764 réponses à ce sujet

[erilben]

LobselVith8 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.

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.

She actually said it about Sten and that it applied to Loghain, too. She wrote the two of them.

[Addai]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

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.

They all are.  The DA writers tried to create a story in the Song of Ice and Fire mold where there are no heroes, only winners and losers.  Cailan was on a course that could have ended Ferelden's sovereignty even if he had defeated the darkspawn; Eamon was colluding with him.  Duncan was single-minded about defeating the darkspawn, to the point of twisting the arm of a dying man in front of his wife and daughter.  In Awakening we see Weisshaupt begin to insinuate political control in Ferelden.  Like them, Loghain is a mix of dark and heroic.

[USArmyParatrooper]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

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.

Between running slaves, attempted murder and staying in bed with a guy who slaughtered an entire villiage, I'm not sure what else you can have the guy do to define him as a horrible person. I also still think abandoning the king and the king's men at Ostagar was horrible. I read that he found out Cailan was planning to divorce Anora (cut from the game due to brevity), and that if you bring him to Return to Ostagar he prefers you leave Calain to the wolves. The context that was removed shows a clear conflict of interest.

I tend to agree with Bann Teagan that his withdraw was most... "fortuitous." Conveniently the a-hole who was leaving his daughter is dead, she retains a position of power and he sets himself up as king.

Many say he saw the battlefield and thought it was a lost position, but to me that makes no sense. Even today flanking elements use signals. Why? Because you always flank from a concealed position, preferably from one that provides cover and concealment. If he had a clear view of the battlefield there would have been no reason for the signal in the first place.

Edit: BTW, even Gaider said in his mind Loghain did not want the signal to be lit.

Modifié par USArmyParatrooper, 19 février 2011 - 10:50 .

[USArmyParatrooper]

Addai67 wrote...

They all are.  The DA writers tried to create a story in the Song of Ice and Fire mold where there are no heroes, only winners and losers.  Cailan was on a course that could have ended Ferelden's sovereignty even if he had defeated the darkspawn; Eamon was colluding with him.  Duncan was single-minded about defeating the darkspawn, to the point of twisting the arm of a dying man in front of his wife and daughter.  In Awakening we see Weisshaupt begin to insinuate political control in Ferelden.  Like them, Loghain is a mix of dark and heroic.

Yes, I agree that DA adds a mix of good and bad in their characters just like real life. And just like real life some people are frankly worse than others.

Are you really suggesting that all DA characters are neatly ballanced with the same mix of good and bad, and that they all fall in the same place on the scale?

Would you say; for example, that Alistair is no better or worse than Renden Howe? Mix black and white paint and depending on the ratio you'll get lighter or darker shades of gray. The only one I can think of with a higher ratio of black than Loghain is Howe.

Modifié par USArmyParatrooper, 19 février 2011 - 11:02 .

[Addai]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

Would you say; for example, that Alistair is no better or worse than Renden Howe? Mix black and white paint and depending on the ratio you'll get lighter or darker shades of gray. The only one I can think of with a higher ratio of black than Loghain is Howe.

Rendon Howe is closer to a more conventional villain and IMO probably a sociopath.  However what you are asking is if a very young man who's spent nearly his entire life cloistered away from society can be compared to someone who's spent a long lifetime active in cutthroat politics.  Obviously not.

Modifié par Addai67, 19 février 2011 - 11:54 .

[Addai]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
Many say he saw the battlefield and thought it was a lost position, but to me that makes no sense. Even today flanking elements use signals. Why? Because you always flank from a concealed position, preferably from one that provides cover and concealment. If he had a clear view of the battlefield there would have been no reason for the signal in the first place.

Edit: BTW, even Gaider said in his mind Loghain did not want the signal to be lit.

I don't think he had a clear view of the battlefield, but you didn't need one.  The horde is visible pouring off a mountainside and there looks to be no end to them.  The enemy force was much larger than anyone anticipated.  Even if Loghain's motives were mixed (and I agree that they were), you can't flank an an enemy who has that much reserve behind them.  You will end up surrounded yourself.  You can say he should have tried anyway, should have flung himself and his men at the horde, and maybe there would have been a miracle and they could have pulled it off.  Or maybe not.  He made a judgment call.

[JFarr74]

Let Loghain Live!

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

Between running slaves, attempted murder and staying in bed with a guy who slaughtered an entire villiage, I'm not sure what else you can have the guy do to define him as a horrible person. I also still think abandoning the king and the king's men at Ostagar was horrible. I read that he found out Cailan was planning to divorce Anora (cut from the game due to brevity), and that if you bring him to Return to Ostagar he prefers you leave Calain to the wolves. The context that was removed shows a clear conflict of interest.

Cailan was planning a marriage thats implications were dire for Ferelden. Whether or not Loghain knew this, or other things, were all cut from the game. But that is not the point.

I tend to agree with Bann Teagan that his withdraw was most... "fortuitous." Conveniently the a-hole who was leaving his daughter is dead, she retains a position of power and he sets himself up as king.

Many say he saw the battlefield and thought it was a lost position, but to me that makes no sense. Even today flanking elements use signals. Why? Because you always flank from a concealed position, preferably from one that provides cover and concealment. If he had a clear view of the battlefield there would have been no reason for the signal in the first place.

Edit: BTW, even Gaider said in his mind Loghain did not want the signal to be lit.

Gaider also said Loghain had not intended to withdraw from Ostagar from the beginning. Gaider said that descision was made probably near the actual battle.

The signal and the battleview are old, tired points of debate I'll not go into, since they have been argued to death.

He sets himself up as regent, not king. This was a foolish choice more than an ambitious one, based on his own personal belief that only he can do what needs to be done.

[KnightofPhoenix]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
Edit: BTW, even Gaider said in his mind Loghain did not want the signal to be lit.

Nope, Gaider said that Loghain would not want the signal lit, should it come to it.
Since he also said that Loghain decided to retreat only during the battle, then he did want the signal to be lit.

[USArmyParatrooper]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
Edit: BTW, even Gaider said in his mind Loghain did not want the signal to be lit.

Nope, Gaider said that Loghain would not want the signal lit, should it come to it.
Since he also said that Loghain decided to retreat only during the battle, then he did want the signal to be lit.

Actually he said Loghain "wasn't certian he would walk away," which means he had already predetermined it was a likelyhood. That's very different from the spur of the moment decision you are claiming. Of course, if he felt that strongly about it he could have walked way prior to the battle out of protest. But I guess better to have the king and thousands of men get slaughtered then himself having to face repercussions for that action.

[KnightofPhoenix]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
Edit: BTW, even Gaider said in his mind Loghain did not want the signal to be lit.

Nope, Gaider said that Loghain would not want the signal lit, should it come to it.
Since he also said that Loghain decided to retreat only during the battle, then he did want the signal to be lit.

Actually he said Loghain "wasn't certian he would walk away," which means he had already predetermined it was a likelyhood. That's very different from the spur of the moment decision you are claiming.

Except that's not what I am claiming and it's obvious if you would read carefully (I even italicized the key part).

He prepared for the possibility, should it come to it. But the actual decision, he made during the battle. So it refutes your claim that Loghain did not want the signal to be lit.

[USArmyParatrooper]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

Gaider also said Loghain had not intended to withdraw from Ostagar from the beginning. Gaider said that descision was made probably near the actual battle.

The signal and the battleview are old, tired points of debate I'll not go into, since they have been argued to death.

He sets himself up as regent, not king. This was a foolish choice more than an ambitious one, based on his own personal belief that only he can do what needs to be done.

Loghain had his withdraw preplanned to the point that joining the battle was actually a plan B.

If Loghain sets himself up as regent then he may want to let his own messengers know, who refer to him as "King Loghain" 

Modifié par USArmyParatrooper, 20 février 2011 - 03:47 .

[LobselVith8]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

Loghain had his withdraw preplanned to the point that joining the battle was actually a plan B.

If Loghain sets himself up as regent then he may want to let his own messengers know, who refer to him as "King Loghain" 

Since Loghain admits Howe tried to convince him to kill Anora to secure his position (one he defied), it's safe to assume Howe's responsible for some men thinking Loghain is going to be King.

[KnightofPhoenix]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

Loghain had his withdraw preplanned to the point that joining the battle was actually a plan B.

Nope, retreat was plan B. Like Gaider said, Loghain went to the battle thinking that he would fight, but preparing for the possibility to retreat, aka the plan B.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 20 février 2011 - 03:52 .

[USArmyParatrooper]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Except that's not what I am claiming and it's obvious if you would read carefully (I even italicized the key part).

He prepared for the possibility, should it come to it. But the actual decision, he made during the battle. So it refutes your claim that Loghain did not want the signal to be lit.

I mistook someone else's post for yours. The final decision was made during the battle, but the withdraw was considered by Loghain the most likely action.

And as I pointed out, Loghain could have forced Cailan's hand by walking out pior to the battle out of protest. I guess it's up to the player to decide whether letting the king and the king's army get slaughtered to avoid the repercussions of such action was for the good of Ferelden.

[KnightofPhoenix]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
 The final decision was made during the battle, but the withdraw was considered by Loghain the most likely action.

Nope, Gaider said otherwise. He went into the battle thinking that he will most likely join.

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
And as I pointed out, Loghain could have forced Cailan's hand by walking out pior to the battle out of protest.

Better yet, he should have eliminated that imbecile fool of a king a long time ago. That I agree.
But since he was not sure of the outcome of the battle, until he saw how greatly outnumbered they were during the battle (and Mary Kirby said that while Loghain's vision of the battle was very limited, he could still see that), I do not mind him making a strategic withdrawal. 

[USArmyParatrooper]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

Loghain had his withdraw preplanned to the point that joining the battle was actually a plan B.

Nope, retreat was plan B. Like Gaider said, Loghain went to the battle thinking that he would fight, but preparing for the possibility to retreat, aka the plan B.

Can you copy and paste where he said he went into the battle intending to fight? Everything I've read states he planned for both possible outcomes, and that he was pessimistic about the battle being winnable.

[USArmyParatrooper]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
 The final decision was made during the battle, but the withdraw was considered by Loghain the most likely action.

Nope, Gaider said otherwise. He went into the battle thinking that he will most likely join.

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
And as I pointed out, Loghain could have forced Cailan's hand by walking out pior to the battle out of protest.

Better yet, he should have eliminated that imbecile fool of a king a long time ago. That I agree.
But since he was not sure of the outcome of the battle, until he saw how greatly outnumbered they were during the battle (and Mary Kirby said that while Loghain's vision of the battle was very limited, he could still see that), I do not mind him making a strategic withdrawal. 

Keep in mind Loghain felt so strongly it would go bad he even wanted to control the signal tower - so that when he chooses not respond he wouldn't be blamed (such a man of integrity!).

If he withdraws prior to the battle out of protest it forces Cailan's hand and thousands of troops would have been saved. But in your eyes leaving them hanging during the battle is a "strategic" withdraw? 

[KnightofPhoenix]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
If he withdraws prior to the battle out of protest it forces Cailan's hand and thousands of troops would have been saved. But in your eyes leaving them hanging during the battle is a "strategic" withdraw? 

Yes.
And while he was pessimistic about the battle from the very beginning, he still did think that the battle could have been won until it started, hence why:

David Gaider wrote...
In my mind, Loghain did not go to
Ostagar expecting to walk away from the battle. It was clear, however,
that he and Cailan were already having profound disagreements -- mainly
centering on Cailan's overtures to Orlais. Loghain was obviously moving
to confront Cailan in some way, undercutting his access to allies and so
forth. But did Loghain plan on killing Cailan? No, I don't think
that. I think he was doing what Loghain does, and trying to ensure that
when that moment of confrontation with Cailan came the battle was
already won.

That said, he had been fighting the darkspawn for
some time in the south with Cailan there, and had already seen what
Cailan was capable of. I think he made preparations prior to that last
battle for the possibility that he would have to walk away. He
once made a promise to Maric that he would never allow one man to be
more important than the Kingdom -- and in his eyes Cailan was recklessly
endangering both himself and his kingdom. Whether that error in
judgement condemns him right there is up to you.
 

David Gaider wrote...
The darkspawn forces were
getting stronger with each engagement. Loghain knew that, and knew that
it wasn't going to keep being so easy. I would say that he knew what
might happen the minute Cailan made his strategy clear: rely on the Grey
Wardens to win the day. In my mind, Loghain still wasn't certain that
he would walk away -- and if he thought that riding into the valley
could have won the battle, he probably would have done so. Whether his
belief that this couldn't happen was the truth or just his twisted
perception of it is something you can decide for yourself. Certainly the
darkspawn horde at the last battle was far bigger than anyone had
anticipated.

The decision, I think, was made at the moment
Loghain saw the beacon lit. He prepared for the possibility, as he
prepared for everything, but I don't think he decided to go through with
it until right then.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 20 février 2011 - 04:29 .

[Addai]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
Can you copy and paste where he said he went into the battle intending to fight? Everything I've read states he planned for both possible outcomes, and that he was pessimistic about the battle being winnable.

David Gaider wrote...

The darkspawn forces were getting stronger with each engagement. Loghain knew that, and knew that it wasn't going to keep being so easy. I would say that he knew what might happen the minute Cailan made his strategy
clear: rely on the Grey Wardens to win the day. In my mind, Loghain still wasn't certain that he would walk away -- and if he thought that riding into the valley could have won the battle, he probably would have done so. Whether his belief that this couldn't happen was the truth or just his twisted perception of it is something you can decide for yourself. Certainly the darkspawn horde at the last battle was far bigger than anyone had anticipated.

The decision, I think, was made at the moment Loghain saw the beacon lit. He prepared for the possibility, as he prepared for everything, but I don't think he decided to go through with it until right then.

From here.  (and ninja'ed by KoP!)

He did plan on the possibility he would have to pull out.  Loghain is a tactician.  But he also  tried strenuously to convince Cailan not to pursue what was essentially a Hail Mary strategy.  If he intended to abandon Cailan, why would he do that?  Why would they be arguing loudly in his tent?  He could have quietly plotted.

It's curious that I see no condemnation of Cailan in your posts.  What do you think of him?

Modifié par Addai67, 20 février 2011 - 04:26 .

[USArmyParatrooper]

KnightofPheonix, you're missing a bit of nuance in there.



"In my mind, Loghain did not GO TO OSTAGAR expecting to walk away from the battle."



He then expands on his growing pessimism during the course of his time there, and his pessimism going into the fatal battle. Loghain even felt so strongly it would go bad he made plans to leave the king's army hanging and avoid blame.



If he was that uncertain about participating in the battle, the time to make a stand of that magnitude is (before) the battle. Not during.

[KnightofPhoenix]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

KnightofPheonix, you're missing a bit of nuance in there.

"In my mind, Loghain did not GO TO OSTAGAR expecting to walk away from the battle."

He then expands on his growing pessimism during the course of his time there, and his pessimism going into the fatal battle. Loghain even felt so strongly it would go bad he made plans to leave the king's army hanging and avoid blame.
 

"The decision, I think, was made at the moment
Loghain saw the beacon lit. He prepared for the possibility, as he
prepared for everything, but I don't think he decided to go through with
it until right then."

The actual decision was made during.  That's the main point that you are trying to argue against. He prepared for the possibility to retreat because any general in his right mind would have done so, especially when he saw that the darkspawn were getting stronger and Cailan was getting more stupid.

And I will agree that Loghain shouldn't have protested only. He should have beat the crap out of the idiot boy, and pull out the army whether he likes it or not. If he could kill him and get away with it, it would have been even better.

[USArmyParatrooper]

Addai67 wrote...

He did plan on the possibility he would have to pull out.  Loghain is a tactician.  But he also  tried strenuously to convince Cailan not to pursue what was essentially a Hail Mary strategy.  If he intended to abandon Cailan, why would he do that?  Why would they be arguing loudly in his tent?  He could have quietly plotted.

It's curious that I see no condemnation of Cailan in your posts.  What do you think of him?

A tactician who goes into a battle in good faith doesn't make secret, underhanded plans to save his own neck and reputation at the expense of thousands of troops.

I think both Loghain and Cailan were unwise and reckless. But Loghain is unscrupulous, unwise and reckless.

[USArmyParatrooper]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

USArmyParatrooper wrote...

KnightofPheonix, you're missing a bit of nuance in there.

"In my mind, Loghain did not GO TO OSTAGAR expecting to walk away from the battle."

He then expands on his growing pessimism during the course of his time there, and his pessimism going into the fatal battle. Loghain even felt so strongly it would go bad he made plans to leave the king's army hanging and avoid blame.
 

"The decision, I think, was made at the moment
Loghain saw the beacon lit. He prepared for the possibility, as he
prepared for everything, but I don't think he decided to go through with
it until right then."

The actual decision was made during.  That's the main point that you are trying to argue against. He prepared for the possibility to retreat because any general in his right mind would have done so, especially when he saw that the darkspawn were getting stronger and Cailan was getting more stupid.

And I will agree that Loghain shouldn't have protested only. He should have beat the crap out of the idiot boy, and pull out the army whether he likes it or not. If he could kill him and get away with it, it would have been even better.

Nothing you said negates what I said. Loghain had two plans.

A: His secret ploy to tuck tail and run and avoid blame.

B: Participate in the battle.

I agree he didn't choose a letter until the beacan was lit. I assigned his tuck and run plan letter 'A' because he obviously thinks the battle is going to go bad. My point is if he felt so strongly it would go bad he makes elaborate dessertion plans, then he should have walked out prior to the battle, not during.

[KnightofPhoenix]

USArmyParatrooper wrote...
I agree he didn't choose a letter until the beacan was lit. I assigned his tuck and run plan letter 'A' because he obviously thinks the battle is going to go bad. My point is if he felt so strongly it would go bad he makes elaborate dessertion plans, then he should have walked out prior to the battle, not during.

And what you are forgetting is the factors that transpired during the battle.

A- the beacon taking too long to get lit (Duncan has a sense of timing, which Loghain can share).

B- more importantly, this:

David Gaider wrote...
Certainly the darkspawn horde at the last battle was far bigger than anyone had
anticipated.

While Loghain's vision is very limited, he coudl still see this (a blind man could).
That puts the entire plan in jeopordy. That is what made Loghain leave, what he saw during the battle that made him be sure that it couldn't be won, his initial pessisim notwithstanding.