146 réponses à ce sujet

[phaonica]

TJPags wrote...
it seems to me that Loghain clearly has trust issues with Orlais and with Orlesians.  Understandable?  Yes.  But rational?  I'm not so sure.  His distrust and dislike for anything Orlesian borders on obsession to me.  Again, I'm not very knowledgeable about psychology, but it doesn't seem mentally healthy.

How is it understandable if it's not rational? And while he has a greater mistrust for Orlesians, he's not quick to trust anyone. In his position at the king's side, in the middle of politics, that's not necessarily a flaw.

[TJPags]

Is a fear of heights rational? even for someone who fell off a roof, it happened once, but may never happen again. Understandable, but not necessarily rational. Is claustrophobia rational? A fear of needles?



Lots of things can be understood, but are not completely rational. Is love always rational? Yet it's understood. That's all I mean.



And yes, someone charged with guarding someone SHOULD be suspicious. It;s their job. Yet Loghain trusts others - he trusts Uldred enough to make a deal with him, trusts Howe enough to give him free reign throughout the game regardless of what he does, hell, he trusts Howe won't kill Anora even after he suggests doing so.



The Orlesians are a very small part of the game, yet Loghain focusses on them a lot. Seems excessive when compared to everyone else in the game. Even his own daughter suggests Orlesian aid.

[Sarah1281]

Is a fear of heights rational? even for someone who fell off a roof, it happened once, but may never happen again. Understandable, but not necessarily rational. Is claustrophobia rational? A fear of needles?

How is a fear of falling from heights not rational? You fall from them, you get injured if not outright die.

[KnightofPhoenix]

TJPags wrote...
The Orlesians are a very small part of the game, yet Loghain focusses on them a lot. Seems excessive when compared to everyone else in the game. Even his own daughter suggests Orlesian aid.

Are they? It's the major power on the block and it's right next to them.
They are far from being small.

[tool_bot]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Is a fear of heights rational? even for someone who fell off a roof, it happened once, but may never happen again. Understandable, but not necessarily rational. Is claustrophobia rational? A fear of needles?

How is a fear of falling from heights not rational? You fall from them, you get injured if not outright die.

Depends on the heights and the fear. Afraid of jumping off a 15 ft diving board while there are 3 life gaurds in the pool and you're the only other person there seems pretty irrational to me.

And in keeping with my proud country's history of hypocrisy, that's exactly how I felt this morning lol.

[Sarah1281]

I don't know, that seems more like an irrational manifestation of a rational fear.

[TJPags]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Is a fear of heights rational? even for someone who fell off a roof, it happened once, but may never happen again. Understandable, but not necessarily rational. Is claustrophobia rational? A fear of needles?

How is a fear of falling from heights not rational? You fall from them, you get injured if not outright die.

I've never fallen from a height.  Never even fell off a step ladder, never saw anyone fall from a height.  I have a strong fear of heights.  How is that rational?

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

TJPags wrote...
The Orlesians are a very small part of the game, yet Loghain focusses on them a lot. Seems excessive when compared to everyone else in the game. Even his own daughter suggests Orlesian aid.

Are they? It's the major power on the block and it's right next to them.
They are far from being small.

They have a small part in the game.  I'm not talking about the relative size of the nation, or it's location.  Caillan mentions waiting for Orlesians, Anora suggests asking for Orelesian aid, and really, they're not mentioned again until Riordan shows up.  That's a very small part in the game.

Andre the Giant was a very large man.  Yet if he had a cameo in, say, Diff'rent Strokes next to Gary Coleman, that wouldn't make it a big part.

[Sarah1281]

TJPags wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

Is a fear of heights rational? even for someone who fell off a roof, it happened once, but may never happen again. Understandable, but not necessarily rational. Is claustrophobia rational? A fear of needles?

How is a fear of falling from heights not rational? You fall from them, you get injured if not outright die.

I've never fallen from a height.  Never even fell off a step ladder, never saw anyone fall from a height.  I have a strong fear of heights.  How is that rational?

Because if you DID fall from it then it would have horrible consequences. If you were afraid of long words, that would be completely irrational as you'd be hardpressed to come up with any situation where bad things would happen as the result of the length of a word.

[TJPags]

Sarah1281 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

Is a fear of heights rational? even for someone who fell off a roof, it happened once, but may never happen again. Understandable, but not necessarily rational. Is claustrophobia rational? A fear of needles?

How is a fear of falling from heights not rational? You fall from them, you get injured if not outright die.

I've never fallen from a height.  Never even fell off a step ladder, never saw anyone fall from a height.  I have a strong fear of heights.  How is that rational?

Because if you DID fall from it then it would have horrible consequences. If you were afraid of long words, that would be completely irrational as you'd be hardpressed to come up with any situation where bad things would happen as the result of the length of a word.

Some people are so afraid of the number 13 they stay inside on the 13th.  Some are so afraid of simply being outside they never leave their house!!  Is any of that rational?

I'm not saying I worry about being at a height . . .in the 15 foot diving board example above, I doubt I'd be able to make myself walk out onto that board, to say nothing of jumping off it.  Where's the rationality in that?

[Sarah1281]

Some people are so afraid of the number 13 they stay inside on the 13th. Some are so afraid of simply being outside they never leave their house!! Is any of that rational?



I'm not saying I worry about being at a height . . .in the 15 foot diving board example above, I doubt I'd be able to make myself walk out onto that board, to say nothing of jumping off it. Where's the rationality in that?

And I wouldn't call the fear of the number thirteen or of the outside in general rational. Just because your fear of falling from heights can manifest itself in an irrational manner does NOT make it an irrational fear.

[KnightofPhoenix]

TJPags wrote...
They have a small part in the game.  I'm not talking about the relative size of the nation, or it's location.  Caillan mentions waiting for Orlesians, Anora suggests asking for Orelesian aid, and really, they're not mentioned again until Riordan shows up.  That's a very small part in the game.

Andre the Giant was a very large man.  Yet if he had a cameo in, say, Diff'rent Strokes next to Gary Coleman, that wouldn't make it a big part.

That does not reduce their regional importance and how big of a concern this is for Ferelden, even if the game fails to convey it.

Loghain doesn't know he's in a game, he thinks he is in a real world and with Orlais as a neighbour, so obiviously he is not going to think it's a small issue. And you said that him thinking about it a lot when it's small in the game makes him obsessed, and I was responding to that. In his world, it's a big deal.

[TJPags]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

TJPags wrote...
They have a small part in the game.  I'm not talking about the relative size of the nation, or it's location.  Caillan mentions waiting for Orlesians, Anora suggests asking for Orelesian aid, and really, they're not mentioned again until Riordan shows up.  That's a very small part in the game.

Andre the Giant was a very large man.  Yet if he had a cameo in, say, Diff'rent Strokes next to Gary Coleman, that wouldn't make it a big part.

That does not reduce their regional importance and how big of a concern this is for Ferelden, even if the game fails to convey it.

Loghain doesn't know he's in a game, he thinks he is in a real world and with Orlais as a neighbour, so obiviously he is not going to think it's a small issue. And you said that him thinking about it a lot when it's small in the game makes him obsessed, and I was responding to that. In his world, it's a big deal.

But nobody else acts as concerned about it as he does.

And, the game should TELL us why he's so obsessed about Orlais.  It should tell us about Orlais' regional importance.  It should MAKE us understand, without reading the books, why this SHOULD be a concern.  It should give us this information.  That's a game fault.  And it's why I'm bothered so often by what the writers say when the topic they're discussing is not in the game. 

The game is very good.  I can't help but think it would have been SO much better if HALF of what the writers have told us was actually put INTO the game.

*Edit - @ Sarah - would you prefer it if i said Loghain rational suspicion of Orlais manifests itself in an irrational manner?

Modifié par TJPags, 14 octobre 2010 - 01:47 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Eh, I prefer a game that makes me think and doesn't spoon feed me everything. That's part of what makes it realistic, or more realistic than other settings. Reading codexes, looking at the map and listening to people made it fairly obvious to me why Orlais is so important and how it might benefit from Ferelden being under its sphere of influence.

[phaonica]

TJPags wrote...


And yes, someone charged with guarding someone SHOULD be suspicious. It;s their job. Yet Loghain trusts others - he trusts Uldred enough to make a deal with him, trusts Howe enough to give him free reign throughout the game regardless of what he does, hell, he trusts Howe won't kill Anora even after he suggests doing so.

Someone being suspicious doesn't make them incapable of trust. And I don't think you have to *entirely* trust someone to be allied with them either, so long as your goals are the same.

The Orlesians are a very small part of the game, yet Loghain focusses on them a lot. Seems excessive when compared to everyone else in the game. Even his own daughter suggests Orlesian aid.

They're not a small part of the game to Loghain. Lost elven history plays a very small part in the actual game. Do the Dalish seem excessively focused on it?

[Sarah1281]

*Edit - @ Sarah - would you prefer it if i said Loghain rational suspicion of Orlais manifests itself in an irrational manner?

Absolutely. He does focus on them while pretty much ignoring the Blight for a year.

[TJPags]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Eh, I prefer a game that makes me think and doesn't spoon feed me everything. That's part of what makes it realistic, or more realistic than other settings. Reading codexes, looking at the map and listening to people made it fairly obvious to me why Orlais is so important and how it might benefit from Ferelden being under its sphere of influence.

I like thinking too.  But think about how much tougher that Loghain decision would be for everyone if we all knew what you learn in the books, or if we knew the full story with Eamon.  Hell, they even named the retreat cutscene "the betrayal".

Give us information, let us decide how to use it.  I don't like having to speculate about history.  Someone's motives, sure, I don't mind wondering about that.  But give me something to use to decipher them.  Tell us more about Celene in game, for example.  Have more people in game complain about or be concerned about the Orlesians.  Hell, let Leli tell us about how bad they are or something.

Just . . . more.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sarah1281 wrote...

*Edit - @ Sarah - would you prefer it if i said Loghain rational suspicion of Orlais manifests itself in an irrational manner?

Absolutely. He does focus on them while pretty much ignoring the Blight for a year.

Did he?
How could he have fought the Blight while the lands between him and it (the bannorn), are fighting him instead?

His primary attention was on the civil war, not the Orlesians. Now had he won the civil war, he said he would secure the borders first and while that's not ignoring the lbight, it's not devoting enough attention to it.

[KnightofPhoenix]

TJPags wrote...
Hell, let Leli tell us about how bad they are or something.

Didn't she? Her bard stories sounded pretty bad to me.

I prfer the game this way to be honest. It gives room for personal interpretation. In real life, we don't know everything and we have to decide with what little info we have (the rest, we can think aboutand attempt to logically reach conclusions).

But that's a personal preference.

[TJPags]

phaonica wrote...

TJPags wrote...


And yes, someone charged with guarding someone SHOULD be suspicious. It;s their job. Yet Loghain trusts others - he trusts Uldred enough to make a deal with him, trusts Howe enough to give him free reign throughout the game regardless of what he does, hell, he trusts Howe won't kill Anora even after he suggests doing so.

Someone being suspicious doesn't make them incapable of trust. And I don't think you have to *entirely* trust someone to be allied with them either, so long as your goals are the same.

The Orlesians are a very small part of the game, yet Loghain focusses on them a lot. Seems excessive when compared to everyone else in the game. Even his own daughter suggests Orlesian aid.

They're not a small part of the game to Loghain. Lost elven history plays a very small part in the actual game. Do the Dalish seem excessively focused on it?

It;'s a small part of the game overall, but you get more if you do the DE origin, and it's a large part during the elven quest.

With Orlais, it's a large part in Loghain's mind, but really, when does it ever come to the fore in the game?  It doesn't.  See what I said to kop, above.  They should have given us this information in the game, not in the books.  Make other characters as concerned.  Let some other nobles mention it.  Let Eamon talk about it, or Teagan, or one of those damn Banns we see at the end.  A templur, a mage, a shopkeeper or two.  Something!!!

[TJPags]

Sarah1281 wrote...

*Edit - @ Sarah - would you prefer it if i said Loghain rational suspicion of Orlais manifests itself in an irrational manner?

Absolutely. He does focus on them while pretty much ignoring the Blight for a year.

Okay - i'll go with that.

[Sarah1281]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

*Edit - @ Sarah - would you prefer it if i said Loghain rational suspicion of Orlais manifests itself in an irrational manner?

Absolutely. He does focus on them while pretty much ignoring the Blight for a year.

Did he?
How could he have fought the Blight while the lands between him and it (the bannorn), are fighting him instead?

His primary attention was on the civil war, not the Orlesians. Now had he won the civil war, he said he would secure the borders first and while that's not ignoring the lbight, it's not devoting enough attention to it.

There may have been a civil war had Loghain not been so hamfisted in his declaration of regency but it wouldn't have been pretty much Loghain vs. everybody else and while it was a strong possibility we'll never know. I think that the reason Loghain was so determined to become the leader of Ferelden (aside from concern about Anora the competent queen being booted) was because he feared that Orlais would take advantage of any weakness Ferelden showed and thought he was the only one taking them seriously.

[TJPags]

Sarah1281 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

*Edit - @ Sarah - would you prefer it if i said Loghain rational suspicion of Orlais manifests itself in an irrational manner?

Absolutely. He does focus on them while pretty much ignoring the Blight for a year.

Did he?
How could he have fought the Blight while the lands between him and it (the bannorn), are fighting him instead?

His primary attention was on the civil war, not the Orlesians. Now had he won the civil war, he said he would secure the borders first and while that's not ignoring the lbight, it's not devoting enough attention to it.

There may have been a civil war had Loghain not been so hamfisted in his declaration of regency but it wouldn't have been pretty much Loghain vs. everybody else and while it was a strong possibility we'll never know. I think that the reason Loghain was so determined to become the leader of Ferelden (aside from concern about Anora the competent queen being booted) was because he feared that Orlais would take advantage of any weakness Ferelden showed and thought he was the only one taking them seriously.

Which is where I lost touch with him as a character, because in the game, Orlais does NOT seem like a great threat.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sarah1281 wrote...
There may have been a civil war had Loghain not been so hamfisted in his declaration of regency but it wouldn't have been pretty much Loghain vs. everybody else and while it was a strong possibility we'll never know. I think that the reason Loghain was so determined to become the leader of Ferelden (aside from concern about Anora the competent queen being booted) was because he feared that Orlais would take advantage of any weakness Ferelden showed and thought he was the only one taking them seriously.

Yes, but how does that equal him ignoring the Blight?
He tried to get all mages and he tried to get the dwarves and I don't think he wanted them solely to deter Orlais. He may not have thought that darkspawn are the immediate threat until the end; that doesn't mean he didn't see them as a threat (which is what ignore means). 

[Sarah1281]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...
There may have been a civil war had Loghain not been so hamfisted in his declaration of regency but it wouldn't have been pretty much Loghain vs. everybody else and while it was a strong possibility we'll never know. I think that the reason Loghain was so determined to become the leader of Ferelden (aside from concern about Anora the competent queen being booted) was because he feared that Orlais would take advantage of any weakness Ferelden showed and thought he was the only one taking them seriously.

Yes, but how does that equal him ignoring the Blight?
He tried to get all mages and he tried to get the dwarves and I don't think he wanted them solely to deter Orlais. He may not have thought that darkspawn are the immediate threat until the end; that doesn't mean he didn't see them as a threat (which is what ignore means). 

I did say 'pretty much ignore.' I know he did take some action to gain allies but he didn't really come up with any new plans once he couldn't get into Orzammar (he could have tried back later) and Uldred went nuts. I don't feel he did as much as he could have, which is what I meant by 'pretty much ignore.'

[Monica21]

TJPags wrote...
But nobody else acts as concerned about it as he does.

No, and that bothers me too. I've said before that Fereldens seem to have an incredibly short memory when it comes to the occupation.

Codex entry from the History of Ferelden: Chapter 2: The occupation was a dark blot on Ferelden's history. Our people, who from time immemorial valued their freedom over all else, were forced to bow to Orlesian rule. The Empire declared our elves property and sold them like cattle. Chevaliers routinely plundered freeholds of coin, food, and even women and children, and excused it as "taxation." And for 70 years no Landsmeets were held, for the Imperial throne had declared our ancient laws a form of treason.

From Noble Families of Ferelden: The occupation left empty castles in its wake. Whole families were butchered in the initial invasion, and all those who couldn't or wouldn't bend knee to the Emperor's puppet king were declared traitors and hunted. Many bloodlines ended on Chevaliers' blades at dusty crossroads, in forest clearings, or in freeholds.

And then there were the turncoats.

To curry favor with their new masters, some nobles took up arms against their brothers. They betrayed and murdered the Rebel Queen, an act that created even more vacant titles and lands, once King Maric exacted justice.

That Ferelden did not fall apart after the Orlesians left is a testament to the strength of King Maric. The old families still held grudges against those who had sided with the emperor, and those new families that had been granted titles were viewed as interlopers. The Landsmeets that followed Maric's coronation were tense, to say the least.

And, the game should TELL us why he's so obsessed about Orlais.  It should tell us about Orlais' regional importance.  It should MAKE us understand, without reading the books, why this SHOULD be a concern.  It should give us this information.  That's a game fault.  And it's why I'm bothered so often by what the writers say when the topic they're discussing is not in the game.

I think the above codex entries do a pretty good job. Granted, the writers could have done more, but they can't cram all of TST and TC into the game. I think the problem is that Loghain seems to be entirely on his own in his mistrust of Orlais, when in reality that shouldn't be the case. No existing noble family should have any desire to have Chevaliers set foot into Ferelden. I honestly believe that if Bryce Cousland knew that Maric had asked for Orlesian help he would not have agreed. And I do know he visited Orlais, but there's a difference between a diplomatic mission and letting boots back on your soil.

Modifié par Monica21, 14 octobre 2010 - 02:39 .