764 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

let me see if I understand everything you're saying. Most is straightforward, but it doesn't hurt to be sure.

First paragraph: The idea of citizenship and being an Orlesian does not apply to Loghain because Orlesians had a certain personality about them, one that most Fereldans didn't share at the time? If so, I agree and retract my statement.

Second and Third paragraph: straightforward stuff. A king in Ferelden is only made a King through the Bannorn's support, willfully given and not forced, something Loghain thought he could do because he saw himself as the perfect ruler and only person to combat the Blight. I will not dispute this, as I've said in this thread before Loghain was so paranoid he almost destroyed the country he was trying to save


Last sentence: I'm assuming by that last line of yours you killed Loghain, though I know not the definition of the word termageant

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 04 mars 2011 - 06:15 .

[TEWR]

Joy Divison wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Sparing someone who was involved in the murder your own family would be entirely out of character. A Cousland should always relish the moment where he (or she) lops off Loghain's traitorous head.

For one thing, an individual Cousland may well be more forgiving than yours. For another, they've already killed Howe.

That might be difficult.  At Ostagar Loghain informs a Cousland GW he knows of Howe's treachery at Highever and thus making Loghain's alliace with Howe reprehensible.

Well now I have two reasons to replay as a Human Noble. 1: to play as a Female HN and flirt with Duncan for some lulz and 2: see this Loghain dialogue, as I don't remember it. And human noble origin and dwarf noble origin are the ones I play(ed) the most

[TEWR]

Bah double post

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 04 mars 2011 - 06:19 .

[Emperor Iaius I]

First paragraph: The idea of citizenship and being an Orlesian does not apply to Loghain because Orlesians had a certain personality about them, one that most Fereldans didn't share at the time? If so, I agree and retract my statement.

Sort of. It's not just a matter of personality, but that is one way of putting it. I'd call it cultural heritage, instead.

Last sentence: I'm assuming by that last line of yours you killed Loghain, though I know not the definition of the word termageant

Ah. No, I was calling him a peasant and was implying that his brutishness and lack of subtlety came as a result of his low birth. The bit about blood was a double entendre, referring both to his common blood and the Tevinter blood mage emblem that I'm using as my icon.

A termagant (I put an errant 'e' in there, apologies) is a shrew or a harpy. The "b" word is a more modern way of putting it: it's a dated insult at an overbearing woman.

[Wereparrot]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

TJPags wrote...


Gaider ignores his own games lore, which requires that the ruler of Ferelden be elected by the Landsmeet.  No Landsmeet, no ruler.

At best, she is perhaps acting regent, no more.  And calling a Landsmeet - which, by Ferelden law must elect the ruler - is no revolt.

Also, on the Grey Warden issue - so, when Loghain is sent to Orlais, do you honestly expect that he will obey commands of the Orlesian Empress?  Since, you know, he's a soldier on the ground and all that.

HA! That's a good point. Loghain was born in a time when Orlais ruled, thus making him born on Orlesian soil and making him an Orlesian. So by your logic wereparrot, Loghain should follow only Orlais politics and all that.

That is incorrect. Someone born in Gibraltar is a Gibraltarian, not British, even though Gibraltar is a colony. It doesn't always work the way it did in the Roman Empire.

[Wereparrot]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

Ok, the Order of the Garter is an English order, but it's knights are international. King Juan Carlos, and many other monarchs, are knights of the Garter. But membership does not and should not impede loyalty to one's own nation. Foreign knights have no loyalty to England, save to the Queen as head of the order.

But let's imagine Juan Carlos was a young medieval knight admitted to the Order at the behest of it's founder, Edward III. Now, should England and Spain should have a disagreement to the point of war, then no matter what Juan felt for England, I would expect him to take up arms on behalf of Spain. 

one good thing about the forums is that you can learn a lot of history here .

and that's what you would EXPECT him to do, but he isn't your puppet so you don't know how he would act. If he thinks differently than you think on what he should do, do you think less of him?

If our Juan did fight on behalf of England he would be a traitor. But as King of Spain, you may be sure that there would never be any chance of that.

Another example would be the Knights Templar; a Western-European military-monastic order. But these knights were bound together by religion, which is a stronger binding influence than the darkspawn. Let's be clear: Grey Wardens aren't needed to fight dawkspawn; anyone can do that. The only thing they are really needed for is to kill the Archdemon.

[Amazon Queen]

Wereparrot wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

Ok, the Order of the Garter is an English order, but it's knights are international. King Juan Carlos, and many other monarchs, are knights of the Garter. But membership does not and should not impede loyalty to one's own nation. Foreign knights have no loyalty to England, save to the Queen as head of the order.

But let's imagine Juan Carlos was a young medieval knight admitted to the Order at the behest of it's founder, Edward III. Now, should England and Spain should have a disagreement to the point of war, then no matter what Juan felt for England, I would expect him to take up arms on behalf of Spain. 

one good thing about the forums is that you can learn a lot of history here .

and that's what you would EXPECT him to do, but he isn't your puppet so you don't know how he would act. If he thinks differently than you think on what he should do, do you think less of him?

If our Juan did fight on behalf of England he would be a traitor. But as King of Spain, you may be sure that there would never be any chance of that.

Another example would be the Knights Templar; a Western-European military-monastic order. But these knights were bound together by religion, which is a stronger binding influence than the darkspawn. Let's be clear: Grey Wardens aren't needed to fight dawkspawn; anyone can do that. The only thing they are really needed for is to kill the Archdemon.

But without the Archdemon darkspawn aren't really a threat to the human nations. They mount the ocasional raid. The only thing they are really needed for is the thing that really matters.

Going back to illegitimacy being a bar to Alistair taking a throne English history doesn't support your argument. Henry VII was the grandson of Henry V's wife and Owen Tudor, and both Mary I and Elizabeth I were declared illegitimate by Act of Parliament when Henry VIII had his marrieges to their mothers annulled. Those Acts of Parliament were never repealed.

[Wereparrot]

Amazon Queen wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

Ok, the Order of the Garter is an English order, but it's knights are international. King Juan Carlos, and many other monarchs, are knights of the Garter. But membership does not and should not impede loyalty to one's own nation. Foreign knights have no loyalty to England, save to the Queen as head of the order.

But let's imagine Juan Carlos was a young medieval knight admitted to the Order at the behest of it's founder, Edward III. Now, should England and Spain should have a disagreement to the point of war, then no matter what Juan felt for England, I would expect him to take up arms on behalf of Spain. 

one good thing about the forums is that you can learn a lot of history here .

and that's what you would EXPECT him to do, but he isn't your puppet so you don't know how he would act. If he thinks differently than you think on what he should do, do you think less of him?

If our Juan did fight on behalf of England he would be a traitor. But as King of Spain, you may be sure that there would never be any chance of that.

Another example would be the Knights Templar; a Western-European military-monastic order. But these knights were bound together by religion, which is a stronger binding influence than the darkspawn. Let's be clear: Grey Wardens aren't needed to fight dawkspawn; anyone can do that. The only thing they are really needed for is to kill the Archdemon.

But without the Archdemon darkspawn aren't really a threat to the human nations. They mount the ocasional raid. The only thing they are really needed for is the thing that really matters.

Going back to illegitimacy being a bar to Alistair taking a throne English history doesn't support your argument. Henry VII was the grandson of Henry V's wife and Owen Tudor, and both Mary I and Elizabeth I were declared illegitimate by Act of Parliament when Henry VIII had his marrieges to their mothers annulled. Those Acts of Parliament were never repealed.

Henry VII userped Richard III. Mary userped Lady Jane Grey, and Elizabeths reign followed. The Tudor age was one of treachery, so your point is a little vague. I am not disputing the fact that there have been disprepencies, but the general rule remains the same that no illegitimate child should be considered heir to the throne. In modern times, succession is restricted to legitimate heirs of Sophia of Hannover.

[Amazon Queen]

Wereparrot wrote...

Amazon Queen wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

Ok, the Order of the Garter is an English order, but it's knights are international. King Juan Carlos, and many other monarchs, are knights of the Garter. But membership does not and should not impede loyalty to one's own nation. Foreign knights have no loyalty to England, save to the Queen as head of the order.

But let's imagine Juan Carlos was a young medieval knight admitted to the Order at the behest of it's founder, Edward III. Now, should England and Spain should have a disagreement to the point of war, then no matter what Juan felt for England, I would expect him to take up arms on behalf of Spain. 

one good thing about the forums is that you can learn a lot of history here .

and that's what you would EXPECT him to do, but he isn't your puppet so you don't know how he would act. If he thinks differently than you think on what he should do, do you think less of him?

If our Juan did fight on behalf of England he would be a traitor. But as King of Spain, you may be sure that there would never be any chance of that.

Another example would be the Knights Templar; a Western-European military-monastic order. But these knights were bound together by religion, which is a stronger binding influence than the darkspawn. Let's be clear: Grey Wardens aren't needed to fight dawkspawn; anyone can do that. The only thing they are really needed for is to kill the Archdemon.

But without the Archdemon darkspawn aren't really a threat to the human nations. They mount the ocasional raid. The only thing they are really needed for is the thing that really matters.

Going back to illegitimacy being a bar to Alistair taking a throne English history doesn't support your argument. Henry VII was the grandson of Henry V's wife and Owen Tudor, and both Mary I and Elizabeth I were declared illegitimate by Act of Parliament when Henry VIII had his marrieges to their mothers annulled. Those Acts of Parliament were never repealed.

Henry VII userped Richard III. Mary userped Lady Jane Grey, and Elizabeths reign followed. The Tudor age was one of treachery, so your point is a little vague. I am not disputing the fact that there have been disprepencies, but the general rule remains the same that no illegitimate child should be considered heir to the throne. In modern times, succession is restricted to legitimate heirs of Sophia of Hannover.

Actually no
Your claim was that a spouse has a better right to the throne than an illigitimate child. The only example of a spouse being accepted as monarch is William III, also in unusual circumstances.  A spouse is not an heir to a throne or title.

[Wereparrot]

Amazon Queen wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

Amazon Queen wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

Ok, the Order of the Garter is an English order, but it's knights are international. King Juan Carlos, and many other monarchs, are knights of the Garter. But membership does not and should not impede loyalty to one's own nation. Foreign knights have no loyalty to England, save to the Queen as head of the order.

But let's imagine Juan Carlos was a young medieval knight admitted to the Order at the behest of it's founder, Edward III. Now, should England and Spain should have a disagreement to the point of war, then no matter what Juan felt for England, I would expect him to take up arms on behalf of Spain. 

one good thing about the forums is that you can learn a lot of history here .

and that's what you would EXPECT him to do, but he isn't your puppet so you don't know how he would act. If he thinks differently than you think on what he should do, do you think less of him?

If our Juan did fight on behalf of England he would be a traitor. But as King of Spain, you may be sure that there would never be any chance of that.

Another example would be the Knights Templar; a Western-European military-monastic order. But these knights were bound together by religion, which is a stronger binding influence than the darkspawn. Let's be clear: Grey Wardens aren't needed to fight dawkspawn; anyone can do that. The only thing they are really needed for is to kill the Archdemon.

But without the Archdemon darkspawn aren't really a threat to the human nations. They mount the ocasional raid. The only thing they are really needed for is the thing that really matters.

Going back to illegitimacy being a bar to Alistair taking a throne English history doesn't support your argument. Henry VII was the grandson of Henry V's wife and Owen Tudor, and both Mary I and Elizabeth I were declared illegitimate by Act of Parliament when Henry VIII had his marrieges to their mothers annulled. Those Acts of Parliament were never repealed.

Henry VII userped Richard III. Mary userped Lady Jane Grey, and Elizabeths reign followed. The Tudor age was one of treachery, so your point is a little vague. I am not disputing the fact that there have been disprepencies, but the general rule remains the same that no illegitimate child should be considered heir to the throne. In modern times, succession is restricted to legitimate heirs of Sophia of Hannover.

Actually no
Your claim was that a spouse has a better right to the throne than an illigitimate child. The only example of a spouse being accepted as monarch is William III, also in unusual circumstances.  A spouse is not an heir to a throne or title.

What are you saying 'actually no' to?

Neither claim holds water really; there has to be a noble somewhere with stronger and legitimate blood ties to the throne. But, back to the real world, we are unlikely ever to find out if a bastard takes precedence over a spouse should they be the only two claimants, so really it's a matter of opinion over two people with weak claims. My HNM is bent on preserving the legitimacy of the monarchy, and that involves marriage to Anora, since the HN most likely has a stronger claim than either of the two claimants, as high positions are generally held for the monarch's relatives.

[JFarr74]

Amazon Queen wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

Amazon Queen wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

Ok, the Order of the Garter is an English order, but it's knights are international. King Juan Carlos, and many other monarchs, are knights of the Garter. But membership does not and should not impede loyalty to one's own nation. Foreign knights have no loyalty to England, save to the Queen as head of the order.

But let's imagine Juan Carlos was a young medieval knight admitted to the Order at the behest of it's founder, Edward III. Now, should England and Spain should have a disagreement to the point of war, then no matter what Juan felt for England, I would expect him to take up arms on behalf of Spain. 

one good thing about the forums is that you can learn a lot of history here .

and that's what you would EXPECT him to do, but he isn't your puppet so you don't know how he would act. If he thinks differently than you think on what he should do, do you think less of him?

If our Juan did fight on behalf of England he would be a traitor. But as King of Spain, you may be sure that there would never be any chance of that.

Another example would be the Knights Templar; a Western-European military-monastic order. But these knights were bound together by religion, which is a stronger binding influence than the darkspawn. Let's be clear: Grey Wardens aren't needed to fight dawkspawn; anyone can do that. The only thing they are really needed for is to kill the Archdemon.

But without the Archdemon darkspawn aren't really a threat to the human nations. They mount the ocasional raid. The only thing they are really needed for is the thing that really matters.

Going back to illegitimacy being a bar to Alistair taking a throne English history doesn't support your argument. Henry VII was the grandson of Henry V's wife and Owen Tudor, and both Mary I and Elizabeth I were declared illegitimate by Act of Parliament when Henry VIII had his marrieges to their mothers annulled. Those Acts of Parliament were never repealed.

Henry VII userped Richard III. Mary userped Lady Jane Grey, and Elizabeths reign followed. The Tudor age was one of treachery, so your point is a little vague. I am not disputing the fact that there have been disprepencies, but the general rule remains the same that no illegitimate child should be considered heir to the throne. In modern times, succession is restricted to legitimate heirs of Sophia of Hannover.

Actually no
Your claim was that a spouse has a better right to the throne than an illigitimate child. The only example of a spouse being accepted as monarch is William III, also in unusual circumstances.  A spouse is not an heir to a throne or title.

Wow...just....wow......

[Persephone]

Aedan_Cousland wrote...

I killed Loghain in my canon playthrough. But then in my canon playthrough sparing him would have seemed out of character.

Sparing Loghain doesn't make much sense if you play the human noble origin, because Loghain is responsible for the murder of your family, and the loss of your family's fiefdom and wealth.

This again? David Gaider himself confirmed that Loghain neither knew of nor had a part in the Highever massacre. My HNs spare him 99%.

[Wereparrot]

@Amazon Queen: You may say what you like, but you cannot argue with over a thousand years of history. I have already said that I am well aware of treacheries hypocrisies and inconsistencies of the past, but it changes nothing.

When Henry II died, it was not his eldest remaining and illegitimate son Geoffrey who became king but Henry's eldest legitimate son, Richard I. And when Richard died, his brother John became king instead of his bastard son.

Legitimacy also continues to be relevant to hereditary titles: only legitimate children are usually admitted to the line of succession. However, some monarchs such as Elizabeth I of England have succeeded to the throne despite the controversial status of his or her legitimacy.

You clearly do not agree, but please do not refute history.

[Joy Divison]

Persephone wrote...

Aedan_Cousland wrote...

I killed Loghain in my canon playthrough. But then in my canon playthrough sparing him would have seemed out of character.

Sparing Loghain doesn't make much sense if you play the human noble origin, because Loghain is responsible for the murder of your family, and the loss of your family's fiefdom and wealth.

This again? David Gaider himself confirmed that Loghain neither knew of nor had a part in the Highever massacre. My HNs spare him 99%.

Talk to Loghain outside his tent as a HN.

[Belrix]

Joy Divison wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Aedan_Cousland wrote...

I killed Loghain in my canon playthrough. But then in my canon playthrough sparing him would have seemed out of character.

Sparing Loghain doesn't make much sense if you play the human noble origin, because Loghain is responsible for the murder of your family, and the loss of your family's fiefdom and wealth.

This again? David Gaider himself confirmed that Loghain neither knew of nor had a part in the Highever massacre. My HNs spare him 99%.

Talk to Loghain outside his tent as a HN.

As mentioned above... talking to Loghain outside his tent at Ostagar, he knows of what happened in Highever, knows who is responsible and then allies himself with the one responsible, recognizing Howe's new station beyond that.

As I tend to play elves more often than not, he also dies in this case.  CE who's father is sold into slavery, a simple beheading is too kind.  Though a Dalish is away from his flat ears cousins, selling them into slavery is still an unforgivable crime... humans may not care, but elves....

[Emperor Iaius I]

Wereparrot wrote...
That is incorrect. Someone born in Gibraltar is a Gibraltarian, not British, even though Gibraltar is a colony. It doesn't always work the way it did in the Roman Empire.

Well, that was only by virtue of the constitutio Antoniniana, besides. The point, better put, is that ius soli is--as the name implies--a law that affirmatively grants citizenship and oughtn't be considered a default provision of any sort of state, especially since citizenship and nationality were often synonymous with ethnicity in more primitive times.

[JFarr74]

Emperor Iaius I wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...
That is incorrect. Someone born in Gibraltar is a Gibraltarian, not British, even though Gibraltar is a colony. It doesn't always work the way it did in the Roman Empire.

Well, that was only by virtue of the constitutio Antoniniana, besides. The point, better put, is that ius soli is--as the name implies--a law that affirmatively grants citizenship and oughtn't be considered a default provision of any sort of state, especially since citizenship and nationality were often synonymous with ethnicity in more primitive times.

WTF are you guys talking about?

[TEWR]

JFarr74 wrote...

Emperor Iaius I wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...
That is incorrect. Someone born in Gibraltar is a Gibraltarian, not British, even though Gibraltar is a colony. It doesn't always work the way it did in the Roman Empire.

Well, that was only by virtue of the constitutio Antoniniana, besides. The point, better put, is that ius soli is--as the name implies--a law that affirmatively grants citizenship and oughtn't be considered a default provision of any sort of state, especially since citizenship and nationality were often synonymous with ethnicity in more primitive times.

WTF are you guys talking about?

ancient ideals of citizenship dating from way back when and a lot of history that I either don't remember or was never taught. or both. However I do know about the constitutio Antoniniana

the constitutio Antoniniana is an old edict that declared all free men in the Roman Empire were given full Roman citizenship and all free women given what rights Roman women had.

This idea of Loghain's life being spared or not turned into a discussion regarding what makes a soldier a soldier and a citizen a citizen. Which is all relevant to the grander scheme of the Dragon Age universe. sort of

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 04 mars 2011 - 10:59 .

[Addai]

Belrix wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Aedan_Cousland wrote...

I killed Loghain in my canon playthrough. But then in my canon playthrough sparing him would have seemed out of character.

Sparing Loghain doesn't make much sense if you play the human noble origin, because Loghain is responsible for the murder of your family, and the loss of your family's fiefdom and wealth.

This again? David Gaider himself confirmed that Loghain neither knew of nor had a part in the Highever massacre. My HNs spare him 99%.

Talk to Loghain outside his tent as a HN.

As mentioned above... talking to Loghain outside his tent at Ostagar, he knows of what happened in Highever, knows who is responsible and then allies himself with the one responsible, recognizing Howe's new station beyond that.

I'm repeating myself now, but in my view Loghain had little choice but to ally with Howe.  By the time he gets back from Ostagar, Howe has not only occupied Highever but likely has already occupied the Denerim arling, too (Vaughn tells you how he got there).  Cailan tells the HN Warden that it will take an army to dislodge Howe from Highever.  With Orlais massing troops on the border, the darkspawn threatening in the south, Redcliffe cut off to him by his own prior actions, and the Bannorn threatening civil war, is he supposed to open another front in the north, too?  Naturally you can still find him culpable if you choose, but as with the other things in the game, nothing is black and white.

[JFarr74]

Howe was a dick...

[Emperor Iaius I]

JFarr74 wrote...

Emperor Iaius I wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...
That is incorrect. Someone born in Gibraltar is a Gibraltarian, not British, even though Gibraltar is a colony. It doesn't always work the way it did in the Roman Empire.

Well, that was only by virtue of the constitutio Antoniniana, besides. The point, better put, is that ius soli is--as the name implies--a law that affirmatively grants citizenship and oughtn't be considered a default provision of any sort of state, especially since citizenship and nationality were often synonymous with ethnicity in more primitive times.

WTF are you guys talking about?

The fellow above is correct: in 212 CE, the Emperor Caracalla granted Roman citizenship to all free inhabitants of the Roman Empire. This was a very big deal for reasons out of the scope of this discussion: suffice it to say that Roman citizens had significant legal advantages over non-citizens, from voting rights to legal privileges and protections (immunity from scourging, arbitrary arrest, or imprisonment; the right to a jury trial; the right to appeal to the emperor; certain contracting rights; etc etc.) Such were these advantages that people willingly put themselves into slavery because they would become citizens once they were freed, and their children would therefore be born as Roman citizens, and their grandchildren would be eligible for high political office.

Ius soli, in general, is a law that grants citizenship to anybody born on a country's soil (the U.S. 14th Amendment is a good example).

There was a suggestion earlier that Loghain, born when Ferelden was under Orlesian rule, was an Orlesian. The point is that this is not the case because there's no evidence that Orlais uses a relatively modern ius soli (modern in the sense that the ancient Roman system was generally more equitable than feudal societies): throughout most of history, peoples of a a peripheral state were not considered to hold citizenship in the metropole; they were subjects, nothing more. The point was further made that citizenship, in a medieval sense, was a matter of tradition, ethnicity, and culture and there is no reason Orlesians would regard Fereldans as one of their own, especially given their dim regard for the lesser sorts in their own country.

[TEWR]

Addai67 wrote...

I'm repeating myself now, but in my view Loghain had little choice but to ally with Howe.  By the time he gets back from Ostagar, Howe has not only occupied Highever but likely has already occupied the Denerim arling, too (Vaughn tells you how he got there).  Cailan tells the HN Warden that it will take an army to dislodge Howe from Highever.  With Orlais massing troops on the border, the darkspawn threatening in the south, Redcliffe cut off to him by his own prior actions, and the Bannorn threatening civil war, is he supposed to open another front in the north, too?  Naturally you can still find him culpable if you choose, but as with the other things in the game, nothing is black and white.

I agree with everything you said. Loghain's paranoia at Orlais troops coming to help coupled with everything else Ferelden was going through left him with no choice. Anora even wonders how many of the plans that were acted upon were of Howe's own thinking and not her father's

[TJPags]

Wereparrot wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

TJPags wrote...


Gaider ignores his own games lore, which requires that the ruler of Ferelden be elected by the Landsmeet.  No Landsmeet, no ruler.

At best, she is perhaps acting regent, no more.  And calling a Landsmeet - which, by Ferelden law must elect the ruler - is no revolt.

Also, on the Grey Warden issue - so, when Loghain is sent to Orlais, do you honestly expect that he will obey commands of the Orlesian Empress?  Since, you know, he's a soldier on the ground and all that.

HA! That's a good point. Loghain was born in a time when Orlais ruled, thus making him born on Orlesian soil and making him an Orlesian. So by your logic wereparrot, Loghain should follow only Orlais politics and all that.

That is incorrect. Someone born in Gibraltar is a Gibraltarian, not British, even though Gibraltar is a colony. It doesn't always work the way it did in the Roman Empire.

Regardless of whether he qualifies as an Orlesian or not, weren't you arguing that a soldier on the ground must fight for and obey the commands of the ruler of the country he's in?  Wouldn't that mean Loghain would have to fight for and obey the commands of Celene?

[Persephone]

Joy Divison wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Aedan_Cousland wrote...

I killed Loghain in my canon playthrough. But then in my canon playthrough sparing him would have seemed out of character.

Sparing Loghain doesn't make much sense if you play the human noble origin, because Loghain is responsible for the murder of your family, and the loss of your family's fiefdom and wealth.

This again? David Gaider himself confirmed that Loghain neither knew of nor had a part in the Highever massacre. My HNs spare him 99%.

Talk to Loghain outside his tent as a HN.

I have. Cailan informed him of what happened. And your point is? As for his later alliance with Howe, my HNs know the difference between a political alliance in a crisis and actual friendship/support in good conscience.

[Persephone]

Belrix wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Aedan_Cousland wrote...

I killed Loghain in my canon playthrough. But then in my canon playthrough sparing him would have seemed out of character.

Sparing Loghain doesn't make much sense if you play the human noble origin, because Loghain is responsible for the murder of your family, and the loss of your family's fiefdom and wealth.

This again? David Gaider himself confirmed that Loghain neither knew of nor had a part in the Highever massacre. My HNs spare him 99%.

Talk to Loghain outside his tent as a HN.

As mentioned above... talking to Loghain outside his tent at Ostagar, he knows of what happened in Highever, knows who is responsible and then allies himself with the one responsible, recognizing Howe's new station beyond that.

He knows because Cailan told him. He even tells you that. Easy, no?

Had Loghain not "recognized" Howe (Even Cailan admits he'd need his full army to bring Howe down), he'd have had a powerful enemy he could not afford to have. Politics work like that, it's nothing personal and my HNs know this.