591 réponses à ce sujet

[shatteredstar56]

Raonar wrote...

You all talk as though Bhelen actually WANTS the caste system and the castless gone. Please, like he cares. All he cares about is what gives him the idea that he's in control (and he doesn't take it well when he doesn't control something, as proven by how he attacks a PARAGON if Branka is given the Anvil).

The whole reason he cares about it is because it would give him more power.  The people who would have been castless would support him, and he does have children off a casteless woman (DC sister), which would help him give the child a stronger claim to the throne.  Bhelen is a typical dictator, but he's a stronger ruler.  To be a dwarven king, you need to be strong, not gentle.  Back down enough from a fight and people will walk all over you. 

[Giggles_Manically]

I knew Harrowmont was a traditionalist but I never expected him to want to be moving Orzamar backwards.



Its scary reading his slide who idiotic he acts and how weak he is.

Then its more scary to see how evil he acts with Golems.



But whatever I picked him maybe twice in all my runs.

[Sarah1281]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Based on what logic? That all that he built will fall apart after his death?

Take a look after Augustus. His reforms lasted for a very long time after he died.

Not everything but I think such a radical rehaul of the entire system that pisses off pretty much everyone who will need to vote on Bhelen's successor once he's dead will probably not last after Bhelen's death. So Augustus might have had his reforms last. Does this happen every time someone gets rid of the entire social order? 

[Giggles_Manically]

Bhelen will not need the nobles or the assembly.



It sounds like he is simply turning Orzamar into a monarchy.

Plus his heir will have the support of pretty much everyone outside the nobles.



I really doubt that most dwarves will give a care about going back to the old ways when the new ways have worked so well.

[Raonar]

It's kind of ironic (and sad) that practically every thread that even has anything REMOTELY to do with dwarves eventually turns into a 'let's say how Bhelen is awesome' thread. It astound me how many people can come to like (and worship) a murderous, self-centered, hypocritical spoiled brat.



And for the record, reading the epilogue slides makes me wonder if any of Bioware's writers actually know any psychology. There is no way in HELL someone like Harrowmont would actually slaughter innocents (castless or no). And the whole Bhelen rebellion this is completely nonsensical too.



if all of Bhelen's deshyr supporters are dead,who exactly leads the rebellion? I get that some heirs will be pissed, but really, everyone is giving Bhelen too much credit. Even his 'scheme' to play his brothers against each other was so very flawed (and blatantly obvious).



Anyway, I'll stop here.



To be on topic: Chantry exalted march against Orzammar=fail.

[Giggles_Manically]

@Raonar



Harrowmont is not a nice person.

He thinks that casteless are scum and criminals who dont count as people.



Why would he not use force on a group of dwarves who he thinks should not even exist?

[Costin_Razvan]

It depends on how strong a leader is Sarah, and how well loved he was by the population.

It's crucial for Bhelen to secure support from the castless and merchants, since they are the only ones who will support him. Why exactly? Because they gain a hell lot from it.

Every good leader ( and this is me speaking from my YEARS of studying history ) who achieved much both in short and long term always had very strong popular support, without you won't do squat or your reforms won't last. That IS a reality and Bhelen knows it.

Also, I do believe that he has an altruistic side to him, but frankly if anyone believes a leader ( especially in Byzantine, sorry Orzammar politics ) can act nicely and actually achieve something then they are bloody morons. Bhelen needs to be prove he is the most ruthless in order to maintain his throne.

 And for the record, reading the epilogue slides makes me wonder if any of Bioware's writers actually know any psychology. There is no way in HELL someone like Harrowmont would actually slaughter innocents (castless or no)

Oh yeah, given from the same guy who tells it in your face he believes casteless are less then scum. You are surprised?

Does anyone who argue against Bhelen ever read history?

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 03 février 2011 - 03:21 .

[Raonar]

Right, Bhelen altruistic. Now i've heard everything.

[Giggles_Manically]

Bhelen may not be the nicest bloke around but he is 100 times better at being the leader of Orzamar the Harrowmont.



Actually wait scratch that there is no scale to even compare how many times Bhelen is better for Orzamar then Harrowmont.



I dont care if he is cut throat... SO IS EVERY OTHER SUCCESSFUL NOBLE IN ORZAMAR.

You can have somebody killed like 10 minutes into the DN origin.

[Costin_Razvan]

Raonar wrote...

Right, Bhelen altruistic. Now i've heard everything.

Because apparently murdering your idiotic brother and wanting to secure the throne so that your people might survive as a species makes you an **** right?

Or is it engaging in the same methods that every other single bloody noble does that make him an ****.

Politics are not a place where morals have any place, in fact having morals usually goes against you in a bloody big way.  

I do not deny Bhelen wants power, but that is NOT all he wants. I believe he wants to help his people and his city-state no matter the cost. You will excuse me if I look at him as having more morals then Harrowmont who simply is a TRADITIONALIST who TALKS kindly, and anyone who advocates for the continued suffering of the castless is far worse then Bhelen ever will be.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 03 février 2011 - 03:27 .

[Raonar]

Sigh... that's why i left all dwarf threads. people are just so incredibly biased (and yes, killing your brother-and Trian is not really an idiot BTW- does make you an ass. i really don't see how this can even be up for debate.). Ah well. to each his own I suppose.

[shatteredstar56]

Raonar wrote...

Sigh... that's why i left all dwarf threads. people are just so incredibly biased (and yes, killing your brother-and Trian is not really an idiot BTW- does make you an ass. i really don't see how this can even be up for debate.). Ah well. to each his own I suppose.

I don't like Bhelen. I hate his murdering, brother slaying, dwarf cheating guts.  But my Warden was better then I was, and chose him not for his wonderful personality, but for the future of Orzammar. Harrowmont wasn't bad.  He just wasn't the best.  No leader can be gentle all the time, had Bhelen not attacked, Harrowmont probably would have opted to let him live, but that wouldn't have worked.

[Costin_Razvan]

Is there any sort of argument you can provide for Trian not being an idiot who would follow the same self-destructive policies his father did. If so please do, cause I am all ears.



The only thing you can bring here is that Bhelen acts like a dick, and so what? He get's **** done, and that is all that matters.



If you really believe that a leader can be a good person and also achieve much in the Medieval Era then you simply have an idealistic view of things. That is not bad in itself as I would want the same kind of leader, but the reality is that no leader can be gentle and expect to achieve anything great.

[Augustei]

I can't help but feel that all the people that support bhelen's ways, only do so because they Metagame and simply deny doing so. I mean they say "look at all the evidence thats to be had as to why bhelen is better" and really there isn't much of it.. Theres so little of it to help make your mind up in the actual game.. But i'm sure that people will disagree, and state to me the reasons.. But it really isn't enough.. To get a slightly even remotely "decent" amount you have to become a dirty turncoat..

A Dwarf says "oh he is good for trade" Damn, guess he is good for trade then.
Another says. "He will help us push foward the dwarven line "Ohh really? sweet guess its best to take his word for it. Bhelens never lied before.
"He is willing to reform things and give the castless a better place" What cause he's doing one? Damn then it must be true.

All the "evidence" sucks exept for "He's willing to get his hands dirty, Radical people are great and normally sucessful, it will totally work out for Bhelen.. and i'm not using metagaming for this at all because im a LIAR!"

And when he does reform things so the Monarchy is the sole power? Thats Just terrific isn't it =D. NO it isn't. Look at the surface nations Orlesian nobles are all **** scared of their bat**** crazy monarchs people have to beg and plead and kiss ass. Every now and then a ****** monarch comes along. "Hey lets capture this land and even though down the track they will manage to kick us out and hate us, thereby allying with our enemies. It will be fine we can totally handle a war on two fronts.. Even though 1 of them happens to be a close competitor with us for STRONGEST SUPERPOWER in the world.

Or the royal family who are the ****es of the Antivan crows and trade princes Because since they are a single individual and their every motion raises the intrest of the guild of assassins then they will not risk their pending death.. The guild of assassins, say orzamaar has one of those. The Carta. Whose life will be made easier should they decide to kill Bhelen since Everyone exept the merchant and Casteless will want him dead for his radical reforms.. Ohh thats great so the ones who have little in the the way of training, armor and weapons are going to take on the Warrior and noble castes. Nice one

"Bhelen is king, he commands those castes" All the Warriors belong to a house.. A house who now will hate Bhelen because he wont let em have a say. Both those castes will now want him dead and thats just how he will end up.

"yeah but he has his loyalists who will protect him"
even if they manage to do so, which seems unlikely. Inevitably people will disagree. Probably in truth for the sake of disagreeing. Then Orzamaar will be filled with rioting and bloodshed and every day that passes when people see what has become of their great city. They will begin to doubt their new king.

and the dwarves of the noble houses. being stubbon that they are, will recall the members of their house in the warrior caste to help fight bhelen and then that promised new push in the darkspawn line will cease to exist wont it? and people will doubt him even more.

TL:DR BHELEN SUCKS

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 03 février 2011 - 05:27 .

[Giggles_Manically]

So a system that oppresses people and lets nobles **** over the entire city for their own benefit is really the best system then?



WOW!

[Augustei]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

So a system that oppresses people and lets nobles **** over the entire city for their own benefit is really the best system then?

WOW!

Pretty much :happy:

[Raonar]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Is there any sort of argument you can provide for Trian not being an idiot who would follow the same self-destructive policies his father did. If so please do, cause I am all ears.
.

umm... what self-destructive policies? Bhelen sodding used Endrin (or his vision of him as the one who plotted the demise of his older brother) as a role model, in case you somehow forgot... And as I recall, everyone in the city loved Endrin, including Branka...

So yea, what self-destructive policies exactly? And for your own sake, DON't use the 'Kal Sharok will accept the rule of Orzammar" argument, because that would defeat the whole purpose of you saying kings should be ruthless (and we don't know WHAT exactly Endrin was talking about anyway).

Modifié par Raonar, 03 février 2011 - 05:37 .

[Elhanan]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

....Does anyone who argue against Bhelen ever read history?

Yeppers; mostly in college. Cannot recall any Dwarven rulers of note, though (excluding Napoleon), so no real significance to a RPG setting here.

I do not pick Harrowmont as the better leader; pick him for having the better character which is what I seek in a ruler. For me and most of my Wardens, that is what I seek as true strength.

Now back to our story of Bhelen; the Altruistic Kinslayer!

[Glorfindel709]

Lets not kid ourselves guys. In Orzammar, we were given a choice between two plates of ****, the only difference being one was older and crustier than the other. Harrowmont is a traditionalist - you see throughout Orzammar that following those traditions is only leading to stagnation and a further decline of the Dwarven People (especially as hinted in the DN Origin with Kal Shirok, progress and profit < Traditions.) Bhelen is a kinslaying devious bastard who, while the position of the people points to him being a reformer, resorts to the same underhanded methods that perpetuated dwarven politics for years, lies, blackmail, and assassination. There can be no saying that one is morally superior to the other because both are immoral in different ways.



The current system sucks. But because that system sucks we should let a more powerhungry person on the throne just because he has the ruthlessness needed to get **** done? Im not sure if that's the outlook we should strive for, but the fact remains that things *need* to change in Orzammar.

[Augustei]

"Harromwont is a traditionalist because of what the crier says"
"Bhelen is a reformist because of what his crier says and because he is doing a castless"

...................................................No

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 03 février 2011 - 05:45 .

[Costin_Razvan]

umm... what self-destructive policies? Bhelen sodding used Endrin (or his vision of him as the one who plotted the demise of his older brother) as a role model, in case you somehow forgot... And as I recall, everyone in the city loved Endrin, including Branka...

So yea, what self-destructive policies exactly? And for your own sake, DON't use the 'Kal Sharok will accept the rule of Orzammar" argument, because that would defeat the whole purpose of you saying kings should be ruthless (and we don't know WHAT exactly Endrin was talking about).

Bhelen used Endrin's assassination of his brother as a role model for how he was going to gain power, but unlike his father Bhelen doesn't believe in tradition, and ofc everyone loved Endrin since he preserved the status-quo and acted like a moderator but with enough personal power to not be taken as a fool as Harrowmont was.

As for self-destructive. How about preserving traditions that dictate that over 40% of your entire population is worth less the scum while the Darkspawn are at the city gates? How dumb can one be to preserve such traditions?

But that's not even the biggest failure. It's that the nobles fight and squabble like petty children while Orzammar is going down the road to ruin. The Western Roman Empire for example did not fall only because of migrating tribes but due to politicians causing civil wars that tore the Empire apart. The Byzantine Empire had entire Royal Families massacred by their political opponents and this in turn led to the Empire losing ground to the Turks.

Stability at home is crucial when one is fighting an enemy. Endrin as ruler managed to have enough to power so that his own place as king was stable but from the Origin story we do find out that nobles do fight each other for power.

Bhelen however puts them all in their places, and this is quite important. But do please go on that that Bhelen is only power hungry and that he doesn't care about the future of his people. 

I hope you do realize that he could gotten the throne just by sticking to tradition and held it quite firmly. Half the Assembly is ready to die for him when he attacks Harrowmont. Why would he wish to given the casteless rights and hereby reducing his allies tenfold in the noble houses. It just doesn't make sense from the perspective of one only interested in power. 

Certainly he can gain very strong allies in merchants and casteless, but that's him replacing his losses from those nobles who eventually turn against him ( which would be most ).

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 03 février 2011 - 06:00 .

[LobselVith8]

XxDeonxX wrote...

"Harromwont is a traditionalist because of what the crier says"
"Bhelen is a reformist because of what his crier says and because he is doing a castless"

...................................................No

Unless you're a dwarven Warden, you have to base your actions on what you hear. If Harrowmont's crier is attacking Bhelen for having pro-casteless views and Bhelen's crier is saying that Bhelen will help the casteless, then maybe Bhelen is going to help the casteless.

Regardless, Bhelen says he'll give you troops; Harrowmont promises to take the issue up with the Assembly, who could have said no and frakked over the Warden and the need to battle the darkspawn on the surface.

[ejoslin]

Glorfindel709 wrote...

Lets not kid ourselves guys. In Orzammar, we were given a choice between two plates of ****, the only difference being one was older and crustier than the other. Harrowmont is a traditionalist - you see throughout Orzammar that following those traditions is only leading to stagnation and a further decline of the Dwarven People (especially as hinted in the DN Origin with Kal Shirok, progress and profit

The current system sucks. But because that system sucks we should let a more powerhungry person on the throne just because he has the ruthlessness needed to get **** done? Im not sure if that's the outlook we should strive for, but the fact remains that things *need* to change in Orzammar.

seeing as Orzammar has been in a war -- that they're losing -- for centuries, yeh, a little ruthlessness is needed.  And you need someone who can send you the troops -- hell, Harrowmont can't be relied upon to get his own men to defend him or fight for him.

"Ill ask the assembly if they will send you troops" when you've been told repeatedly that it's up to the king, not the assembly, lets you know that Harrowmont not only does not want power, but he does not want the responsibility of leadership either.  He will hand off everything to the assembly, even things that he should not.

What is worse?  Putting a man on the throne who wants to be there and who see what is wrong with Orzammar and wants to change them for whatever reason?  Or putting a man on the throne wants to hand off what little power he does have to an assembly who cares only about what is best for their own houses.

Yes, Bhelen is a snake.  Yes, Harrowmont has a nice, grandfatherly voice.  

Oh, and Bhelen's son is a noble no matter what -- he doesn't need to help the casteless to strengthen his son's claim to the throne.  Any daughter he had with a casteless would have issues if the mother isn't elevated, but sons are peachy. (this particular point is not in response to the post I quoted, obviously).

Modifié par ejoslin, 03 février 2011 - 07:36 .

[Augustei]

LobselVith8 wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

"Harromwont is a traditionalist because of what the crier says"
"Bhelen is a reformist because of what his crier says and because he is doing a castless"

...................................................No

Unless you're a dwarven Warden, you have to base your actions on what you hear. If Harrowmont's crier is attacking Bhelen for having pro-casteless views and Bhelen's crier is saying that Bhelen will help the casteless, then maybe Bhelen is going to help the casteless.

Regardless, Bhelen says he'll give you troops; Harrowmont promises to take the issue up with the Assembly, who could have said no and frakked over the Warden and the need to battle the darkspawn on the surface.

Yeah you have to make a choice based on a serious lack of infomation

And the point you mentioned is a good one... However you have to be a dirty turncoat to find it out. lol

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 03 février 2011 - 08:35 .

[Sarah1281]

I can't help but feel that all the people that support bhelen's ways, only do so because they Metagame and simply deny doing so. I mean they say "look at all the evidence thats to be had as to why bhelen is better" and really there isn't much of it..

Have you ever heard of The Law of Conservation of Detail? The game can't put in absolutely everything so they have to make what they can put in count. Unless something is exposed as a lie or obviously a myth (like one of the dwarves in Dust Town worrying about falling into the sky) then it is probably going to be true. You can't learn a great deal about Harrowmont and Bhelen's policies but you're not going in blind. Someone tells you something about the candidates and unless they're actually working for the candidates themselves, it's probably true about them and not malicious lies.

Whose life will be made easier should they decide to kill Bhelen since Everyone exept the merchant and Casteless will want him dead for his radical reforms.. Ohh thats great so the ones who have little in the the way of training, armor and weapons are going to take on the Warrior and noble castes. Nice one. "Bhelen is king, he commands those castes" All the Warriors belong to a house.. A house who now will hate Bhelen because he wont let em have a say. Both those castes will now want him dead and thats just how he will end up.

You realize that there are more castes than just noble, warrior, and merchant, right? There are also smiths, artisans, miners, and servants. We don't know that ALL nobles and warriors hate him and what 'say' do the warriors have under the old system?

Inevitably people will disagree. Probably in truth for the sake of disagreeing. Then Orzamaar will be filled with rioting and bloodshed and every day that passes when people see what has become of their great city. They will begin to doubt their new king.

Following this line of reasoning, no matter who rules ever people will argue, riots will erupt, and people will doubt every single monarch they ever have. Orzammar history does not seem to support this.

I do not pick Harrowmont as the better leader; pick him for having the better character which is what I seek in a ruler. For me and most of my Wardens, that is what I seek as true strength.

True moral strength maybe but for God's sake don't pretend that he's an even remotely competent ruler. Being incompetent =/= 'true strength.'

"Harromwont is a traditionalist because of what the crier says"
"Bhelen is a reformist because of what his crier says and because he is doing a castless"
...................................................No

YES. We've been over this. If one crier says something, it can be doubted. If the crier for Harrowmont and the crier for Bhelen say the same thing about a candidate (for example: they both agree that Harrowmont is tradition and Bhelen will change things but Harrowmont's side presents the tradition as good and the change as bad and Bhelen's vice versa) then it is going to be true. One crier might be lying to make their candidate look better but why would the rival crier support this lie making their opponent look better? They wouldn't. Do I really need to look up those examples of things we know for sure about the candidates because the criers agree again?