261 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Sure she does. She's the queen now and he's not there in his Warden capacity but rather in his 'I'm not renouncing my claim to the throne' capacity.

He's always in his warden capacity.  And he never refuses to renounce his claim to the throne.

edit:look, if Anora demanded he renounce his claim and then called for his execution after he refused that would be one thing.  But she gets it the wrong way around.

Modifié par Wulfram, 22 octobre 2010 - 07:12 .

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
Anora doesn't give him the chance to swear fealty.  She immediately calls for his execution.

After he said that he was leaving without renouncing his claim. So yes, of course.

  Alistair always renounces his claim.  Just because he doesn't say it explicitly, that's like cutting someone's head off because they forgot to sign on the dotted line.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Wulfram wrote...
edit:look, if Anora demanded he renounce his claim and then called for his execution after he refused that would be one thing.  But she gets it the wrong way around.

Him saying he was leaving without renouncing his claim can be seen as him refusing. She explains to him why she wants to execute him and he still doesn't renounce his claim until the Warden intervenes.
If Anora got it wrong, Alistair did as well. Did he seriously think he can just walk away without renouncing his claim?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
After he said that he was leaving without renouncing his claim. So yes, of course.

  Alistair always renounces his claim.  Just because he doesn't say it explicitly, that's like cutting someone's head off because they forgot to sign on the dotted line.

If it isn't done explictily, then it has no legal or effective bearing. He has to say it explicitly. If he leaves without saying it, that's like him not renouncing his claim.

[Wulfram]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Him saying he was leaving without renouncing his claim can be seen as him refusing. She explains to him why she wants to execute him and he still doesn't renounce his claim until the Warden intervenes.
If Anora got it wrong, Alistair did as well. Did he seriously think he can just walk away without renouncing his claim?

Anora is only willing to leave him alive after he renounces his claim as a favour to the warden.  Without the Warden's intervention it would have done him no good.

And yes, Alistair does need to (edit: explicitly) renounce his claim before leaving.  But that's cause to say "Alistair, you need to renounce your claim to the throne" not to order his execution.

Modifié par Wulfram, 22 octobre 2010 - 07:25 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Wulfram wrote...
Anora is only willing to leave him alive after he renounces his claim as a favour to the warden.  Without the Warden's intervention it would have done him no good.

Because rebellions can still be called in his name, which indeed does happen if he is exiled.

Wulfram wrote...
And yes, Alistair does need to renounce his claim before leaving.  But that's cause to say "Alistair, you need to renounce your claim to the throne" not to order his execution.

She didn't order it. She said she wants to order it, but she didn't call the guards to take him away immediately, she explains to him why. And yet he still does not renounce it until it had to be explained to him. 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 octobre 2010 - 07:28 .

[Monica21]

Wulfram wrote...
He's always in his warden capacity.  And he never refuses to renounce his claim to the throne.

No he's not. He's left the Wardens by that point, and Anora has every right to decide that the last Theirin who has chosen to no longer be a bound by his previous oath might also prove a danger to her reign.

Modifié par Monica21, 22 octobre 2010 - 07:43 .

[Wulfram]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Because rebellions can still be called in his name, which indeed does happen if he is exiled.

While starting your reign with the murder of the son of Maric is going to give you stability?

She didn't order it. She said she wants to order it, but she didn't call the guards to take him away, she explains to him why. And yet he still does not renounce it until it had to be explained to him. 

Well renouncing his claim wouldn't have done any good, would it, since Anora would have executed him anyway.

edit: Monica:  You can't leave the wardens.  If I want to have him executed for desertion, that's my affair, but it's no concern of Ferelden's crown to which neither I nor he owe any fealty.

Modifié par Wulfram, 22 octobre 2010 - 07:45 .

[Zjarcal]

Wulfram wrote...

Well renouncing his claim wouldn't have done any good, would it, since Anora would have executed him anyway.

EDIT: Gah, stupid site ate what I had written!

Anyway, I agree with the above statement. I doubt Anora would've let him go even if he renounced to his claim, had the Warden not intervened.

We'll never know for certain since she never asks him to renounce his claim unless the Warden intervenes.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 22 octobre 2010 - 07:53 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Wulfram wrote...
While starting your reign with the murder of the son of Maric is going to give you stability?

The execution of Maric's unrecognized bastard does indeed provide stability, as per the epilogue.  

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 octobre 2010 - 07:49 .

[Wulfram]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
While starting your reign with the murder of the son of Maric is going to give you stability?

The execution of Maric's unrecognized bastard does indeed provide stability, as per the epilogue.  

Well, it makes no sense that it does.

[Zjarcal]

Wulfram wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
While starting your reign with the murder of the son of Maric is going to give you stability?

The execution of Maric's unrecognized bastard does indeed provide stability, as per the epilogue.  

Well, it makes no sense that it does.

I don't know, I would say it does. The rebellions that occur when Alistair is exiled would have no meaning anymore, so there's no point in them occurring.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Wulfram wrote...
Well, it makes no sense that it does.

It makes perfect sense.
A- with the Thereins gone, there is no point in rebelling in their name.
B- Maric never recognized Alistair, a bastard. No one was even aware of his existence save Eamon  and Teagan.
C- If you go to the Tavern before the Landsmeet and listen to the nobles, all of them are skeptical about Eamon pushing the unknown Alistair for the throne. They didn't seem impressed.

So all things considered, the execution of an unrecognized, unknown, untrained bastard son of a King that has been dead for years, would largely be insignificant. Ferelden does care for Therein blood, but not that much.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 octobre 2010 - 08:01 .

[Sarah1281]

edit: Monica: You can't leave the wardens. If I want to have him executed for desertion, that's my affair, but it's no concern of Ferelden's crown to which neither I nor he owe any fealty.

Yes, you can. Seriously. If Alistair is like '**** you all, I'm leaving' and then goes off to become a drunk somewhere else in Thedas then it doesn't matter if he is still tainted. He is no longer with the Wardens and while he will never physically never be untainted, it's pretty clear he's not one of them. It doesn't even matter if he does end up going back to Ferelden and getting himself killed in the Deep Roads. He decides to leave the order and isn't a Warden.

[Ryzaki]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
Well, it makes no sense that it does.

It makes perfect sense.
A- with the Thereins gone, there is no point in rebelling in their name.
B- Maric never recognized Alistair, a bastard. No one was even aware of his existence save Eamon  and Teagan.
C- If you go to the Tavern before the Landsmeet and listen to the nobles, all of them are skeptical about Eamon pushing the unknown Alistair for the throne. They didn't seem impressed.

So all things considered, the execution of an unrecognized, unknown, untrained bastard son of a King that has been dead for years, would largely be insignificant. Ferelden does care for Therein blood, but not that much.

And yet this same person can be considered a legitimate threat to the throne? His being insignificiant works both ways. 

The only reason he's even considered seriously is because Loghain was abusing his power overtly. Without that no one would've taken a second look at Alistair. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 22 octobre 2010 - 08:18 .

[Wulfram]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It makes perfect sense.
A- with the Thereins gone, there is no point in rebelling in their name.
B- Maric never recognized Alistair, a bastard. No one was even aware of his existence save Eamon  and Teagan.
C- If you go to the Tavern before the Landsmeet and listen to the nobles, all of them are skeptical about Eamon pushing the unknown Alistair for the throne. They didn't seem impressed.

So all things considered, the execution of an unrecognized, unknown, untrained bastard son of a King that has been dead for years, would largely be insignificant. Ferelden does care for Therein blood, but not that much.

Allowing Anora such arbitrary tyranny puts anyone who might find themselves on her bad side at risk.  To permit her the unprovoked murder of the last of the Theirin bloodline is to give her the same absolute power enjoyed by the Empress of Orlais.

[Ryzaki]

Frankly I only place Anora on the throne alone if I'm leaving Fereldan. If my PC plans on staying there its always Anora + Hardened Alistair. They do work the best together after all. It's the only royal ending I seen the Golden Age result from.  

Modifié par Ryzaki, 22 octobre 2010 - 08:22 .

[Sarah1281]

And yet this same person can be considered a legitimate threat to the throne? His being insignificiant works both ways.



The only reason he's even considered seriously is because Loghain was abusing his power overtly. Without that no one would've taken a second look at Alistair.

You're right: without Loghain's problematic regency, Alistair wouldn't have been considered. Since Loghain DID have those problems and he WAS considered for the throne then that makes him more significant and more of a threat than he would have been before Eamon put him forward as king. Notice how Alistair is never asked to renounce any claims to the throne prior to Ostagar when Eamon, at least, seemed worried that he'd cause problems for Cailan? He was unrecognized and so it wasn't as important as afterwards when he was a word away from replacing Anora.

[Sarah1281]

Allowing Anora such arbitrary tyranny puts anyone who might find themselves on her bad side at risk. To permit her the unprovoked murder of the last of the Theirin bloodline is to give her the same absolute power enjoyed by the Empress of Orlais.

How does 'executing a rival to the throne' which has a huge historical precedent translate to arbitrary tyranny that could threaten anyone she doesn't like? She and Eamon seem to hate each other and yet he makes out just fine.

Modifié par Sarah1281, 22 octobre 2010 - 08:24 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Wulfram wrote...
Allowing Anora such arbitrary tyranny puts anyone who might find themselves on her bad side at risk.  To permit her the unprovoked murder of the last of the Theirin bloodline is to give her the same absolute power enjoyed by the Empress of Orlais.

If anyone had a problem with it, the Landsmeet would have spoken against it. They didn't, thus they gave their implicit consent. So it's not arbitrary tyranny.

It's a legal and legitimate execution that was unopposed in front of the Landsmeet. Not a murder.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 octobre 2010 - 08:28 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Ryzaki wrote...
And yet this same person can be considered a legitimate threat to the throne? His being insignificiant works both ways. 

Not him, his name is the legitimate threat. Rebellions can be raised in his name.

[Ryzaki]

Sarah1281 wrote...

And yet this same person can be considered a legitimate threat to the throne? His being insignificiant works both ways.

The only reason he's even considered seriously is because Loghain was abusing his power overtly. Without that no one would've taken a second look at Alistair.

You're right: without Loghain's problematic regency, Alistair wouldn't have been considered. Since Loghain DID have those problems and he WAS considered for the throne then that makes him more significant and more of a threat than he would have been before Eamon put him forward as king. Notice how Alistair is never asked to renounce any claims to the throne prior to Ostagar when Eamon, at least, seemed worried that he'd cause problems for Cailan? He was unrecognized and so it wasn't as important as afterwards when he was a word away from replacing Anora.

I know. Which is why I wonder why Anora is so bothered that I chose (the one time I got this ending) to allow Alistair to be exiled. She acts like he'll come back a greater threat...when...that's not liable to happen. 

[Wulfram]

Sarah1281 wrote...
How does 'executing a rival to the throne' which has a huge historical precedent translate to arbitrary tyranny that could threaten anyone she doesn't like?

Since she failed to get any legal cover, and didn't even have the decency to do her murdering quietly and with plausible deniability.

Executing your rival after a failed rebellion is one thing, but all Alistair did was put his claim forward to a landsmeet called for that purpose, in accordance with Ferelden tradition.

[Ryzaki]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...
And yet this same person can be considered a legitimate threat to the throne? His being insignificiant works both ways. 

Not him, his name is the legitimate threat. Rebellions can be raised in his name.

He's an illegitmate bastard with no proof. Any rebellion raised in his name will be a rebellion that would've happened regardless but needed an excuse. Without Alistair they'll just find something else. 

Also could there not be rebellions over Anora killing the last heir to the Therrin throne? Yes I know the people in the landsmeet was fine with it but maybe some die hard royalists will use him as some sort of martyr. 

I see that as going as far as trying to use Alistair as a symbol. What good is the warden who slunk away from fighting the blight? Aren't Fereldans big on honor and duty? 

Edit: Though OP if you want the royal "Golden Age" ending and you want your PC to live (well...if you're attached to Alistair as a romance partner this might not be for you). You'll have to harden Alistair, tell him before hand to marry Anora, spare Loghain, suggest the whole marriage again which leads to Alistair claiming the throne with Anora (granted he hates you but...), sacrifice Loghain and talk to Ali at the cornation ceremony. (He doesn't sound as angry as he would if Loghain is still alive). Your friendship seems to be on the mend, you won't be as close as before but it's something. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 22 octobre 2010 - 08:34 .

[nos_astra]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
Allowing Anora such arbitrary tyranny puts anyone who might find themselves on her bad side at risk.  To permit her the unprovoked murder of the last of the Theirin bloodline is to give her the same absolute power enjoyed by the Empress of Orlais.

If anyone had a problem with it, the Landsmeet would have spoken against it. They didn't, thus they gave their implicit consent. So it's not arbitrary tyranny.

It's a legal and legitimate execution that was unopposed in front of the Landsmeet. Not a murder.

I haven't seen anyone declare Anora regent or put a crown on her head. So obviously it's not legitimate and therefore murder.