213 réponses à ce sujet

[Herr Uhl]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

Just a small, provoking sign for our heterophobic friends out there

So him being bisexual makes him sexually confused?

k.

[Knightly_BW]

Not that hard decision for me actually.

I usually kill them. Loghain have little upper hand if I would want to ****** Alistair so he can live.

Also Loghain more remind me of Meredith, both are went crazy with immense phobia.

Anders is just a stupid terrorist who should be killed by the first moment he made that stupid remark about dying templar in Awakenings. Jowan and Anders destined to die an every occasion.

Modifié par Asperius, 30 mars 2011 - 01:05 .

[majeeek]

I just wish i could tear him apart, limb by limb not just a dagger in the back.

The chantry have the right concept it's the execution of it that has problems. Never any mercy for Anders from me.

[allanon10101a]

I dunno. Part of me still remembers Anders' first line in Awakenings: "I didn't do it". That part remembers how he was the comic relief through most of that add-on, and likes him for it. Then I think about how annoying he's become now he has Vengence soul-merged with him, and it's choppy-choppy time.

As for Loghain, I can sort of understand his plight. He was brought up in Orlesian slavery. He led the rebellion against them. And here is the son of the man he fought alongside discussing a formal alliance with their imperial house, something that normally results in marriage with the nobility. In his eyes, his king was betraying everything he and Maric fought and bled for. He had to do something, and in the end, he did. He walked away. I won't pretend to think that justifies everything, the slavery, the atrocities committed by Howe, the attempted assassination. But I can start to understand that here was a troubled man pushed to the edge by the son of his dearest friend, a man who cracked and went too far, and then did what he felt he had to do to unite the country and fund the war he knew was coming.

I usually spare Loghain. He did what he thought was best for Ferelden as a whole, even if he got it horribly, horribly wrong. But Anders, he never repented for a second. He never had a second thought about it, and manipulated Hawke to do what he wanted to achieve it. And that spells game over every damn time.

Modifié par allanon10101a, 30 mars 2011 - 01:26 .

[Halo Quea]

allanon10101a wrote...

I dunno. Part of me still remembers Anders' first line in Awakenings: "I didn't do it". That part remembers how he was the comic relief through most of that add-on, and likes him for it. Then I think about how annoying he's become now he has Vengence soul-merged with him, and it's choppy-choppy time.

As for Loghain, I can sort of understand his plight. He was brought up in Orlesian slavery. He led the rebellion against them. And here is the son of the man he fought alongside discussing a formal alliance with their imperial house, something that normally results in marriage with the nobility. In his eyes, his king was betraying everything he and Maric fought and bled for. He had to do something, and in the end, he did. He walked away. I won't pretend to think that justifies everything, the slavery, the atrocities committed by Howe, the attempted assassination. But I can start to understand that here was a troubled man pushed to the edge by the son of his dearest friend, a man who cracked and went too far, and then did what he felt he had to do to unite the country and fund the war he knew was coming.

I usually spare Loghain. He did what he thought was best for Ferelden as a whole, even if he got it horribly, horribly wrong. But Anders, he never repented for a second. He never had a second thought about it, and manipulated Hawke to do what he wanted to achieve it. And that spells game over every damn time.

Historically this scenario plagued many young kings who came to power after their father's deaths.   They inherit more than their father's crown,  they inherit his court, generals, and most importantly their unfinished business. 
There are real reasons why that historically young and/or incoming monarchs would act quickly to remove old members from the court when first coming to power.  Sometimes this would happen for the better, sometimes for the worst.   But no matter the case, many monarchs found difficulty in trying to govern with these entrenched figures still holding on to their positions.

As you stated,  Loghain is STILL trying to hold fast to what was, he sees no wisdom in what the young king is doing, and he might well be right.  But Loghain's actions are not entirely rooted in service of country.  IF Cailan had triumphed at the the battle of Ostagar  he would have begun building a name for himself.  Winning battles is usually how kings and generals build their living legends and cement their places in history.   But more importantly it gives weight to their authority.

Loghain's actions prove that he wanted to deny the young King that opportunity. If Cailan had returned from Ostagar victorious, he becomes that much harder to control or even manipulate.  Because In Loghain's eyes he will ALWAYS be a boy, unworthy of the command and respect that he gave Maric.  In fact he may not have ever seen a King in Cailan, THAT more than anything else is probably what made it so easy for him to leave him on the battlefield to a certain death. 

The other rationalizations and justifications for leaving Cailan to die, making his daughter a widow with no heir to secure her position, supporting Howe's massacre of the Couslands, enaging in subversion thoughout Ferelden, the captures and torturings of those who might oppose him, employing blood mages for assasination, allowing a slave trade passage between the Tevinters and the Alienage.........I could go on and on. 

The problem is that Loghain's only moral compass is his desire to defend Ferelden.  In his world view, anything that can be done to accomplish this is justifiable.  He falls into the typical self-made trap of the tyrant who is willing to do anything in order to "save" his country.   It has often been proven that nations need rescuing from such saviors.

This is why I killed Loghain in every playthrough.  Death really became my only option to redeem the General, for him to keep on living would have been a greater tragedy for Ferelden.

[Hrodric]

Here is what I think:

Modifié par Hrodric, 30 mars 2011 - 04:04 .

[bleachorange]

If bioware had a formula, then that decision fits it. But while I empathized with Anders, I couldn't let him live. It made me sad. Alternatively, Loghain was clinically insane with paranoia over Orlais. But it was justified paranoia, as Cailan was going to marry the empress of Orlais, and lord knows what would happen to Anora. So I normally kill Loghain, but I didn't take any pleasure in it past the first time.

Modifié par bleachorange, 08 avril 2011 - 04:34 .

[Barefoot Warrior]

I had no problem killing off Loghain, I let Alistair take care of that. But in DA2, I had a real issue killing off Anders, he deserved it and his actions were not justified (pun). Just as I was about to I remembered, he is the only healer. So, let him live, but I wanted to. But at that point in the game, any decision was a bad one as far as I was concerned and just went with it.

[Addai]

I can see similarities. If I kill Anders, it's not out of a sense of justice (ironic, that) but because he's an abomination that's too dangerous to let live. You could see Loghain as too great a threat to continue to live. Alternatively, when I spare Anders, it's because I think he ought to fight in the war he started as long as my other companions have to risk their lives for it, and not because I support what he did. Likewise you could decide that sparing Loghain and putting him to use is better for your cause than lopping his head off.

Of course Loghain is 100% more badass than Anders, but that's neither here nor there. 

Modifié par Addai67, 08 avril 2011 - 05:09 .

[Cutlass Jack]

Those were the two easiest decisions I made. They both had to die for their actions.

Of the two Anders is the only one I felt bad about. I did like him, but decided at the very moment he asked me to collect manure and bomb parts that if he did something to purpose kill the Grand Cleric, he would die for it. It was the line that once crossed he didn't get to come back from. Exactly the same line the Arihok crossed when the Vicount's head rolled down the stairs.

My only regret for Loghain is I wasn't allowed to let my Dog kill him.

Modifié par Cutlass Jack, 08 avril 2011 - 05:15 .

[Zjarcal]

Addai67 wrote...
Of course Loghain is 100% more badass than Anders, but that's neither here nor there. 

LOL, I still chuckle at you liking Loghain, even after all these months. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

No, not even close. Both were so different that the choice regarding their fate, by implication, was vastly different for me as well.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 08 avril 2011 - 05:21 .

[Addai]

Zjarcal wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
Of course Loghain is 100% more badass than Anders, but that's neither here nor there. 

LOL, I still chuckle at you liking Loghain, even after all these months. 

I would have said that about a comparison with Anders regardless. 

[Esbatty]

Zjarcal wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
Of course Loghain is 100% more badass than Anders, but that's neither here nor there. 

LOL, I still chuckle at you liking Loghain, even after all these months. 

She'd commit polyandry if he was not fictional. And dead. In most playthroughs.

[Torax]

I did let Logain do the Sacrifice for an achievement once. Was interesting but I prefer to kill him for his actions. I love his tone when he quietly and calmly says "Hush Anora, it's over." He was a great character. Love to hate him but he was still more like able than Anders.

[Super_Fr33k]

I do not consider Loghain's and Anders' decisions equivalents, but I concede which is worse incredibly subjective. Which is worse depends on what kind of character you're playing, and how you weigh the intangibles that drove them.

Loghain's action was clearly one of a traitor, unlike Anders. Anders manipulated Hawke, and in some cases (depending upon how you roleplay) you could call it a betrayal, but it is far less clear cut than Loghain's decision. Loghain and Anders are also on different ends of the political spectrum. Loghain engaged in an authoritarian coup, or tried to. He was preserving and hijacking the social order. Anders is more like an anarchist, believing in freedom despite its risks.

Also, I think it's fair to say Anders was responding to a clear and present danger, the abuses of Meredith and her subordinates, while Loghain was succumbing to paranoia over past abuses. He had good reasons to hate Orlais, but it was still a possible enemy, which he feared more than the actual enemy at Ostagar.

Fundamentally, Loghain was trying to preserve order, while Anders wanted to spark chaos. I think that's the best way to define the difference.

Personally, I consider Anders more justified than Loghain. Again, he was responding to ongoing abuses and killed someone morally culpable for those abuses and their perpetuation. Elthina was guilty of neglect and passivity. Cailan was guilty of nothing when he was killed, except being childish and naive, and was in the middle of defending all of Thedas from a grave threat. While Loghain dismissed the Battle of Ostagar as not a sign of a new blight, they were still massing in such numbers that they were the clear threat, not Orlais. As such, his actions were strategically and morally faulty.

[Musou1776]

Anders is like a beaten dog, I can't blame him for attacking his abuser. Loghain is a traitor which is one of the worst things you can be, IMO. Plus Anders is not all there because of the possession thing. Loghain is soley responsible for his actions.

[Torax]

Super_Fr33k wrote...

I do not consider Loghain's and Anders' decisions equivalents, but I concede which is worse incredibly subjective. Which is worse depends on what kind of character you're playing, and how you weigh the intangibles that drove them.

Loghain's action was clearly one of a traitor, unlike Anders. Anders manipulated Hawke, and in some cases (depending upon how you roleplay) you could call it a betrayal, but it is far less clear cut than Loghain's decision. Loghain and Anders are also on different ends of the political spectrum. Loghain engaged in an authoritarian coup, or tried to. He was preserving and hijacking the social order. Anders is more like an anarchist, believing in freedom despite its risks.

Also, I think it's fair to say Anders was responding to a clear and present danger, the abuses of Meredith and her subordinates, while Loghain was succumbing to paranoia over past abuses. He had good reasons to hate Orlais, but it was still a possible enemy, which he feared more than the actual enemy at Ostagar.

Fundamentally, Loghain was trying to preserve order, while Anders wanted to spark chaos. I think that's the best way to define the difference.

Personally, I consider Anders more justified than Loghain. Again, he was responding to ongoing abuses and killed someone morally culpable for those abuses and their perpetuation. Elthina was guilty of neglect and passivity. Cailan was guilty of nothing when he was killed, except being childish and naive, and was in the middle of defending all of Thedas from a grave threat. While Loghain dismissed the Battle of Ostagar as not a sign of a new blight, they were still massing in such numbers that they were the clear threat, not Orlais. As such, his actions were strategically and morally faulty.

Just for sake of accuracy. Cailan was in correspondence with the Empress of Orlais that almost hinted at Cailan leaving Anora and maybe instead joining her to produce an heir. Since Anora appeared barren. If Loghain is with you when you return to Ostagar he replies something like "I knew it."

Modifié par Torax, 08 avril 2011 - 05:45 .

[Huntress]

I killed loghain with every single one of my characters , he betrayed his king, for whatever reason, My characters didnt see any reason for him to be fair minded towards any of them, even if I have made him a hero by killing the archdemon he always dies one way or another.

Anders? he never dies, he goes to the same extreme as meredith, he removed what made both sides be somewhat tolerant to each other, he is a hero. Yes i feel sorry for the building been destroyed, but it was empty 99% of the times I went there beside from the cleric and 4-5 priests.

[PantheraOnca]

Ferelden is worse for its lack of Cailan. Loghain is a power hungry, demented individual. He is also either a traitor or a coward.

Anders is at least tragic in his turn into an abomination. His turn to extremist action is almost forced upon him, whereas Loghain is just a dick about things.

[Plaintiff]

Loghain is far more similar to Meredith, for me. Whatever he used to be, he is that person no longer. Paranoia has twisted a once-great man into a tyrant and a traitor. He sees Orlesians everywhere, with no proof, the same way that Meredith sees blood magic.

He says that Cailan's death was of his own making, but that's not true. The strategy they employed was of Loghain's own devising, and he had obviously planned in advance to retreat with his men. Nothing justifies the betrayal of Cailan, who was not only his King, but his son-in-law and the child of his best friend. He orders Howe to wipe out the Couslands for no apparent reason, he sells city elves to Tevinter as slaves, he poisons Arl Eamon, he ignores the threat of the darkspawn in favour of greedily expanding his own power base and lies blatantly and repeatedly about all his actions to the nobility and his own daughter. Loghain is a power-mad tyrant, killing him was easy.

Anders, on the other hand is fighting against what he (and I) perceive as an obvious injustice. The Chantry is not nice, nor is it neutral. "Neutral" only means "I'm going to allow this obvious injustice to occur right under my nose". When you have the power and the responsibility to stop injsutice and do nothing, you are just as guilty as the person perpetrating it. Elthina is just as guilty as Meredith. The Chantry is an oppressive, bigoted power that controls through fear and manipulation. It deserves to be eradicated. Anders is not insane, nor is he power-hungry, he is acting in pursuit of freedom, and he recognizes that drastic action is needed to free the mages. People in the forum paint him as some kind of cackling villain, but that's not true. It's extremely evident that it was a hard decision for him to make, and once it's done, he willingly submits himself to Hawke for judgement. That is not the action of an evil man.

I only take issue with the fact that he lies to Hawke about his intentions, regardless of Friend/Rival level or relationship status. And I'm not about to kill him or something as petty as that.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 08 avril 2011 - 06:18 .

[Cutlass Jack]

Plaintiff wrote...

Anders, on the other hand is fighting against what he (and I) perceive as an obvious injustice. The Chantry is not nice, nor is it neutral. "Neutral" only means "I'm going to allow this obvious injustice to occur right under my nose". When you have the power and the responsibility to stop injsutice and do nothing, you are just as guilty as the person perpetrating it. Elthina is just as guilty as Meredith. The Chantry is an oppressive, bigoted power that controls through fear and manipulation. It deserves to be eradicated. Anders is not insane, nor is he power-hungry, he is acting in pursuit of freedom, and he recognizes that drastic action is needed to free the mages. People in the forum paint him as some kind of cackling villain, but that's not true. It's extremely evident that it was a hard decision for him to make, and once it's done, he willingly submits himself to Hawke for judgement. That is not the action of an evil man.

He didn't kill Elthina because she was guilty. He killed her to remove the possibility of Mediation between parties. He was forcing everyone to take action whether they wanted to or not. Whether they were innocent or guilty.

And he submit himself willingly because he expected Hawke to kill him. Because he wanted to be a Martyr for his cause, and also because both 'justice' and 'vengance' would demand he die for what he did. One of the walkaround coversations he has with Isabela in Act 3 gets into that.

[Addai]

Loghain did not have anything to do with the Cousland massacre, per David Gaider here in the forums.

I also have to say that Cailan can hardly be called blameless for how he ended up. It wasn't Loghain who wanted him on the front lines, Cailan was considering a marriage alliance with Orlais, and had initiated an extremely foolish military alliance which was known at the time of Ostagar. The Origins DLCs and DA2 bear out some of Loghain's paranoia, in fact. It wouldn't have been the first time in Thedas history that Orlais used a Blight as pretext to occupy other countries.

Modifié par Addai67, 08 avril 2011 - 06:22 .

[Plaintiff]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Anders, on the other hand is fighting against what he (and I) perceive as an obvious injustice. The Chantry is not nice, nor is it neutral. "Neutral" only means "I'm going to allow this obvious injustice to occur right under my nose". When you have the power and the responsibility to stop injsutice and do nothing, you are just as guilty as the person perpetrating it. Elthina is just as guilty as Meredith. The Chantry is an oppressive, bigoted power that controls through fear and manipulation. It deserves to be eradicated. Anders is not insane, nor is he power-hungry, he is acting in pursuit of freedom, and he recognizes that drastic action is needed to free the mages. People in the forum paint him as some kind of cackling villain, but that's not true. It's extremely evident that it was a hard decision for him to make, and once it's done, he willingly submits himself to Hawke for judgement. That is not the action of an evil man.

He didn't kill Elthina because she was guilty. He killed her to remove the possibility of Mediation between parties. He was forcing everyone to take action whether they wanted to or not. Whether they were innocent or guilty.

And he submit himself willingly because he expected Hawke to kill him. Because he wanted to be a Martyr for his cause, and also because both 'justice' and 'vengance' would demand he die for what he did. One of the walkaround coversations he has with Isabela in Act 3 gets into that.

 I was explaining my own reasoning as to why I see his actions as justifiable. I'm aware of Anders' reasoning, and I also agree with it. Mediation doesn't help the situation, Elthina is useless and by refusing to take a firm stance one way or the other she allows the situation to worsen.

If Anders wanted to be a martyr, then he was oddly relieved when I let him live. Indeed, the fact that he sees his own death as justice, as you stated, indicates rather the opposite. I don't perceive Anders as having any aspirations to martyrdom at all.

[Cutlass Jack]

Plaintiff wrote...

If Anders wanted to be a martyr, then he was oddly relieved when I let him live. Indeed, the fact that he sees his own death as justice, as you stated, indicates rather the opposite. I don't perceive Anders as having any aspirations to martyrdom at all.

You never killed him I take it? If you choose to kill him, you'll get the whole martyr dialogue. Basically how he wants you to kill him so his name goes up in lights for the day the world changed. Made me want to stab him again.

Thats only if you're not romancing him. You get a different dialogue if you kill him and you are.

Modifié par Cutlass Jack, 08 avril 2011 - 06:43 .