156 réponses à ce sujet

[nos_astra]

KoP, I've been wondering if you could play devil's advocate again and make a guess as to what the Bannorn could do to depose the monarch? What would they want? How could they succeed and ... what then?

Assuming they are really clever and there's a strong leader (or idea or figurehead) that might unite them.

Modifié par klarabella, 01 novembre 2010 - 08:22 .

[Xilizhra]

It's true about the Dales; rebuilding Arlathan would be the most ideal thing.



However, I do have a solution to the problem of cheap labor, though it may require you to accept my personal premise about the archon; Tevinter freedmen. Buy a bunch of slaves from Tevinter and free them, then fill the cheap labor gap with them in those areas that the Crown would need them. Not perfect, but it's likely that many city elves wouldn't leave the alienages anyway (and CE laborers are loyal to their employers primarily, regardless of who they are), so you wouldn't lose all of them to the Dalish.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Ahh, KoP, I love the way you think. A shame I can't import Arcturus into my games and elect him as king to marry Anora, since none of my human noble playthroughs involve taking the throne.

[Costin_Razvan]

And power hates vacuums. Such a sudden brutal act will lead to more problems, such as uniting the Bannorn and freeholders against you,

That's not a problem as they are already planning to unite against you in Awakening to start a Civil War, and from what we know of Dragon Age 2. Personally I would have tried to pacify them so that I can launch my war against Orlais, but trying to pacify a bunch of people who fight wars over trees is out of the question for me. ( which is why I made this thread once I found out about how the Bannorn is exactly ).

Knight's plan is long term, it would take years to achieve it. Why wait so that they can have a chance to rebuild their strength on both a political ( with the freeholders ) and a military level? The Bannorn ( besides Arl Wulf ) was decimated by the Darkspawn, and they also lost many troops against Loghain. They don't have the military capability to wage any sort of civil war...for now. As such I can and I would kill them all now while they are at their weakest, if any Bann survives and tries to wage a war...well they will find they cannot.

The farmland is devastated, they have no supplies and they desperetly need aid from the Crown.

And why would the Freeholders aid them against the Crown? The Crown can offer protection and economical aid, which they desperatly need. The Banns can offer what? Squat.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 01 novembre 2010 - 08:41 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

klarabella wrote...

KoP, I've been wondering if you could play devil's advocate again and make a guess as to what the Bannorn could do to depose the monarch? What would they want? How could they succeed and ... what then?

Assuming they are really clever and there's a strong leader.

Well, their unification is necessary and they need leadership. Redcliffe, despite its meager economic capabilities, can offer that via its strategic location and its symbolic status (most famous fortress in Ferelden, I think).
 
We know from the Codex that no monarch can really rule the country without the Bannorn's consent. If they are fighting each other, it doesn't really matter. But if they are united under one leader, that means they essentially have a veto of some sort. So they can block everything and even call for the overthrow of a monarch whenever they want to.

Now this is still a trend, and I think it will take time and innaction (or overreation) on the part of Denerim for this to happen. But if I was there in Redcliffe, I'd see the opportunity to create a new Ternir of Redcliffe, by assimilating either all the bannorn if possible, or some of it and keep the rest under my influence. And with that power, I'd either be strong enough to make myself king of Ferelden, or dictate demands to any king whom I'll naturally have a lot of say on who he / she is.  Or just declare independence and form a new Kingdom.

In case of civil war between the Bannorn and the Coastlands, calling for foreign aid, like from Orlais, might become necessary, since the Coastlands would be richer.

Their agenda can be very varied and I don't think they have one specific clear agenda now, it's still a trend in progress and it's mostly a reaction. In the future however, a defensive agenda can turn quite offensive, especially with the right leadership.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 01 novembre 2010 - 08:42 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...
Tevinter freedmen. Buy a bunch of slaves from Tevinter and free them, then fill the cheap labor gap with them in those areas that the Crown would need them.

Too expensive. Last thing I want is to create more social divisions. I'd rather take advantage of existing ones.

Xilizhra wrote...
but it's likely that many city elves wouldn't leave the alienages anyway

If they don't want to, they will be forced. Plus, they will be given lots of incetives to move.

Istanbul was built by forced movement and settlement if populations.

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

Ahh, KoP, I love the way you
think. A shame I can't import Arcturus into my games and elect him as
king to marry Anora, since none of my human noble playthroughs involve
taking the throne.

Aww thanks

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Knight's plan is long term, it would take years to achieve it. Why wait so that they can have a chance to rebuild their strength on both a political ( with the freeholders ) and a military level?

Who said we would wait for that and be inactive? Of course not, like I said in my first post. The Coastlands have to be very active vis a vis the middle class and the freeholders and offer them incentives.

If you strike now, you'll only accelerate the process of Bannorn unification and if they are united, they can be harder to defeat (and if I was Orlais, I'd assist them). So why not take advantage of their highly divisive nature? They fight over bloody trees, it's not like we'll have to think hard to make them fight each other.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 01 novembre 2010 - 08:42 .

[Costin_Razvan]

If you strike now, you'll only accelerate the process of Bannorn unification and if they are untied, they can be harder to defeat (and if I was Orlais, I'd assist them). So why not take advantage of their highly divisive nature? They fight over bloody trees, it's not like we'll have to think hard to make them fight each other.

If I kill all the Banns at once via my of doing it at a Landsmeet, how would they unite?

And they are trying to unite, Celene or at least Eamon is. When your enemy is almost dead, you don't wait you finish him off quickly.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 01 novembre 2010 - 08:45 .

[Xilizhra]

Too expensive. Last thing I want is to create more social divisions. I'd rather take advantage of existing ones.

Imagine that they were offered very cheaply indeed, perhaps even freely, in exchange only for mutually beneficial trade relations with Tevinter. Would you take this deal then?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

If I kill all the Banns at once via my of doing it at a Landsmeet, how would they unite?

They'd find ways to fill the power vacuum you created.
Ferelden is not divisive only because of banns. I suspect freeholders also don't care much about the whole country, but they are easier to sway and include.

The Landsmeet is a very very old tradition, almost sacred. Doing such a thing would be an outrage and I am not sure any high rank noble would agree with you and not be horrified. And these are the people you would trust to fill the power vacuum? What if they become too powerful with the lands you are giving them and decide to stop obeying because they don't trust you not to kill them?

It might work perfectly well for you. But it's too risky in my opinion and a very probable result is the collapse of the entire country.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
And they are trying to unite, Celene or at least Eamon is. When your
enemy is almost dead, you don't wait you finish him off quickly.

In a very long process that can be countered without hanvy handed methods.
And I dont' see them as an enemy, that's the thing. As a possible enemy yes in the distant future, but they don't have to be enemies if it's played right. More like a nuissance for me, that can be delt with, with minimal violence.
You are making them an enemy by doing this.

And all of Ferelden is damaged. Denerim is in flames. Highever saw fighting in the civil war. It's not only the Bannorn that is damaged.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 01 novembre 2010 - 08:56 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...

Too expensive. Last thing I want is to create more social divisions. I'd rather take advantage of existing ones.

Imagine that they were offered very cheaply indeed, perhaps even freely, in exchange only for mutually beneficial trade relations with Tevinter. Would you take this deal then?

I don't see why and how that would happen.
Still, no I'd rather not create another social class.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

That's not a problem as they are already planning to unite against you in Awakening to start a Civil War, and from what we know of Dragon Age 2. Personally I would have tried to pacify them so that I can launch my war against Orlais, but trying to pacify a bunch of people who fight wars over trees is out of the question for me. ( which is why I made this thread once I found out about how the Bannorn is exactly ).

The Bannorn have armies. Taking them on directly is a bad choice. What you need to do is undermine them. By giving incentives to the freeholders to switch their alliegence elsewhere. It is much better to use the subtle tools of statecraft to break up any alliance and turn them back upon each other.

Now why in the hell do you want to launch a war against Orlais? You do realize it is a major empire and very powerful, and Ferelden is in no shape to be taking on a major superpower. They vastly outnumber the fereldens, not to mention they are also financially, culturally, and technologically superior to Ferelden. An alliance with Nevarra would not change that, Orlais is big and powerful enough to hold off both powers. Don't count on Orzammar, either. Bhelen cares about dwarven problems, and they have far bigger fish to fry with the darkspawn than some silly surface war. They could be persuaded perhaps to support Ferelden should it come under attack, but do you really think they would be willing to waste dwarven lives on surface conquests, when they need those bodies in the deep roads?

Knight's plan is long term, it would take years to achieve it. Why wait so that they can have a chance to rebuild their strength on both a political ( with the freeholders ) and a military level? The Bannorn ( besides Arl Wulf ) was decimated by the Darkspawn, and they also lost many troops against Loghain. They don't have the military capability to wage any sort of civil war...for now. As such I can and I would kill them all now while they are at their weakest, if any Bann survives and tries to wage a war...well they will find they cannot.

Yes, his plan is long term, and that's why it's best. Because it looks ahead into the far future, and is a constant, steady drive towards evolution of Ferelden from backwaters to major player. Such things take years to accomplish, but the long term benefits are more than worth it.

The Bannorn isn't the only place that suffered great losses from the civil war and Blight. Loghain lost alot of troops killing them, and the kings army, the largest in the country, was pretty much wiped out in Ostagar. Ferelden cannot afford to keep throwing away lives trying to crush or bully its subjects into submission, when it's far less costly to manipulate and weaken them through subtle, more shadowy methods. The Banns armies are loyal to their leige, and their combined forces of all the Banns outnumber your forces. Those are forces your country needs, and it's not likely that armies sworn to a certain lord will simply do nothing when you slaughter their golden gooses. You risk far more bloodshed for very temporary gains, and divert resources away from the reconstruction and development of Ferelden in the process. You would also have to slaughter the entire families of the Banns in order to succeed.

All of this would cause a far more widespread rebellion against you. A less bloody method would involve discreetly eliminating through shadowy means, certain figureheads that are the most dangerous, thus weaking an alliance, while eroding their power base.

And why would the Freeholders aid them against the Crown? The Crown can offer protection and economical aid, which they desperatly need. The Banns can offer what? Squat.

The freeholders would aid them as opposed to the crown if it saw the crown as being a bigger threat to them. Going around slaughtering families is not going to inspire much confidence in your rule, it's going to make people nervous. Its a very orlesian thing to do, and becoming Orlesians in spirit is not the way forward for Ferelden.

[Costin_Razvan]

Your High Noble, I am dealing with Fergus, Sighard ( who's son I saved ), Bryland ( who seems to want Loghain out of power for the crimes he comitted,), Alfansa ( who owe's her brother's life because of me ), and Wulf ( who I would give aid to rebuilding his arling ).

The high nobles for now are people I think can sway under my side. Save for Bryland they ALL fought for Loghain, so probably are not happy with the Bannorn at all ( and even Bryland may have fought for Loghain ).

The Freeholders are ( and I repeat myself here ), FARMERS, they do not have any sort of military might and that's a period. They matter because of the money can they provide nobles, but I do not see them in any position to raise an army.

They'd find ways to fill the power vacuum you created.

How? They come with their wives and maybe even children at the Landsmeet, and those that do not come can and would be dealt with assassins.

 The Bannorn have armies

What armies when the Blight marched through the entire Bannorn virtually unopposed, what armies when Loghain crushed them in open battles?

 Now why in the hell do you want to launch a war against Orlais? You do realize it is a major empire and very powerful, and Ferelden is in no shape to be taking on a major superpower.

It's has been getting it's ass kicked by Nevarra alone for over 200 years in war, it has lost territory constantly.

Why do you think Celene did not invade Fereldan at the end of Origins? it was because Nevarra is a very real and strong threat to them. I believe you overestimate their military strength.

 You would also have to slaughter the entire families of the Banns in order to succeed.  

And that is something that I am perfectly aware of.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 01 novembre 2010 - 09:03 .

[Xilizhra]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Too expensive. Last thing I want is to create more social divisions. I'd rather take advantage of existing ones.

Imagine that they were offered very cheaply indeed, perhaps even freely, in exchange only for mutually beneficial trade relations with Tevinter. Would you take this deal then?

I don't see why and how that would happen.
Still, no I'd rather not create another social class.

Blast. Is there anything whatsoever that would allow you to accept Dalish independence and city elf emancipation?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Your High Noble, I am dealing with Fergus, Sighard ( who's son I saved ), Bryland ( who seems to want Loghain out of power for the crimes he comitted,), Alfansa ( who owe's her brother's life because of me ), and Wulf ( who I would give aid to rebuilding his arling ).

The high nobles for now are people I think can sway under my side. Save for Bryland they ALL fought for Loghain, so probably are not happy with the Bannorn at all ( and even Bryland may have fought for Loghain ).

Them fighting for Loghain does not mean they will be ok with the massacre you are planing in the country's Landsmeet that is supposed to be a place of political debate. I don't see why they would stand for this.
They were horrified by the torture of a few nobles and they turn against Loghain for torture, slavery and other mostly minor things, what do you think will happen when you do this?

Costin_Razvan wrote...
The Freeholders are ( and I repeat myself here ), FARMERS, they do not have any sort of military might and that's a period. They matter because of the money can they provide nobles, but I do not see them in any position to raise an army.

They can raise a militia. Most of Maric's rebellion was militia.
And I was under the impression that Freeholders are property owners and not simply peasants. They own the land they or their workers farm.

And how can they fill the vacuum? They don't need nobles, they band together. Elect leaders from amongst themselves (like Loghain's father leading a band of poachers)....etc. They have tons of ways to resist the aggressive policy of Denerim and you won't have enough men to wage war accross the country, when Denerim itself is almost ruined.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 01 novembre 2010 - 09:03 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...
Blast. Is there anything whatsoever that would allow you to accept Dalish independence and city elf emancipation?

I can't think of anything, I'm afraid.

[Costin_Razvan]

They were horrified by the torture of a few nobles and they turn against Loghain for torture, slavery and other mostly minor things, what do you think will happen when you do this?

Alfanssa turns for you saving her brother, Sighard turns for you saving his son ( or for slavery, so whatever here ), Wulf turns for you declaring your goal of defeating the Blight.

 
And how can they fill the vacuum? They don't need nobles, they band together

Your logic is interesting. I assume they just loved the Bannorn uniting to wage war against Loghain or the constant fighting against each other...I personally don't they did that. You assume they will unite out of their horror for me killing the Bannorn, I disagree.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 01 novembre 2010 - 09:06 .

[Xilizhra]

I can't think of anything, I'm afraid.

Very well. Can we meet halfway with Dalish independence only?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Alfanssa turns for you saving her brother, Sighard turns for you saving his son ( or for slavery, so whatever here ), Wulf turns for you declaring your goal of defeating the Blight.

They do and when they voice it in the Landmseet, you clearly hear people not amused by it.
I didn't see it as invidual votes. They provide the proof of your accusations and I am positive many nobles were swayed by this and not only the victims. The Landsmeet has many many nobles who participate and vote, not only a few of them. The game couldn't show us this for obvious reasons.

And what Loghain did really pales in comparision to your planned massacre.

 
Your logic is interesting. I assume they just loved the Bannorn uniting to wage war against Loghain or the constant fighting against each other...I personally don't they did that. You assume they will unite out of their horror for me killing the Bannorn, I disagree.

It's not for the Banns, it's to protect themselves. I sure wouldn't trust a government that decides to slaughter a class en masse whenever it wants, during the Landsmeet that really marks the tradition of my country. 
Disolving it is one thing. Massacring everyone in it? Too far in the context of Ferelden, I think.

Also, Arls and Teyrns have banns under them that help them rule. If you slaughter 90% of the Banns and leave a few of them alive, they won't be able to effectively govern the huge chunks of land that you are giving them (assuming they won't turn on you). They are not equipped to deal with this. 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 01 novembre 2010 - 09:15 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...

I can't think of anything, I'm afraid.

Very well. Can we meet halfway with Dalish independence only?

For the short future, I don't think so.

[nos_astra]

@KoP
Thanks for answering my question upthread.

I'm ridiculously pleased with myself now because that's very close to what I've been planning, including support from Orlais. I'm sure Orlais would happily give money and establish trade with Redcliffe if it means dividing the country.

Modifié par klarabella, 01 novembre 2010 - 09:15 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Disolving it is one thing. Massacring everyone in it? Too far in the context of Ferelden, I think.

Because it is too far a leap in logic to consider that a bunch of nobles would agree to a massive amount of land under their control in return for them aiding you with the massacre after they lost soldiers against the Bannorn in the Civil War and after they found out the Bannorn is planning to break away from Denerim.

Also, Arls and Teyrns have banns under them that help them rule. If you slaughter 90% of the Banns and leave a few of them alive, they won't be able to effectively govern the huge shunks of land that you are giving them (assuming they won't turn on you). They are not equipped to deal with this.

That's is why they ( or you ) would need to place representatives to deal with those huge chunks of land that they are given.

klarabella: What are you going to do?

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 01 novembre 2010 - 09:20 .

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

[quote]Costin_Razvan wrote...


[quote]
[/quote]


What armies when the Blight marched through the entire Bannorn virtually unopposed, what armies when Loghain crushed them in open battles?[/quote]

The darkspawn marched unopposed through the Bannoron because they were not united, they were busy throwing themselves at Loghain and each other. Had they united, instead of the infighting, the darkspawn would have had more opposition. Also, many people were fleeing for their lives.

Remember in Lothering, they state that the local Bann had taken his forces with him north to join Loghain, instead of forming defenses and alliances against the DS. It was infighting, and no the lack of strength in the Bannorn, that made the darkspawn spread so easy.


[quote]It's has been getting it's ass kicked by Nevarra alone for over 200 years in war, it has lost territory constantly.

Why do you think Celene did not invade Fereldan at the end of Origins? it was because Nevarra is a very real and strong threat to them. I believe you overestimate their military strength.[/quote]

Celene did not invade Ferelden because, as we know, she was working on other less violent ways to assimilate it (i.e. Cailan marriage). She is not stupid and invasion happy. The occupation of Ferelden was very costly to Orlais, and provided less benefit than effort. Nevarra have made some territorial gains, but they have not threatened or lessened the influence and power of Orlais. They might be snagging disputed border territories, but that's a far cry from actually being able to successfully invade, and maintain, Orlais. Ferelden is still a backwaters country with a backwards military, any invasion attempt on their part would be crushed rather swiftly, since Orlais would be more likely to take out the easier and weaker threat first.

Orlais forces are still vastly superior to fereldens, it it will take a while of careful planning and progression to make Ferelden a force to be reckoned with.


[/quote]And that is something that I am perfectly aware of.
[/quote]

And something that would earn you the outrage and rebellion of the arls, teyrns, and much of the populace.

[Giggles_Manically]

So wipe out all the people who dont like you.

Put yes men, and loyals into the homes of the people you butcher.

After killing the rightful nobles in a once traditional place of debate.

Then send assassins after all the family who survive.

Then expect all the people who make up a nation famed for its independence and its willful stand against aggressors and tyrants to go "ok" and be fine with it?



Wow, I dont even know what to say about that.

[KnightofPhoenix]

@ Klarabella

Twas my pleasure

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Because it is too far a leap in logic to consider that a bunch of nobles would agree to a massive amount of land under their control in return for them aiding you with the massacre after they lost soldiers against the Bannorn in the Civil War and after they found out the Bannorn is planning to break away from Denerim.

You are assuming that they are perfectly logical and will not be affected emotionally and not be outraged.

Since you've used Stalin as an example, I think he said that his biggest mistake was assuming that those he delt with thought like he thought.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
That's is why they ( or you ) would need to place representatives to deal with those huge chunks of land that they are given.

It's not that simple. You can't create a bureaucracy from scratch in a few days. You're essentially creating a new class of Banns, only with the kingdom divided into several Ternirs. Why wouldn't that cause civil war? 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 01 novembre 2010 - 09:26 .