267 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

TJPags wrote...
 However, you take that lack of information and turn it into lack of justification.  That's not right.

I simply reject a comparision without enough info to back it up. That was my initial point.

Though I very much doubt that Orlais was in a similar situation, but fine, I don't know for sure. Point stands. 

[testing123]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I simply reject a comparision without enough info to back it up. That was my initial point.

My initial point had absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Loghain was justified.  I was merely pointing out that his logic took him to the same crimes Orlais committed.  That remains true.

[TJPags]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

TJPags wrote...
 However, you take that lack of information and turn it into lack of justification.  That's not right.

I simply reject a comparision without enough info to back it up. That was my initial point.

Though I very much doubt that Orlais was in a similar situation, but fine, I don't know for sure. Point stands. 

The comparison, I believe, was simply about what was done, not why it was done.  Both Orlais and Loghain sold people into slavery. 

Now, Orlais sold humans and Loghain slaves, so maybe that's a valid distinction, I don't know.  But I don't think it was a motivation comparion simply a factual one.

*edit - seems it is just an action comparison.  So it's a very valid comparison.

While reasons can differ, end result was the same.

Modifié par TJPags, 27 décembre 2010 - 03:46 .

[TheRevanchist]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

TJPags wrote...
 However, you take that lack of information and turn it into lack of justification.  That's not right.

I simply reject a comparision without enough info to back it up. That was my initial point.

Though I very much doubt that Orlais was in a similar situation, but fine, I don't know for sure. Point stands. 

And Loghain would not have had to do it either if he didn't waste all of the kingdoms money trying to deal with you and force the Bannorn to submit to him. The fact remains he didn't need to do it eaither if he just admitted the Blight was real instead of denying it through 90% of the game.

"This is no true Blight Anora...only Cailen's vanity demanded it be so!"- Loghain Mac Tir

Modifié par kylecouch, 27 décembre 2010 - 03:52 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

jvee wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I simply reject a comparision without enough info to back it up. That was my initial point.

My initial point had absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Loghain was justified.  I was merely pointing out that his logic took him to the same crimes Orlais committed.  That remains true.

I thought you saying it's "amusing" was you implying something. If not, then I apologize.

@TJP
An action comparision is still superficial for me, as it demonstrates nothing except the obvious

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 27 décembre 2010 - 03:55 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

kylecouch wrote...
And Loghain would not have had to do it either if he didn't waste all of the kingdoms money trying to deal with you and force the Bannorn to submit to him. The fact remains he didn't need to do it eaither if he just admitted the Blight was real instead of denying it through 90% of the game.

"This is no true Blight Anora...only Cailen's vanity demanded it be so!"- Loghain Mac Tir

Yea yea, back to square 1 like I predicted. Why do I get myself into this unending wheel of boredom. 

[mousestalker]

Once you start rejecting arguments for insufficient facts, then you rule out 80% of all discussion in this forum. All that's left is random fan squee (mind you, I'm not saying that's a bad thing).

Holding out for facts is a dangerous thing in DA. :innocent:

Modifié par mousestalker, 27 décembre 2010 - 03:57 .

[TheRevanchist]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

kylecouch wrote...
And Loghain would not have had to do it either if he didn't waste all of the kingdoms money trying to deal with you and force the Bannorn to submit to him. The fact remains he didn't need to do it eaither if he just admitted the Blight was real instead of denying it through 90% of the game.

"This is no true Blight Anora...only Cailen's vanity demanded it be so!"- Loghain Mac Tir

Yea yea, back to square 1 like I predicted. Why do I get myself into this unending wheel of boredom. 

The fact remains that your argument of what he did being nessisary is wrong...because it wasn't...he already had what he needed...he simply denyed a threat existed and wasted those resources on things that were not important...once he runs out of money he resorts to a "get rich quick scheme". You claim his motives are to do what is needed...but he completely denied what was needed and simply tried to blaim Grey Warden's for the country's troubles. The whole country was already united under Cailen's efforts and instead of trying to persuade Cailen that the battle was a bad idea he let's Cailen believe victory is possible and lets a large portion of Ferelden's armies die out of paranoiya. Which in turn results in divided loyalties. 

Modifié par kylecouch, 27 décembre 2010 - 04:10 .

[testing123]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I thought you saying it's "amusing" was you implying something. If not, then I apologize.

That it amused me. =P

And you never need to apologize to me.  So apology not accepted!

mousestalker wrote...

Once you start rejecting arguments for insufficient facts, then you rule out 80% of all discussion in this forum. 

Generally we at least have circumstantial evidence.  It helps to support whatever 'feelings' we might have.

Modifié par jvee, 27 décembre 2010 - 04:00 .

[TJPags]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

jvee wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I simply reject a comparision without enough info to back it up. That was my initial point.

My initial point had absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Loghain was justified.  I was merely pointing out that his logic took him to the same crimes Orlais committed.  That remains true.

I thought you saying it's "amusing" was you implying something. If not, then I apologize.

@TJP
An action comparision is still superficial for me, as it demonstrates nothing except the obvious

Fair enough - I agree for the most part. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

kylecouch wrote...
The fact remains that your argument of what he did being nessisary is wrong...because it wasn't...

Metagaming knowledge. In the thick of it, we can't know what's necesarry. We can believe, whether valid or not.
Most of what the Warden do is unnecessary. Doesn't make those choices any less valid.   

[TheRevanchist]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

kylecouch wrote...
The fact remains that your argument of what he did being nessisary is wrong...because it wasn't...

Metagaming knowledge. In the thick of it, we can't know what's necesarry. We can believe, whether valid or not.
Most of what the Warden do is unnecessary. Doesn't make those choices any less valid.   

edited to defend without such knowledge.

[KnightofPhoenix]

kylecouch wrote...
edited to defend without such knowledge.

Not going to bother. Too tired and bored of repeating the same thing.  If you want, post it in the Loghain thread and I might dissect it tomorrow.

[Bryy_Miller]

mousestalker wrote...

Loghain is the most respected military commander in Ferelden. He has followers who are devoted to him. He has a faction in the Landsmeet. His daughter loves him. None of the following has any impact in game, but all of it would apply to real world considerations.

Who knows how it might affect DA2.

[Addai]

mousestalker wrote...

Loghain is the most respected military commander in Ferelden. He has followers who are devoted to him. He has a faction in the Landsmeet. His daughter loves him. None of the following has any impact in game, but all of it would apply to real world considerations.

If you want the absolute largest and best equipped army possible, you want to unite all of Ferelden and give it the best leadership possible, then sparing Loghain is the sensible plan, especially if he then becomes a Grey Warden. Your job as a Grey Warden is to stop the Blight. Not indulge in reprisals.

Howe was a divisive figure. He had no friends, one patron and many enemies. Killing him does not diminish your forces at all. It can only add to them.

Loghain is well regarded by many in Ferelden. His forces would not be at all enthusiastic about fighting for someone who had him killed. Some would fight, out of necessity. Some might very well scarper off to the Free Marches instead. You need his army.

From the perspective of getting the biggest and best army possible, I'd argue the best result is to have Alistair marry Anora and spare Loghain. That unites the country, settles the civil war and gets everyone pointed in the right direction. That it's not what Anora, Alistair and Loghain necessarily want is besides the point.

(husband)

Nice analysis.  I would also add there is a big difference in Howe and Loghain as far as repentance goes so trying to make a moral equivalency between the two like many do does not really work. 


You make a good point, although it doesn't really help me much because I always
thought a HN Warden is the one who'd feel a special kinship with
Alistair because they both lost their families. So if HN ended up in the
same position that Alistair did, would he/she be all reasonable and
practical and able to detach him/herself from his/her feelings if
Riordan offered to spare Howe? I have a hard time believing that. My
Warden was lucky enough to be presented with an opportunity to kill Howe
without any obstacles, with everyone cheering, but what would he have done if he had been in Alistair's shoes? It still smacks of hypocrisy to me.


(husband)

There is a substantial difference between the the noble and Alistair situations.   When the human noble looses his parents he is loosing someone who literally raised him from a babe, someone he known for 18-23 years.   Vs. Allistair who is about 6 months before meeting the player.   To have an equivalency between the two you would have to have not only Duncan dieing, but the Grand Cleric, Eamon and Teagan.  Essentially everybody that nurtured or mentored him.   So I don't see it as hypocritical, it's not a direct analog situation.


(I do realize some might say that its a direct equivalence in Alistair's mind.   But I see that as more an argument against his fitness for leadership, as far as mental health issues goes).

Modifié par Addai67, 27 décembre 2010 - 08:57 .

[Addai]

Tigress M wrote...

Despite Loghain's relationship with Howe, I believe that both the HN and DN have the most logical reasons for sparing Loghain because of all the Origins, those are the two who would most likely have a good grasp of military strategy and therefore could most easily recognize that Loghain's retreat at Ostagar was not necessarily a betrayal, but a sound strategic move.

As a HN, you would also have a very good idea of what Fereldan needs, a strong General, thereby making it easier to spare Loghain, despite his ties to your worst enemy, in light of saving Fereldan. I think to a HN, the best answer in their head would be to put Alistair on the throne and spare Loghain (don't metagame, knowing what Alistair is likely to do).

Now, I'm not real versed on how this works since I never marry Alistair to Anora, but I believe if you have hardened Alistair and gotten him to agree to marry Anora before hand, that you can spare Loghain and put A&A on the throne, although Alistair will still leave the Wardens. I'm sure someone who's more versed in this will correct me if I'm wrong.

(husband)

The big problem with the "strong general" refain that keeps getting bandied about is Loghain is basically delusional.   (He can fight dark spawn, see dark spawn raze villages but if he was in control his first impulse is to go to the border and put troops on it rather than engage dark spawn).

[Addai]

Raelis25 wrote...

Well, I started the thread not because I wanted to discuss Loghain's motivations for the billionth time, but because I wanted to know how other people who play a good Human Noble who's close to Alistair rationalize sparing Loghain. So if you guys don't want to discuss Loghain, by all means, don't! But tell me about your own characters' motivations in case you spared the guy! I'm really interested to know!

(husband)

Easy.

1) Mercy is one of the virtues of the Andraste's cult, much like the in the Judean Christian tradition.   What could be more mercificul then sparing Loghian.   And unlike Howe, Loghain at least seems to be repentant when you look at his last statement and his remaining silent during the whole Alistair confrontation (If he did not feel guilty he would have kept silent).


2) There is "doing what is right for Ferelden."   Now this varies a lot depending on who you are and what you do.   But  there are some reasons to pick Anora over Alistair, based on her experience in ruling and such.   And sparing Loghain also can go along with that.  If she going to be leader it will make her happy and  a happy leader is generally better than one that is bitter and resentful.


3) Utilitarianism.  OF waste not, want not.   Why through away a tough old bastard of a veteran.  Metagaming this doesn't work because of Alistair but it defintely is what Duncan would do.  


4) You are playing a "Good noble" but not one that is purely good.   Besides the altrusim, you also have some self interest going on, in wanting to be prince consort or maybe you've been reading my wifes fanfiction and think Loghain is hot....

Modifié par Addai67, 27 décembre 2010 - 08:39 .

[Wulfram]

To me, the HN is the origin where it most makes sense to spare Loghain. Loghain would have been a hero to them growing up, and it makes sense that they'd want to give him a chance to redeem himself.

[Ryzaki]

Wulfram wrote...

To me, the HN is the origin where it most makes sense to spare Loghain. Loghain would have been a hero to them growing up, and it makes sense that they'd want to give him a chance to redeem himself.

Eh I find it to be the opposite. Howe slaughtered the Couslands. I don't see him doing that unless he knew Loghain would back him up.

[nos_astra]

Loghain is a tough nut for me. I dislike his arrogance, the way he firmly believes his view on the world is the right one. And he just can't give up, he can't open his eyes.

This is so much bordering on insanity that I can pity him, but never respect him.

I still spared him on one of my canon playthroughs, but I did it as a punishment. A deal with Anora was the reason for sparing him for my HNF Warden, while she was secretly knowing that a quick death might be more merciful for the old man.

He was a closely guarded prisoner of war then, one that was allowed to kill the AD and redeem his name. I don't know if she ever forgave him what his alliance with Howe did to her family.

And that's it. I can't play it any other way.

Modifié par klarabella, 27 décembre 2010 - 03:18 .

[Persephone]

My opinion on Loghain is well known and I will grant that it's not impartial.

However:

To my HN characters there are some "good" reasons to spare Loghain. How I hate the whole limiting into "pure good" and "pure evil" categories. The shades of grey interest me most.

First of all, the reasons regarding Alistair.

As the game progresses we see an emotionally overwrought Alistair slowly being consumed by his thirst for vengeance. Getting to the point where, if he doesn't get what he wants, he'll end up a wandering drunk and not even a Senior Warden's word will make him consider the idea of sparing Loghain for Ferelden's sake. Hardened Alistair frustrates me more here because I am used to his whining if he doesn't get his way, temper tantrums and demanding a crown he doesn't want just so he can kill Loghain....without considering the consequences for Ferelden if their king gains the crown that way, is unfit to rule because he is dominated by his emotions rather than whatever little sense the Maker gave him....Argh. So hardened Alistair learns an important lesson.... Vengeance isn't what should govern your outlook. Rulers who begin their reign in bloodshed don't really fit into the "good" category, do they?

Then there are pragmatic reasons. Riordan's advice. Loghain's skills as a tactician and a fighter. Most of Ferelden still revere him, killing their hero Nr. 1 in such a crisis doesn't strike me as a politically savy move. But KOP explained those reasons far better than I ever could.

And personal reasons. Doesn't being "good" involve mercy, redemption and forgiveness? Does it not require not to be blindsighted by rage, revenge and bloodlust? Never mind the fact that killing him in front of his child is downright barbaric to me. My HN grew up on legends of the occupation and its heros. He/she has been taught what made Loghain great. Anora speaks my mind when she says "I am simply glad it did not result in a sad end for a great man." My "good" HN want to figure him out, rather than condemn him. They know he isn't doing this to go on a power trip. Tis much harder for my CEs, I grant you. The whole Landsmeet is harrowing to my HN, no matter how they decide. One way or the other, someone is going to leave that room deeply traumatized without deserving it. Only Anora had the strength to overcome the trauma of witnessing such a horrid deed. Alistair sought the embrace of alcohol to dull out his guilt. DA2 might show just how successfully he'll be doing that.

[CalJones]

What Persephone said, in a nutshell.

[DPSSOC]

My HN's can never spare Loghain because of all Origins they have the best idea of the depth of his crimes. I've seen people bring up sparing Sten and Zev and Jowan but that's on a completely different scale. Sten murdered a family; tragic but not unforgivable. Zev tried, and failed, to murder you under Loghain's orders; certainly not unforgivable and sparing Zev is a consideration of risk vs gain. Jowan is really only guilty of one crime, being a blood mage; the poisoning of Arl Eamon is Loghain's crime and Jowan is simply accessory to it. So whether or not to free Jowan isn't a consideration of his crime it's a mark on your feelings toward magic.



Loghain on the other hand committed regicide, which as either he or Maric mentions in TST is an unforgivable crime. I could accept that withdrawing from Ostagar was a tragic but necessary tactical decision but the moment he steps up and declares himself king it becomes a military coup. He also sold Fereldan citizens into slavery, kidnapped and tortured nobility, all to support his Civil War. By the time my HN gets to the Landsmeet it isn't about what Alistair wants, it isn't about what Riordan suggests, Loghain's actions demand justice and justice demands blood. There is no justification that can excuse what he's done,



Only my HN characters have that perspective though. To a DN regicide is pretty old hat and for all the others it's not something they're concerned with. A HN knows the laws of Fereldan, knows what Maric did to the traitors and bootlickers, Loghain is a traitor and my only regret is he doesn't get a traitor's death.

[CalJones]

I don't see him as a regicide. As far as I'm concerned, the ogre killed Cailan. Loghain left, sure, but there's no assurance that Cailan could have been saved even if Loghain had charged. More to the point, Loghain advises Cailan against fighting on the front lines, which the young king ignores because he's after glory. When Loghain says "Cailan's death was his own doing," I must agree with him.

I am not saying that he is blameless, but that is one thing I don't pin on him (and I also think Fereldan is better off without that buffoon of a king in any case).