28 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarah1281]

I'm not even talking about fighting the darkspawn, though. It says in the Harrowmont + Anvil ending that he "passed a series of laws to please the clan lords" which resulted in an increased "caste restrictions and the rights of the nobles." Apparently the nobles cannot find it within themselves to vote to give themselves more rights unless Harrowmont has an army of golems behind him. Just...why? He's not even trying to do anything that they don't like!

[mousestalker]

It takes a strong leader to get legislators to shut up and stop arguing. Without golems, Harrowmount doesn't even come close.

"Laws are like sausages. It's better not to see them being made"- Otto von Bismarck

Politics are rightly verboten on these here fora, but I can cite several real life examples of similar instances without any real trouble at all. Legislative gridlock is a very common phenomenon.

Modifié par mousestalker, 15 janvier 2011 - 05:20 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

@ Sarah.

I think it's because most of his opponents are killed when Harrowmont is able to successfully defeat the rebellion. That's the main difference between the two scenarios. He doesn't even have to kill the nobles, if he uses golems to eliminate their warriors. Once they have no strength to resist violently, they can agree to whatever he wants.

I want to say that Harrowmont essentially succeeding in preserving his rule is a good thing, but his reign is so horrible that it's a very bad thing.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 janvier 2011 - 06:36 .

[Graspiloot]

But guys, this guy is the same person who started the other Bhelen-Harrowmont thread.

This guy is just trolling to get some discussion or flame war started or something... The last thread wasn't offensive enough I guess..