106 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

Pushover1985 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Pushover1985 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Duncan is a conniving bastard in pretty much ALL of the origins stories.  The difference is that in most of the origins stories, he is a conniving bastard whose best interests coincide very well with your own.  That emphatically is not true for the Human Noble origin story, and legal or no, destroying the second family of Feredan's chance to recover (among other things) is borderline treason.


-Polaris

How is it borderline treason for him to use the right of conscription, given to him by the crown?

Because the action actively weakens the state and imperials at least one (if not two) high noble lines of sucession which makes such an action one that knowingly and deliberately acts against the interest of the state and the crown.  Because the right was given by the crown is the ONLY reason I call it "borderline".

-Polaris

Even if you flat out refuse to be a grey warden, Duncan still has the blessing of your father, the current teyrn of highever before his death, for him to use the right of conscription. So was Bryce Cousland conniving and commiting borderline treason?

You don't consider an act of Extortion against the Teryn of Highever (second only to the King) to be an act of treason?  Try an act of extortion against the president and see how the secret service regards it.......

Duncan engaged in an open act of extortion against Bryce, the Teryn of Highever.  Allow me to recruit your son, or you line dies here and now and I won't lift a finger to save them.

I'd call that borderline treason.  Don't you?

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 27 novembre 2010 - 11:27 .

[Pushover1985]

IanPolaris wrote...

Pushover1985 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Pushover1985 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Duncan is a conniving bastard in pretty much ALL of the origins stories.  The difference is that in most of the origins stories, he is a conniving bastard whose best interests coincide very well with your own.  That emphatically is not true for the Human Noble origin story, and legal or no, destroying the second family of Feredan's chance to recover (among other things) is borderline treason.


-Polaris

How is it borderline treason for him to use the right of conscription, given to him by the crown?

Because the action actively weakens the state and imperials at least one (if not two) high noble lines of sucession which makes such an action one that knowingly and deliberately acts against the interest of the state and the crown.  Because the right was given by the crown is the ONLY reason I call it "borderline".

-Polaris

Even if you flat out refuse to be a grey warden, Duncan still has the blessing of your father, the current teyrn of highever before his death, for him to use the right of conscription. So was Bryce Cousland conniving and commiting borderline treason?

You don't consider an act of Extortion against the Teryn of Highever (second only to the King) to be an act of treason?  Try an act of extortion against the president and see how the secret service regards it.......

Duncan engaged in an open act of extortion against Bryce, the Teryn of Highever.  Allow me to recruit your son, or you line dies here and now and I won't lift a finger to save them.

I'd call that borderline treason.  Don't you?

-Polaris

Right. Maybe the game would have been better if you and the king hung Duncan at Ostagar for his horrible crime and you had all died in the battle later that night.

[Addai]

IanPolaris wrote...

You don't consider an act of Extortion against the Teryn of Highever (second only to the King) to be an act of treason?  Try an act of extortion against the president and see how the secret service regards it.......

Duncan engaged in an open act of extortion against Bryce, the Teryn of Highever.  Allow me to recruit your son, or you line dies here and now and I won't lift a finger to save them.

I'd call that borderline treason.  Don't you?

-Polaris

No, I don't.  For one thing, Duncan was under no obligation to help the Couslands.  He would have been within his rights to escape without Cous in tow.  He decides to help but wants something in return.  Not exactly noble, but within his rights.  It is not Duncan who's traitorous in this situation, but Howe.

[CalJones]

He pretty much blackmails Teyrn Cousland, but treason? No. Addai has the right of it.

[IanPolaris]

Glaucon wrote...

@IanPolaris
I'm inclined to line up with Sarah128 on this subject. 

I think your use of the word treacherous is a little extreme.  The Wardens have not sworn fealty to the Ferelden King and a Wardens singular philosophy is to defeat the blight by any means: paraphrasing Alistair: "That can mean some pretty extreme things.".  I also believe that you're endowing Duncan with a level of political astuteness that I do not see.  If he his astute it is with methods for destroying the Blight.  In short, although Duncan would happily manipulate situations to improve his odds against the Blight --  I'm not sure that Duncan would give two hoots for the 'politics' of Ferelden.

One I did say 'borderline', but remember that Duncan is appointed as "Warden Commander of Ferelden" by King Maric (and confirmed by King Cailan).  That means he has a dual oath of loyalty not just to the FIrst Warden and the Wardens in general, but also to Ferelden.  This is why GWs get supported by a stipend by the nobles, so it's entirely fair to lay the charge of treason at Duncan's feet....and Logain does (against all the Grey Wardens) after Ostagar.  Many question Logain's right to be regent, but not the legality of the crown/regent of Fereldan laying down a charge of treason against one (or all) Grey Wardens.

As for Duncan's political astuteness, I think it is very poliically astute.  Play through the Dwarven Noble background and you see just how astute he is....and the fact he is just as respected by both Fereldan Nobility as well as Dalish Keepers should tell you just how politically astute he is....and both in the DN background and HN before the attack, Duncan is very much aware of the politics of Fereldan (and Orzammar) and does give a great deal more than two-hoots.  In the case of the HN, Duncan sees a golden opportunity to EXTORT what he want from the Teryn of Highever while before he had to cajole, and doesn't give a rat's ass abouit anything else it seems.  Duncan ,may be (and is) a hero in other origin stories, but for the HN he is little more than a rat bastard.

You also seem to be employing post-hoc rationalisation with respect to the Warden and Highever's intentions.  It seems obvious that all parties involved are operating with sketchy intelligence, so who is to say that what they knew could have been corroborated in the time frames you're discussing?

Duncan knows that making your HN a noble virtually insures you will neve have children.  He also knows that you are (currently) either the Teryn of Highever and last surviving Cousland or the family's only heir.  That's all the more reason to catch up to Fergus and give him the news BEFORE Howe can do something else, but Duncan doesn't do it.

Two men on foot with light gear can easily overtake an army even quickmarching if they want to.  Duncan clearly didn't want to.  That's borderline treason and I'm sticking to it.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Addai67 wrote...

No, I don't.  For one thing, Duncan was under no obligation to help the Couslands.  He would have been within his rights to escape without Cous in tow.  He decides to help but wants something in return.  Not exactly noble, but within his rights.  It is not Duncan who's traitorous in this situation, but Howe.

Really?  I disagree.  Duncan as Warden-Commander of Fereldan had to swear a loyalty oath to the crown.  He is obligated to help the crown IF HE CAN.  That means that he IS obligated to help.

Totally unenforceable of course, but Teryn Cousland did give Duncan a legally binding order to save his family and in return Duncan blackmails him.  I'd call that borderline treason.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Pushover1985 wrote...

Right. Maybe the game would have been better if you and the king hung Duncan at Ostagar for his horrible crime and you had all died in the battle later that night.

It would have been better, but King Cailan was a fool and both Arl Howe (he says as much if you talk to him in the HN origins), Logain, and Duncan all know it.  Cailan is like Wynne in how he puts the GWs on a pedestal.

BTW, yes GWs are like a paramilitary force, but paramility forces ARE subject to the laws of the nation that sponser them (or groups).  The Fereldan GWs are no exception.  The GW Commander of country X is required to swear fealty and loyalty to the king/queen/emporer of X.

-Polaris

[Sarah1281]

Really? I disagree. Duncan as Warden-Commander of Fereldan had to swear a loyalty oath to the crown. He is obligated to help the crown IF HE CAN. That means that he IS obligated to help.

Was this in one of the books? It certainly wasn't in the game.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I just played the Origin today. Bryce says to Duncan "You are under no obligation to me and my family" before begging him for his help. So no, Duncan is not obligated to help, it seems.

[IanPolaris]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Really? I disagree. Duncan as Warden-Commander of Fereldan had to swear a loyalty oath to the crown. He is obligated to help the crown IF HE CAN. That means that he IS obligated to help.

Was this in one of the books? It certainly wasn't in the game.

It certainly is.  Talk to Levi Dryden and he tells how Maric reinstated the Wardens.  The Warden Commander most certainly is required to swear loyalty to the state.  In fact in a convesation option later in Soldier's Peak, you state that the only excuse to break it is if the King/Queen/etc activily hinders you against the Blight.

Logain was considered a rat-bastard by many of the bannorn, but the legality of his order to accuse the Grey Wardens of treachery was never questioned.  It IS a legal order (Arland did it) when issued by the crown.  The only point in question was whether or not Logain had authority to issue the order (i.e. if he was the legal regent).

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I just played the Origin today. Bryce says to Duncan "You are under no obligation to me and my family" before begging him for his help. So no, Duncan is not obligated to help, it seems.

He says this because he knows that any command he gives could be ignored by Duncan.  First rule of leadership:  Never, EVER give an order you know won't be obeyed.

However, Duncan as Warden Commander does have an oath obligation to Fereldan.  Bryce is simply aknowledging reality in saying that he's not imposing it because it's totally unenforceable and begging Duncan to do the right thing....and Duncan then acts like a rat-bastard in return.

I don't see how Duncan's actions are defensible here.  I just don't.

-Polaris

[KnightofPhoenix]

It's speculation at this point. But possible and likely.

I personally wouldn't trust a foreign order to operate in my country without giving them a set of obligations and rules.

[IanPolaris]

To be glib, continue defending Duncan. It doesn't make his actions defensible or makes him any less of a rat-bastard towards the Couslands.



-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It's speculation at this point. But possible and likely.
I personally wouldn't trust a foreign order to operate in my country without giving them a set of obligations and rules.

I don't think that Celene I of Orlaise would either (and she is a canny ruler by all accounts and her opinion really, really matters).  For that matter given their experiences with the Crows I don't think the Antivans would either.

Riordan also suggests that the near autonomy and control the Wardens have in the Anderfels is unique which strongly suggests to me that I have the right of it.  The Warden-Commander of country X IS required to swear loyalty to the govt/king of country X and thus CAN be charged with treason.  No one questions that King Arland was within his rights after all (nor Logain IF you accept him as regent).

As I said before Levi Dryden when you talk to him says as much when discussing how King Maric restored the Wardens to Fereldan.  Note that a loyalty oath is very different from an oath of fealty.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Glaucon wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

To be glib, continue defending Duncan. It doesn't make his actions defensible or makes him any less of a rat-bastard towards the Couslands.

-Polaris

I have stated that I do not believe the Wardens to be noble in a traditional sense.  Consider the consequences of the taint when judging a Wardens actions.

Knights often weren't noble either but did swear oaths of loyalty....and the head of Orders of Knights (even if not explicitly noble) could and were accountable for their support of the country they were in or lack of it.  I see Wardens in much the same light.

An oath of loyalty makes a charge of treason possible (and the fact that this charge can be made is never questioned by anyone....not even Arl Eamon).  The only question was who has the right to make that charge since only the crown has that authority (meaning you'd have to aknowledge Logain as regent).

Again Oath of Loyalty =/= Oath of Fealty

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Glaucon wrote...

Apples and Pears.  And who makes this charge?  I can only begin to render the implications of dual loyalty, that's a whole other debate imo.

Disagree.  The stucture of the Wardens is strikingly similiar to many orders of knighthood in the middle ages (Knight Templar especially).  That makes this a very fair point of comparison.  Dual loyalty also existed IRL with such orders as well often with unfortunate consequences.

-Polaris

[KnightofPhoenix]

One problem with saying that Duncan is bordering treason is that legally speaking, the Right of conscription trumps all other legal matters, at least in theory. In practise, Duncan could not have conscripted anyone he likes, but that's for practical reasons, not because he can't. Bryce for instance, when the subject of the Cousland becoming a Warden was brought, quite strongly rejects the idea but also says "unless you wish to invoke the right of conscription?". That would have overpowered him, legally at least.

So, if Duncan invoked the right of conscription on the last Cousland, legally it's binding and not treasonous, regardless of who he is consripting (except if it was the king I suspect). But granted, he doesn't invoke the Right until we object.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 novembre 2010 - 12:26 .

[IanPolaris]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

One problem with saying that Duncan is bordering treason is that legally speaking, the Right of conscription trumps all other legal matters, at least in theory. In practise, Duncan could not have conscripted anyone he likes, but that's for practical reasons, not because he can't. Bryce for instance, when the subject of the Cousland becoming a Warden was brought, quite strongly rejects the idea but also says "unless you wish to invoke the right of conscription?". That would have overpowered him, legally at least.

So, if Duncan invoked the right of conscription on the last Cousland, legally it's binding and not treasonous, regardless of who he is consripting (except if it was the king I suspect). But granted, he doesn't invoke the Right until we object.

Which is why I called it BORDERLINE treason.

-Polaris

Edit:  The point being is that the king would be within his legal rights to disband the Fereldan Grey Wardens and restrore the noble house if things were pushed to hard.  No one questions that King Arland was a donkey's hind end, but no one also questions the legality of removing the Wardens from Fereldan nor the right of the crown to do so at it's whim in the future.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 28 novembre 2010 - 12:29 .