167 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...
Even if the baby is not Fiona's, based on Alistair's age he can't have been born during her lifetime.  So yeah as I said, you have to handwave it in one direction or another and therefore it's difficult to say that Loghain knew much of anything about the circumstances.

Not sure what's set you on a Maric rage, but not much to discuss there.

Or we can arrive at the conclusion that the timeline is completely screwed up, to DG's own admittance, because apparently setting up a coherent timeline is a very difficult thing to do. In either case, Loghain's comment does not necessarily imply that Rowan was still alive, and I do not find that to be handwaving. Nor is it that relevent to my main point either.

And there is no rage. Why assume that those who disagree with your perception of Maric have to be raging?
Is it my turn now to accuse you of fangirling?

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 04 février 2011 - 04:49 .

[Addai]

There's no basis on which to discuss a character if for you it's "insulting" to take how he is written seriously. Like I said upthread, you want a different story than the one that's been written, where Maric is treated as a flawed hero but a hero nonetheless. I'd be happy to discuss the characters' positives and negatives, but when you have such extreme views- Loghain on a pedestal and Maric a ridiculous nutter- that's no basis for discussion. But, carry on. I just meant to point out that the comments Loghain makes about Alistair are too confusing to draw firm conclusions on.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...

There's no basis on which to discuss a character if for you it's "insulting" to take how he is written seriously. Like I said upthread, you want a different story than the one that's been written, where Maric is treated as a flawed hero but a hero nonetheless. I'd be happy to discuss the characters' positives and negatives, but when you have such extreme views- Loghain on a pedestal and Maric a ridiculous nutter- that's no basis for discussion. But, carry on. I just meant to point out that the comments Loghain makes about Alistair are too confusing to draw firm conclusions on.

I didn't find it insulting that he is written seriously. I said I find it hard to take Loghain's infatuation with him seriously, and I took him comparing my Warden with Maric to be insulting. No where did I say that Maric is a ridiculous nutter. More like a mediocre individual, with no prominent skills, below average intelligence expected from a king,  who is responsable for a series of blunders and idiocies. Nor do I put Loghain on a pedestal, like I said, I find his infuation with Maric to be ridiculous and he is not that politically competent either (but at least he was competent at something).

I rather find your attempt to oversimplify my views (and impose a false dichotomy that I did not imply or hint at) and of course always imply that what I want is a flawless individual with a flawless story, the most common argument to defend all kinds of idiocies, to be the extreme view here that makes any kind discussion impossible.

What I see is negatives far outweighing positives. If you think that's extreme, then yes, no discussion is possible. 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 04 février 2011 - 05:05 .

[Mayorin]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Ferelden is not as fixated on royal blood as Eamon makes it sound like. If they didn't know Alistair at all and saw that Maric hid him from them, they really have little reason to accept him as king. They almost went for a Cousland, despite Cailan being the son of their "savior".

And Bryce Cousland declined the offer. Otherwise 1)Cailan's supporters would rise a rebellion and 2) other nobility would eventually say: "Hey, what that Cousland guy doin' on the throne, we have as much rights to rule as he does since our true kings Theirins are gone". Theirins are Calenhad's descendants and their right to rule is less questionable. So i guess royal blood is not as unimportant as you think.

And you'd think that if this is what Maric had in mind, that he would make sure that Eamon is in fact educating him, which apparently he wasn't. Furthermore, I think Loghain's comments on the issue (who I think ought to know a lot about this) does not really hint that anyone thought Alistair to be a plausible plan B.

Well, as i see Maric's plan : let's keep Alistair with Eamon but not train him for ruling or giving him any hope of becoming king, so he cannot rise a rebellion by himself, but if Cailan dies without heir we'll pull him out of Redcliffe to the Landsmeet. Or Cailan himself will make Alistair his heir (Or why else have they told Cailan about Alistair's existance?). Scheming and drawing over nobility and common folk to their side is up to Eamon.

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I didn't find it insulting that he is written seriously. I said I find it hard to take Loghain's infatuation with him seriously, and I took him comparing my Warden to be insulting. No where did I say that Maric is a ridiculous nutter. More like a mediocre individual, with no prominent skills, below average intelligence expected from a king,  who is responsable for a series of blunders and idiocies. Nor do I put Loghain on a pedestal, like I said, I find his infuation with Maric to be ridiculous and he is not that politically competent either (but at least he was competent at something). 

Oh, only that.  LOL  Too bad that no one in Thedas seems to share your assessment, including Loghain who knew Maric better than anyone.

Since DG said we'll find out what happened to Maric and Fiona, I expect we might also find out more concerning Alistair's birth.  Have to see.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Mayorin wrote...
And Bryce Cousland declined the offer. Otherwise 1)Cailan's supporters would rise a rebellion and 2) other nobility would eventually say: "Hey, what that Cousland guy doin' on the throne, we have as much rights to rule as he does since our true kings Theirins are gone". Theirins are Calenhad's descendants and their right to rule is less questionable. So i guess royal blood is not as unimportant as you think.

No one rose up against Anora solo as far as we know so far. Unless Alsitair is alive and the revolt gut crushed easily.  The symbol is important, but like  all symbols, it ends up waning in importance, with only a few clinging to it.

Point was, they are not fixated on royal blood so much that they would blindly accept an unrecognized bastard as heir to the throne, simply because he is a Therein by blood. Like I said, the nobles in Origins were not impressed.
They might accept an incompetent imbecile like Cailan (a recognized and suposedely trained heir), but to argue that they are so infatuated with the Therein line as if it's some sort of messianic blood that they cannot imagine themselves without, so would gladly and unquestionably pick an unrecognized bastard with no qualifications as king, to be overestimating the importance of royal blood.

Mayorin wrote...
Well, as i see Maric's plan : let's keep Alistair with Eamon but not train him for ruling or giving him any hope of becoming king, so he cannot rise a rebellion by himself, but if Cailan dies without heir we'll pull him out of Redcliffe to the Landsmeet. Or Cailan himself will make Alistair his heir (Or why else have they told Cailan about Alistair's existance?). Scheming and drawing over nobility and common folk to their side is up to Eamon.

That's a poor plan. It assumes that the nobility will fall in line and accept an unrecognized bastard that was hidden from them by their own king, as heir with barely any education or qualifications, regardless of circumstance. If Cailan's ascension to the throne was contentious when he was the recognized heir of Maric, imagine what Alistair's would have been like, without the Warden and withotu a Blight.

And Cailan was probably informed to be warry of a potential threat. But like I said before hand, it makes much more sense to reveal Alsitair, give him a minor title, keep him under surveillance, acquaint him with the nobles enough for them to be able to consider him as a potential heir.

Maybe I am overestimating the nobility's intelligence here (saying a lot), but if I was a noble, Cailan dies and all of a sudden I have Eamon claiming that he has Maric's unrecognized bastard that has no qualifications whatsoever other than blood, and he wants him to have the throne, I'd raise an eyebrow. I'd be much less skeptical if I knew Alistair from before and knew that he at least has some basics.

[Sarah1281]

And Bryce Cousland declined the offer. Otherwise 1)Cailan's supporters would rise a rebellion and 2) other nobility would eventually say: "Hey, what that Cousland guy doin' on the throne, we have as much rights to rule as he does since our true kings Theirins are gone". Theirins are Calenhad's descendants and their right to rule is less questionable. So i guess royal blood is not as unimportant as you think.

Or maybe the Couslands who are so proud to be semi-autonomous just didn't WANT to rule. Teyrns have a lot of power on their own while kings have to derive it from the people so in some ways becoming king would take away some of his power and freedom. I don't think that if a Landsmeet legitimately declared Bryce king that Cailan's supporters would have a revolt. They would have to accept that legitimately Bryce was the king or go against their precious and long-missed traditions. And if Bryce was an unpopular king or Fergus and the HN were unsuited to rule than maybe after Bryce's death there would be problems but if this wasn't the case then the Couslands would just be the new royal line and the nobles wouldn't just all decide that if a Theirin can't rule then they should rise up against their non-Theirin king. There might have been problems at the Landsmeet after Bryce's death and challenges for the throne but it wouldn't devolve into civil war as long as everyone continued to accept the decision of the Landsmeet.

Well, as i see Maric's plan : let's keep Alistair with Eamon but not train him for ruling or giving him any hope of becoming king, so he cannot rise a rebellion by himself, but if Cailan dies without heir we'll pull him out of Redcliffe to the Landsmeet. Or Cailan himself will make Alistair his heir (Or why else have they told Cailan about Alistair's existance?). Scheming and drawing over nobility and common folk to their side is up to Eamon.

But that plan would make no sense at all unless Maric thinks that he'll outlive Cailan. If Alistair has no training at all then being pulled out of Redcliffe and put into the Landsmeet would go about as well as putting Daveth in the Landsmeet. He would have no idea what he was doing and probably wouldn't be able to learn years of training in just a few weeks/months as he's desperately needed. Sure, he ends up having to do exactly that if you put him on the throne at the end of the game but I doubt anyone would have planned for that to be their ideal outcome. Except maybe Eamon.

[Mayorin]

Addai67 wrote...

I'm not sure why you assume Loghain knew anything about it at all. The Calling shows Maric trying to conceal even his son's existence from Loghain.

My impression was that at some point Alistair's heritage stopped being a secret at all. Even little kids in the Chantry knew he was a bastard prince. So sooner or later Loghain've found out the truth. And he didn't like it at all. i presume.

[Sarah1281]

Mayorin wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

I'm not sure why you assume Loghain knew anything about it at all. The Calling shows Maric trying to conceal even his son's existence from Loghain.

My impression was that at some point Alistair's heritage stopped being a secret at all. Even little kids in the Chantry knew he was a bastard prince. So sooner or later Loghain've found out the truth. And he didn't like it at all. i presume.

Loghain may have found out but 'little kids in the Chantry' didn't. They thought that he was the son of noble, yes, and thus was putting on heirs and the other legitimate children of nobles rejected him for being a bastard. Since everyone seemed to think he was Eamon's and Eamon dropped him off at the Chantry, they likely thought that he was Alistair's father and not Maric.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...
Oh, only that.  LOL  Too bad that no one in Thedas seems to share your assessment, including Loghain who knew Maric better than anyone.

A reader of a story can have as much understanding of a character as a character in the story itself, especially one who has subjective reasons to be blind in his feelings.
And your first "argument" is really weak. If you base it on bard stories in Orlais and how Maric, the rebel prince, captures people's imaginations, I can give you dozens of examples of individuals in our own history who also capture people's imagination, without being competent.  I do not intrinsically value what the masses happen to think of an individual.

An opinion I'd take far more seriously, is Celene saying that Ferelden is a land of barbarians with only one solitary rose.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 04 février 2011 - 05:24 .

[Mayorin]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


Point was, they are not fixated on royal blood so much that they would blindly accept an unrecognized bastard as heir to the throne, simply because he is a Therein by blood. Like I said, the nobles in Origins were not impressed.
They might accept an incompetent imbecile like Cailan (a recognized and suposedely trained heir), but to argue that they are so infatuated with the Therein line as if it's some sort of messianic blood that they cannot imagine themselves without, so would gladly and unquestionably pick an unrecognized bastard with no qualifications as king, to be overestimating the importance of royal blood.  

The person is not important. Even a two year old infant can be made a king  if army is large enough. Who stands beside this person is important: Eamon and army of Redcliffe sounds good. Plus some noble friends Eamon made. Therein blood is a bonus other opponents doesn't have. They have armies and powerful friends of their own but not the name.

That's a poor plan. It assumes that the nobility will fall in line and accept an unrecognized bastard that was hidden from them by their own king, as heir with barely any education or qualifications, regardless of circumstance. If Cailan's ascension to the throne was contentious when he was the recognized heir of Maric, imagine what Alistair's would have been like, without the Warden and withotu a Blight.

Well i never said it was a good plan. It was a plan for the worst case scenario: Cailan dies with no heirs. And that seemed to be very unlikely: why wouldn't healthy strong man live long and have kids with his beautiful wife? It just seems very suspicious to me how quickly Eamon came up with his "Let's put Alistair on the throne" plan in game. He has barely recovered.

Modifié par Mayorin, 04 février 2011 - 06:00 .

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
An opinion I'd take far more seriously, is Celene saying that Ferelden is a land of barbarians with only one solitary rose.

Did you ever consider that Celene might have motives other than speaking the plain truth for flattering Anora?

For instance, what about her plan to usurp Anora's place?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Mayorin wrote...
The person is not important. Even a two year old infant can be made a king. Who stands beside this person is important: Eamon and army of Redcliffe sounds good. Plus some noble friends Eamon made. Therein blood is a bonus other opponents doesn't have. They have armies and powerful friends of their own but not the name.

This is not a full fedged or developped monarchy where kids can assume the throne. And generally, it was de facto controlled by either the mother and / or a vizier (chancellor in Ferelden's case). Not a noble who is going to inevitably alienate the others, because he took power for himself.

If the Ferelden civil war proved anything is that there are a lot of "old gruges" that can come to a boil. It's no coincidence imo that it was the Coastlands vs the bannorn. While the game does a ****** poor job of potraying politics, Ignacio's comments and the geographic seperation of Ferelden into 2 blocs has obvious economic implications (Coastland vs hinterland).

Anyhow, if that's what Maric was thinking, he was probably going to plunge the country into civil war.
Which I am now realizing is somewhat inevitable and desirable. Fereldens really need a lot of bloodshed to realise how irrational their system is, so they can start anew. 

 It just seems very suspicious to me how quickly Eamon came up with his "Let's put Alistair on the throne" plan in game. He has barely recovered.

I think Eamon always had it on his mind as a possibility that that's why I theorize that he volunteered for the job. I do nto think Maricd was thinking that much (if at all) in this situation and was essentially being played around.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 04 février 2011 - 05:49 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
An opinion I'd take far more seriously, is Celene saying that Ferelden is a land of barbarians with only one solitary rose.

Did you ever consider that Celene might have motives other than speaking the plain truth for flattering Anora?

For instance, what about her plan to usurp Anora's place?

I do not see how her respecting Anora means that she wouldn't carry on with her plan.

It is indeed perhaps she respects Anora that she sees her as a threat to Orlais and would rather get her out of the way.

[Mayorin]

[quote]Sarah1281 wrote...

[quote]Or maybe the Couslands who are so proud to be semi-autonomous just didn't WANT to rule. Teyrns have a lot of power on their own while kings have to derive it from the people so in some ways becoming king would take away some of his power and freedom. I don't think that if a Landsmeet legitimately declared Bryce king that Cailan's supporters would have a revolt. They would have to accept that legitimately Bryce was the king or go against their precious and long-missed traditions. And if Bryce was an unpopular king or Fergus and the HN were unsuited to rule than maybe after Bryce's death there would be problems but if this wasn't the case then the Couslands would just be the new royal line and the nobles wouldn't just all decide that if a Theirin can't rule then they should rise up against their non-Theirin king. There might have been problems at the Landsmeet after Bryce's death and challenges for the throne but it wouldn't devolve into civil war as long as everyone continued to accept the decision of the Landsmeet.  [/quote] Even a slightest misstep is a cause (and an excuse) for power-hungry noble to start a war. Cousland not being a legitimate king would be just an excuse too. And a good excuse for ordinary people. "That bastard Cousland usurped the throne that belongs to your saviour's son Cailan" etc. And the fact that "bastard Cousland" was elected at Landsmeet might not even matter anymore. Nobles never needed really good excuses to grab some extra power.

Modifié par Mayorin, 04 février 2011 - 05:59 .

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
An opinion I'd take far more seriously, is Celene saying that Ferelden is a land of barbarians with only one solitary rose.

Did you ever consider that Celene might have motives other than speaking the plain truth for flattering Anora?

For instance, what about her plan to usurp Anora's place?

I do not see how her respecting Anora means that she wouldn't carry on with her plan.

It is indeed perhaps she respects Anora that she sees her as a threat to Orlais and would rather get her out of the way.

Sure it's possible that she actually does think Anora is a "rose among brambles."  I just wouldn't take such obvious flattery at face value, not coming from someone like Celene.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...
Sure it's possible that she actually does think Anora is a "rose among brambles."  I just wouldn't take such obvious flattery at face value, not coming from someone like Celene.

But you'd take bard stories at face value?

[Wereparrot]

Sarah1281 wrote...
If Eamon never intended the letter to be seen by anyone, why hide the fact that he set Celene and Cailan up? And sure they don't have to be in order but if it's a letter that old and not even important to Cailan (how could it be? At least Celene's promise to come and then backing out matter) then why would he still have it on him?

I don't think Cailan did have the letter on him. Maybe I'm wrong here but I think the devs just decided to place them at Ostagar in RtO because they wanted us to know. If Cailan brought these letters to Ostagar then he is a bigger fool than I previously believed. Anyway, I think that swapping letters one and three around makes for pretty good evidence that, for good or ill, Eamon knew of and approved of Cailan's plans, possibly even instigating them through Isolde's Orlesian connections. Obviously, between letters one (formerly three) and two there is a lot still to be accounted for.

If Eamon honestly thinks his son can take the Orlesian throne then he's a freaking idiot. End of story. The very best he could hope for was marrying Connor to an Orlesian noble and even then he'd have to give up Redcliffe if he wanted to livei n Orlais to try and eventually have an descendent married into the royal family.

Conner would be a man capable of running Eamon's estates in his absence by then. When Edward III claimed the French throne there was dissent among his people concerning whether Edward, should he conquer France, would rule primarily as king of England or king of France. I believe a similar situation would arise in the event of Cailan/Celene's death regarding their heir, causing civil unrest and a war of succession between Ferelden and Orlais. Due to the fighting, neither would be in an ideal position to prevent Connor or anyone else from taking advantage of the situation. Ferelden would fall first, and Cailan and Celene's kid would have to go back to Orlais and get Orlais back in order sharpish if he were to avoid a similar fate befalling Orlais.

And am I the only one who thinks Ferelden might actually beat Orlais based on the examples of Crécy and Agincourt? I admit these two battles might be unreasonably high benchmarks as Cailan is nothing like the kings that presided over them, but even so, with the right leadership it might be possible.

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
Sure it's possible that she actually does think Anora is a "rose among brambles."  I just wouldn't take such obvious flattery at face value, not coming from someone like Celene.

But you'd take bard stories at face value?

I'm not sure what you're referring to.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
Sure it's possible that she actually does think Anora is a "rose among brambles."  I just wouldn't take such obvious flattery at face value, not coming from someone like Celene.

But you'd take bard stories at face value?

I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Where did this "Thedas doesn't share you assement of Maric" come from then?

Anyways, really gtg. cheers.

[Addai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Where did this "Thedas doesn't share you assement of Maric" come from then?

Anyways, really gtg. cheers.

Well Fereldans for one all regard him highly, and he seems to have been a respected ruler all around.

The Orlesians also tried to assassinate him, so they must have seen him as a threat as well.  Not just our dear Anora. 

[PatT2]

Sarah1281 wrote...

I believe that it was Isolde's nagging that made him send Alistair to the Chantry.

The thing is, though, that if Eamon really did have some plan to use Alistair for more influence or whatever then it makes no sense to so quickly give up on that just because Isolde wouldn't stop nagging.

You've never been married to a very headstrong, insistent spouse, no? Some spouses can get their other-halves to move heaven and earth just to shut them up. Not speaking about self as I am permanently single to avoid such problems. But I do know a few.

[PatT2]

A lot of the discussions (walls of text) here apparently miss some of the things said in Stolen Throne. Such as that after Rowan died, Maric went into a long depression where he really didn't do anything, including interact with Cailan.



In the relationship with Maric and Rowan....Rowan chooses to stay with Maric rather than continue her dalliance with Loghain. After that, Loghain removes himself back to his farmhold and doesn't step foot in Denerim again for a very long time, and Maric doesn't go visit him. There seems to be a serious chilling of their relationship after the various indiscretions. After Rowan dies, then Maric goes into his depression and the chantry priestess is the one who has the most contact with Cailan. It was like Maric's whole reason for living had failed. Cailan, unfortunately suffered as a result. Meanwhile, Anora isn't mentioned in the books, but one supposes that her father has more to do with her than Maric did with Cailan.



There's no reason to see a strong realtionship between Cailan and Loghain, except for what can be accounted to Anora..



I think there's far less scheming and planning, and far more of things just "happening" and people going along with it. Up to the point where Anora sees Cailan and I can see a lot of scheming going on there. But Loghain doesn't seem as shart as she is.



Life is what happens when you're busy making other plans. I'm pretty sure that these players also just found themselves on a chessboard and played the game out the way they found it, they didn't design the place they landed. Loghain was a reluctant hero who had a knack for strategy. But he didn't insert himself into the play...he accidentally came upon the boy Maric and it was his father who stopped him ultimately from killing him.



I think the events carried the people more often than the people design the events. It is just that some people are better at taking advantage of those events when they present themselves. But to give any of these characters credit for grand designs truly gives humans too much credit for the situations in which they find themselves. (Which most people are wont to do in the real world...take too much credit for the good situations they find themselves, not recognizing the plain old good fortune that placed them in a position to take advantage,and conversely, the tendencies to blame people more harshly for the circumstances they find themselves in if they find themselves in difficulty, as though they are personally to blame for the political and economic conditions, like being born poor to uneducated parents. It's so easy to take too much credit for one's good fortune, and to impart too much blame for other folks ill fortune. Makes us feel so far superior to those who are beneath us.



In fact, we don't deserve the credit for our good fortune, in large part (we don't get to pick our families and circumstances...whether we were born to slaves or in a slum in Mexico, for example). Even the most deserving person may never even imagine their own potential because of their unfortunate luck of parentage. And even the stupidest person can become president of a superpower if they are born to the right parents and sent to the right schools.



They don't deserve credit for the accomplishment. They didn't accomplish anything but subterfuge. If Maric or Cailan or Alistair or Anora were born any other place in any other time, they could have ended up living very different lives with very different outcomes. It seems to me that giving them credit for the outcome of the political situation in Ferelden is a direct result of giving them credit for more than being in the right place at the right time with the right parents. I don't think most of these characters deserve the acuity they are being assigned by folks here....



My $.02 worth. Back to my life now.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Where did this "Thedas doesn't share you assement of Maric" come from then?

Anyways, really gtg. cheers.

Well Fereldans for one all regard him highly, and he seems to have been a respected ruler all around.

The Orlesians also tried to assassinate him, so they must have seen him as a threat as well.  Not just our dear Anora. 

It's hard not to regard the one who freed them highly. So much so that it's hard to hold him under scrutiny and be objective. Doesn't make my criticism of him and his acts (that the people don't happen to know) any less valid. Like I said, I do not attribute any intrinsic value to what the masses think. What they see is a name and a symbol. They do not see the person behind the name and the symbol, who would have been compeltely useless if it wasn't for Loghain, who did not have his name. 

As for respectable, I see a mediocre king, average at the very best, who didn't do much to develop and improve Ferelden. But you think Ferelden is great as is while I think it's a total mess, so no point in further discussing.

When it comes to comparing the rule of both, Anora beats Maric hands down vis a vis the reforms she is implementing.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 04 février 2011 - 11:12 .

[Addai]

PatT2 wrote...

My $.02 worth. Back to my life now.

A lot of good thoughts and worth the wall of text it took to state them.    I agree a lot with your perspective.  I think Gaider (and the other game writers) tried to shape a world where ordinary people were caught up in circumstances and did both heroic and stupid things.  I put it in the same tradition as George R. R. Martin, where there really are no heroes, just winners and losers.

I also think Gaider is more interested in their relationships rather than in the social-political scheme.  Probably why this discussion doesn't interest me much, besides the fact that it's old ground.