed past that point.  I'm disappointed that it hasn't.

[Monica21]

TJPags wrote...
Decorated war hero, father of the Queen, and he has no influence?  I'm a Grey Warden, and I get to put a Grey Warden on the throne (or not).  I also get to rule an Arling.  And I'm no war hero, at least not yet.  I may not even be human.

While he certainly seems resigned to his fate in his Awakening cameo, there's no guarantee at the time that he would be, and reasonable reason to believe he MAY have influence, or the opportunity to do more harm - see Sophia Dryden.

and PS - the one thing I've never accused him of is declaring war on Orlais. 

Nope, none. If you do make him a Warden, you conscript him, as a criminal, in front of the entire Landsmeet. What makes you think he can do anything? And yes, you get to rule an Arling. Not Loghain, not Alistair, not Riordan. You do. What makes you think Loghain would get an arling?

What you can or can't do as a Warden is because you have the backing of Arl Eamon and the last remaining Theirin tagging along with you throughout Ferelden, not because you're a Warden. If Alistair wasn't Maric's son, then Eamon would do whatever he wanted on his own. He might use you, but you're still not much more than a pawn in his game.

He's resigned to his fate when you kill him, or did you not notice from him telling Anora that it was okay? What reason do you have that he'd change his mind? And Sophia Dryden is a very different case. She had a claim to the throne, lost it, got conscripted, the king turned out to be a jerk, the nobles wanted her back, and she started the rebellion. Loghain has no claim to the throne and no one wants him on the throne. He doesn't even want the throne.

[Zjarcal]

TJPags wrote...

This is why I hate discussing this man anymore, and stopped for quite some time.  It seemed like this thread had progressed past that point.  I'm disappointed that it hasn't.

This discussion has been going on for 10 months and it hasn't progressed one bit. Fun as it may be to discuss things, this is one of those issues where some people will NEVER reach a consensus.

[Sabariel]

The first time I executed Loghain is because I wanted to be "Queen". Am I terrible now?



Sorry. Couldn't resist.

[TJPags]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

There are comparisons to be made here, however YOU will ignore them.
I can say whatever I want and all you will do is go "Hurr Durr Loghain ist evilz" and declare all others retards for not seeing it how YOU see it.

Dont have time for that.
You and I see the game from VASTLY different POVs Mari, for which I am grateful.

Au revoir!

Frankly, posts like this annoy me to no end.

You - and others - reduce everyone and anyone who wants to discuss Loghain to a blabbering idiot capable of only black and white decision making.  And then accuse them of doing so.

I've yet to see anyone post "I can say whatever I want, and all you'll do is say 'Duh, Loghain good, you moron" and ignore it.  Yet something like this is okay, from your point of view.

This is why I hate discussing this man anymore, and stopped for quite some time.  It seemed like this thread had progressed past that point.  I'm disappointed that it hasn't.

Yea, that's adult.  Props to you.

[Monica21]

Sabariel wrote...

The first time I executed Loghain is because I wanted to be "Queen". Am I terrible now?

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

If that makes you a terrible person then I am too.

[Giggles_Manically]

TJPags wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

There are comparisons to be made here, however YOU will ignore them.
I can say whatever I want and all you will do is go "Hurr Durr Loghain ist evilz" and declare all others retards for not seeing it how YOU see it.

Dont have time for that.
You and I see the game from VASTLY different POVs Mari, for which I am grateful.

Au revoir!

Frankly, posts like this annoy me to no end.

You - and others - reduce everyone and anyone who wants to discuss Loghain to a blabbering idiot capable of only black and white decision making.  And then accuse them of doing so.

I've yet to see anyone post "I can say whatever I want, and all you'll do is say 'Duh, Loghain good, you moron" and ignore it.  Yet something like this is okay, from your point of view.

This is why I hate discussing this man anymore, and stopped for quite some time.  It seemed like this thread had progressed past that point.  I'm disappointed that it hasn't.

Yea, that's adult.  Props to you.

[TJPags]

Zjarcal wrote...

TJPags wrote...

This is why I hate discussing this man anymore, and stopped for quite some time.  It seemed like this thread had progressed past that point.  I'm disappointed that it hasn't.

This discussion has been going on for 10 months and it hasn't progressed one bit. Fun as it may be to discuss things, this is one of those issues where some people will NEVER reach a consensus.

It never will.  Doesn't mean discussions are worthless.

But, so be it.

[Zjarcal]

TJPags wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

TJPags wrote...

This is why I hate discussing this man anymore, and stopped for quite some time.  It seemed like this thread had progressed past that point.  I'm disappointed that it hasn't.

This discussion has been going on for 10 months and it hasn't progressed one bit. Fun as it may be to discuss things, this is one of those issues where some people will NEVER reach a consensus.

It never will.  Doesn't mean discussions are worthless.

But, so be it.

I never said they were worthless. I've enjoyed several of the Loghain debates, but there comes a point where you realize that this is going nowhere. I usually realize that once the discussion returns to square one, which happens a lot in most Loghain centric threads.