764 réponses à ce sujet

[USArmyParatrooper]

I think what's missing here is that the leadership of any military are always responsible for their actions and judgments, excuses be damned. Even if you set aside the laundry list of unscrupulous behavior I've seen little to suggest Loghain is even a good General. This, of course, is basing everything on what takes place in DA Origins.

From what I've seen Loghain is a tyrannical thug and he must be brought to justice for his crimes. Whether or not he thought the ends justified the means is immaterial. The buck stops with him and he should face the consequences.

Modifié par USArmyParatrooper, 19 février 2011 - 03:49 .

[JFarr74]

Wow.........we are getting so off topic. My questions have been answered so I think this thread should be closed since we're getting SO off topic..and I'm the one who started this thread!

[Addai]

klarabella wrote...

Again, Loghain wasn't present all the time, so is it possible you confuse knowledge the reader would have with knowledge Loghain could (not) have?

Also, three high-ranking Wardens still don't equal the Wardens as an organization 20 years later. He had no such issues with the Circle of Magi.

I take it you haven't read The Calling?  He is present at the battle in the Tower, where Bregan, Genevieve and Utha are full on tainted.

Anyway, why all this discussion?  Loghain didn't hate Wardens.  He chose to use them as scapegoats after Ostagar when he thought they were all dead anyway.  I doubt he actually believed that they deliberately got Cailan killed.  When it turned out that some survived, he had to kill them to minimize political liability.  He didn't trust the order, but then they're not that trustworthy, are they?  A shady paramilitary group that has already once tried to overturn Ferelden's monarchy, and who in other countries have complete political power (the Anderfels).  Loghain has a more realistic grasp on who the Wardens are than, say, Alistair.

[Addai]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

I think what's missing here is that the leadership of any military are always responsible for their actions and judgments, excuses be damned. Even if you set aside the laundry list of unscrupulous behavior I've seen little to suggest Loghain is even a good General. This, of course, is basing everything on what takes place in DA Origins.

From what I've seen Loghain is a tyrannical thug and he must be brought to justice for his crimes. Whether or not he thought the ends justified the means is immaterial. The buck stops with him and he should face the consequences.

Loghain's role has always been both as both political leader and military one.  It's not a role he chose for himself, it was forced on him by necessity in the rebellion and again when Maric had a breakdown after his queen's death, and by the fact that his daughter was queen to an incompetent king.  In fact Loghain's banter indicates he didn't want to be a general, either.

This isn't a modern army where the military is separate from the political and under civilian command.

But it's kind of hard to discuss this if you haven't read the novels.  You're missing a lot of background information and context.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

I think what's missing here is that the leadership of any military are always responsible for their actions and judgments, excuses be damned. Even if you set aside the laundry list of unscrupulous behavior I've seen little to suggest Loghain is even a good General. This, of course, is basing everything on what takes place in DA Origins.

From what I've seen Loghain is a tyrannical thug and he must be brought to justice for his crimes. Whether or not he thought the ends justified the means is immaterial. The buck stops with him and he should face the consequences.

I wouldn't call him a tyrannical thug. Think more along the lines of General Jack D. Ripper in Dr. Strangelove. He's grown paranoid once Maric died and his moronic offspring took the throne. There were alot of behind the scenes issues that were cut.

A tyrannical thug would be one who seeks to wield power for it's own sake. Loghain seizes power because of paranoia that there is some possible Orlesian plot afoot. Paranoia that, as Addai pointed out, is not completely in his head. He does have good reasons to fear Orlesian/Warden possible plots, as it has happened in his own lifetime. Much of the unscrupulous behavior I believe stems from Howe, who we already know is a shamelessly unscrupulous person whose personal ambition and greed rules his actions, as opposed to Loghain, who is more a combo of idealist/pragmatist.

As for bringing him to "justice" for his crimes, about the only one I find criminal is selling off elves into slavery. But even then, when I kill him, I do not do so out of a sense of justice, because I really am not going to judge him. Other than slavery, I have no problems with what he did. And the slave issue reeks of Howe's influence.

I kill him because he failed, and has been an obstacle to achieving my mission.

[USArmyParatrooper]

Addai67 wrote...

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

I think what's missing here is that the leadership of any military are always responsible for their actions and judgments, excuses be damned. Even if you set aside the laundry list of unscrupulous behavior I've seen little to suggest Loghain is even a good General. This, of course, is basing everything on what takes place in DA Origins.

From what I've seen Loghain is a tyrannical thug and he must be brought to justice for his crimes. Whether or not he thought the ends justified the means is immaterial. The buck stops with him and he should face the consequences.

Loghain's role has always been both as both political leader and military one.  It's not a role he chose for himself, it was forced on him by necessity in the rebellion and again when Maric had a breakdown after his queen's death, and by the fact that his daughter was queen to an incompetent king.  In fact Loghain's banter indicates he didn't want to be a general, either.

This isn't a modern army where the military is separate from the political and under civilian command.

But it's kind of hard to discuss this if you haven't read the novels.  You're missing a lot of background information and context.

Perhaps much of the disagreements about Loghain stem from differences between the book and the game. It stands to reason that a book will provide much more depth and dynamics to each of their characters than in a game. As far as the game goes, I can totally see the writers turning up the antagonism dial to make the PC's arch-nemesis appear more evil. Bioware does a very good job giving us wealth of decisions to make that are shades of gray. But with that being said, they still have Loghain abadoning the king and the troops at Ostagar, telling everyone you killed the king,  sending assassins after you, trying to kill off political opponents, running slaves, maintaining kinship with a man who slaughtered your whole family, and using intimidation to place himself on the throne.

Is it possible that the Loghain the writers of DAO wanted you to know is slightly different than the one who appears in The Calling? 

Modifié par USArmyParatrooper, 19 février 2011 - 07:25 .

[USArmyParatrooper]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

I think what's missing here is that the leadership of any military are always responsible for their actions and judgments, excuses be damned. Even if you set aside the laundry list of unscrupulous behavior I've seen little to suggest Loghain is even a good General. This, of course, is basing everything on what takes place in DA Origins.

From what I've seen Loghain is a tyrannical thug and he must be brought to justice for his crimes. Whether or not he thought the ends justified the means is immaterial. The buck stops with him and he should face the consequences.

I wouldn't call him a tyrannical thug. Think more along the lines of General Jack D. Ripper in Dr. Strangelove. He's grown paranoid once Maric died and his moronic offspring took the throne. There were alot of behind the scenes issues that were cut.

A tyrannical thug would be one who seeks to wield power for it's own sake. Loghain seizes power because of paranoia that there is some possible Orlesian plot afoot. Paranoia that, as Addai pointed out, is not completely in his head. He does have good reasons to fear Orlesian/Warden possible plots, as it has happened in his own lifetime. Much of the unscrupulous behavior I believe stems from Howe, who we already know is a shamelessly unscrupulous person whose personal ambition and greed rules his actions, as opposed to Loghain, who is more a combo of idealist/pragmatist.

As for bringing him to "justice" for his crimes, about the only one I find criminal is selling off elves into slavery. But even then, when I kill him, I do not do so out of a sense of justice, because I really am not going to judge him. Other than slavery, I have no problems with what he did. And the slave issue reeks of Howe's influence.

I kill him because he failed, and has been an obstacle to achieving my mission.

Sorry, but threats, murder and slavery are tryannical acts of a thug.

I totally disagree about the criminal aspect of his abandonment at Ostagar, but I can understand some people seeing it differently. But do tell his legal basis for attempting to murder you and and your companions, as well as Arl Eamon? 

As far as blaming Howe, I wouldn't accept that answer from my 8 year old daughter "she made me do it", let alone a grown man.

Modifié par USArmyParatrooper, 19 février 2011 - 07:35 .

[wickedgoodreed]

klarabella wrote...

wickedgoodreed wrote...
He doesn't have to be present all the time. He knew very well who Commander Genevieve was, and I'm sure he had Maric fill in all the details about what she had done after he rescued him.

You are sure about that? I remember Flemeth giving Maric a warning about Loghain, so I'm not sure at all that he would always turn to Loghain and give him a detailed report as to what had happened.

Loghain didn't exactly approve of Maric's little adventure to begin with.

With good reason. It turns out Loghain was right.

Flemeth did give Maric a warning about keeping Loghain close, but Maric kept him close regardless. I concede that there is no way I can know for certain what Maric told him. Perhaps you're correct and Maric kept details to himself. But considering the scene Loghain stumbles on to in the Circle Tower,  I find it hard to believe that Maric wouldn't provide one of his closest advisors explanation.

At the very least, we know that Loghain personally saw Remille's dead body, sent his own soldiers after the Architect, and heard Bregan's last words. From that, Loghain could likely gather for himself that Bregan and his sister had been party to whatever the Orlesian Remille and the Architect were up to, even if he wasn't present for everything and doesn't know the full extent of what that was. I don't think it's too unrealistic to expect that Loghain would have asked for or Maric would have offered some further explanation about what was going on, particularly considering the bizarre circumstances Loghain walked in on.

klarabella wrote...

wickedgoodreed wrote...
I still think it makes his suspicions regarding the credibility of the organization as a whole warranted.

Suspicion and caution, yes. Paranoia to a point where you come close to ruining your own country because you let your personal demons take over and handle things, no.

I never tried to argue otherwise. The only point I was arguing was that Loghain has valid reasons to question the intent and credibility of the Grey Warden organization.

Genevieve was only Warden Commander of Orlais. That may be a bit higher-ranking
than what Duncan was, but she not the head of the order. That would be
the First Warden in the Anderfels (not Orlais!).

Genevieve was the head of the order within Orlais and represented the Grey Warden organization in that region of Thedas. The point still stands.

About Cailan on the front lines. You should be aware that Fereldan
tradition is based on a system of barbarian warlords. Cailan would be
the highest ranking of the warlords and as the King of Ferelden he would
be expected to fight!

I think there's some confusion here. The King of Ferelden I was referring to was Maric.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...


Sorry, but threats, murder and slavery are tryannical acts of a thug.

I totally disagree about the criminal aspect of his abandonment at Ostagar, but I can understand some people seeing it differently. But do tell his legal basis for attempting to murder you and and your companions, as well as Arl Eamon?

You're talking about a country where attempting murder, murder, and semi-slavery are not only common, but socially acceptable practices in many circumstances. A country where your local elites start wars over dogs, trees, or names. Where drug addled religous fanatics can pretty much slaughter any "apostate" with impunity, regardless of whether they did anything or not. or rich guys can have elven women dragged off to be gang raped, also with impunity. Where the most critical and delicate situations regarding the nation are settled by a no-holds barred brawl in front of their highest cleric.

You're talking about legality in a country that is one bad day away from barbarism and anarchy.

About the only "legal" basis in Ferelden of executing Loghain is that fact you kicked his ass in the duel.

As far as blaming Howe, I wouldn't accept that answer from my 8 year old daughter "she made me do it", let alone a grown man.

I'm not blaming Howe. I'm saying Loghain made a very poor choice in him as a political advisor. Loghain sucks at politics, he allied with Howe because Howe knew the game better than he did, and was an avid supporter.

[Addai]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

Perhaps much of the disagreements about Loghain stem from differences between the book and the game. It stands to reason that a book will provide much more depth and dynamics to each of their characters than in a game. As far as the game goes, I can totally see the writers turning up the antagonism dial to make the PC's arch-nemesis appear more evil. Bioware does a very good job giving us wealth of decisions to make that are shades of gray. But with that being said, they still have Loghain abadoning the king and the troops at Ostagar, telling everyone you killed the king,  sending assassins after you, trying to kill off political opponents, running slaves, maintaining kinship with a man who slaughtered your whole family, and using intimidation to place himself on the throne.

Is it possible that the Loghain the writers of DAO wanted you to know is slightly different than the one who appears in The Calling?

No, I think the novels and game story mesh very well, it's just that the novels fill in some of the mindset and context not only to Loghain but to the Wardens and to Fereldan politics.  Mary Kirby said that they intended to give you a nemesis you could easily kill.  The casual gamer who just wants to get to the end and slay the big bad doesn't care about delving into the political nuances.  Forcing them to do so would be frustrating for that type of player.  For those really interested in the story, however, there is much more and you can see it all in the game, subtle as it may be.

As for Ostagar, think of it as Loghain being unwilling to send his men into certain death on the whims of a foolish king.  You can see it as abandonment of the king's army, or as him being unwilling to see the entire Fereldan army destroyed and the country left defenseless.  He had to make a judgment call and he made it.  The situation is not black and white, however.

[Addai]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

I'm not blaming Howe. I'm saying Loghain made a very poor choice in him as a political advisor. Loghain sucks at politics, he allied with Howe because Howe knew the game better than he did, and was an avid supporter.

There is more to it than simply his naivete about Howe.  When Loghain returned to Denerim, Howe occupied the north.  Even Cailan tells a Cousland Warden that it will take an army to dislodge Howe from Highever.  He may have even occupied Denerim by the time Loghain returns.  With the Bannorn also threatening civil war and Orlesians on the western border, he cannot afford to open another front with Howe, too.  The Couslands are all dead, so he thinks.  Redcliffe is cut off to him by his own previous actions against Eamon.  He really has no choice but to ally with Howe.

Modifié par Addai67, 19 février 2011 - 08:28 .

[erilben]

Mary Kirby Loghain's crimes are extreme and "unforgivable", and the sensible thing is to execute him. If his crimes are minor or just a misunderstanding, then that means sparing him is no longer a character defining choice. It's easy to spare someone that didn't really do anything wrong.



So it's funny that Loghain fans seem to want to argue that Loghain is just misunderstood or that he didn't really commit any crimes. This ruins the point Mary wanted.

[Addai]

erilben wrote...

Mary Kirby Loghain's crimes are extreme and "unforgivable", and the sensible thing is to execute him. If his crimes are minor or just a misunderstanding, then that means sparing him is no longer a character defining choice. It's easy to spare someone that didn't really do anything wrong.

So it's funny that Loghain fans seem to want to argue that Loghain is just misunderstood or that he didn't really commit any crimes. This ruins the point Mary wanted.

Not what I'm saying at all.  Rather that the game story is not a simple matter of black and white, good vs. evil, paragons of virtue vs. moustache-twirling villain.

[JFarr74]

OH MY GOD! Can we all settle down please!

[Addai]

JFarr74 wrote...

OH MY GOD! Can we all settle down please!

Heh,we're  just having a discussion and it's hardly heated.  You can relax, too. 

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Addai67 wrote...
There is more to it than simply his naivete about Howe.  When Loghain returned to Denerim, Howe occupied the north.  Even Cailan tells a Cousland Warden that it will take an army to dislodge Howe from Highever.  He may have even occupied Denerim by the time Loghain returns.  With the Bannorn also threatening civil war and Orlesians on the western border, he cannot afford to open another front with Howe, too.  The Couslands are all dead, so he thinks.  Redcliffe is cut off to him by his own previous actions against Eamon.  He really has no choice but to ally with Howe.

That's a very good point. I hadn't thought about that, but yes, from a practical point it makes sense. To make ally and supporter of the man who controls the north, where your capital also lies, rather than have to fight him as well. And, of course, Howe is painted as heavily anti-Orlesian, so such an alliance would be an easy choice to make.

[JFarr74]

Well regardless, I'm letting him live

[ReD BaKen9]

so if i harden alistair he will marry anora and i can let loghain live but alistair will leave the party?Does anora gives the final speach and when my guy dies anora gives death speech? someone pplease answer. and wil alistair hate mee

[USArmyParatrooper]

Addai67 wrote...

erilben wrote...

Mary Kirby Loghain's crimes are extreme and "unforgivable", and the sensible thing is to execute him. If his crimes are minor or just a misunderstanding, then that means sparing him is no longer a character defining choice. It's easy to spare someone that didn't really do anything wrong.

So it's funny that Loghain fans seem to want to argue that Loghain is just misunderstood or that he didn't really commit any crimes. This ruins the point Mary wanted.

Not what I'm saying at all.  Rather that the game story is not a simple matter of black and white, good vs. evil, paragons of virtue vs. moustache-twirling villain.

I agree with your last point; however, I still think (being generous) Loghain is a very dark shade of gray.

[LobselVith8]

erilben wrote...

Mary Kirby Loghain's crimes are extreme and "unforgivable", and the sensible thing is to execute him. If his crimes are minor or just a misunderstanding, then that means sparing him is no longer a character defining choice. It's easy to spare someone that didn't really do anything wrong.

So it's funny that Loghain fans seem to want to argue that Loghain is just misunderstood or that he didn't really commit any crimes. This ruins the point Mary wanted.

Sparing Sten and Zevran is no different than sparing Loghain, though. In all matters, you're giving someone a chance to atone for their mistakes and make something out of their lives.

[LobselVith8]

ReD BaKen9 wrote...

so if i harden alistair he will marry anora and i can let loghain live but alistair will leave the party?Does anora gives the final speach and when my guy dies anora gives death speech? someone pplease answer. and wil alistair hate mee

Anora gives the speech at the Battle, Alistair and Anora rule as King and Queen as long as his personality is hardened, and as long as you don't become Chancellor he should forgive you in time.

[JFarr74]

I feel that he deserves another chance to redeem himself. I always felt bad about killing him other times.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

erilben wrote...

Mary Kirby Loghain's crimes are extreme and "unforgivable", and the sensible thing is to execute him. If his crimes are minor or just a misunderstanding, then that means sparing him is no longer a character defining choice. It's easy to spare someone that didn't really do anything wrong.

So it's funny that Loghain fans seem to want to argue that Loghain is just misunderstood or that he didn't really commit any crimes. This ruins the point Mary wanted.

Does it? If that were the case, then even the small amount of dialogue you get from Loghain when you do spare him seems counter to what you are saying. If Mary Kirby wished to make a character whose crimes were unforgivable, then she failed. Loghain isn't even a real villan when you look at other examples of arch enemies in RPGs.

That fact that even Loghain himself believes he is guilty also runs contrary to the intent. A real despicable villian would not think so. Of course, one's definition of what is despicable may vary.

Other than the slavery thing, I don't see anything else particularly vile in his actions. Perhaps it is in context to the setting. Maybe had they written Ferelden as a functional, civilized, and benevolent society ruled by wise men who care about the nation, then yes, Loghain would have succeeded in being an evil, power hungry malevolent villan. But Ferelden is not.

Perhaps the problem is that Loghain was simply not set in the right background to be a villan.

[JFarr74]

Who is Mary Kirby?

[LobselVith8]

JFarr74 wrote...

Who is Mary Kirby?

She's one of the writers of Dragon Age. She wrote Loghain and Sten.