240 réponses à ce sujet

[ReubenLiew]

The Angry One wrote...

ReubenLiew wrote...

Urm... not being held against her will and not being manipulated by her father isn's really a crime, you see. She didn't order the elves to be enslaved, nor did she order Cailan to be killed. I think many of the Bannorn already suspects that she was deposed by her own father by then.

If that is to be the case at least fully half of the Bannorn will be executed for siding with Loghain during their Civil War. I doubt they'd call for her execution if it meant that it would call for their own execution as well. Plus I think a lot of them don't blame Anora for not being to stop her father, I mean half the Bannorn sure couldn't how could she?

How could she? SHE'S THE QUEEN, THAT'S HOW.
According to the codex, she held the true power while Cailan went off playing warrior likes the swords. So she has no excuse. She let her father install himself as regent and start a civil war. Again, she either didn't want to stop him or couldn't. Either makes her a joke of a Queen. The first time in her reign when she was called upon to make a decision for the good of Ferelden, and she FAILED.

That would make Maric a poor king as well, as we all know Loghain was the true power behind the throne.
Well by the time she let her father be installed as Regent she had just received word of her fathers death and that the Grey Wardens did it. Loghain had been planning this for quite some time, I gather, and he has a far more powerful political base than she did considering he IS her father and he was there when Maric pieced together Fereldan. It was only later she began to have her doubts about Loghain but by that point she had already let Loghain be regent, and it was too difficult to pull him out of his seat of power without some serious firepower, ie; you.

Although I don't see why failing once is so bad. Does making one mistake somehow makes one irredeemable? I think it was human, her love of her father overpowering her more cynical side until the cynical side won over, and by then she could not rectify her mistake.

Modifié par ReubenLiew, 22 novembre 2009 - 07:30 .

[The Angry One]

Loghain would never kill Anora and she knows that. She says she fears for her life, but she's *lying*.

Even Howe wouldn't dare kill her if he's grown attached to his head remaining on his neck.

[Taerda]

SeanMurphy2 wrote...

She is forced to pick a side. She can't be half hearted about it. 

If she sides with her father, then she is not going to say bad things about him.

It is a risk for her to side with you. There has to be some benefit for her. And presumably she needs to believe you are strong enough to win. Otherwise she will face repercussions if she ends up on the losing side. And she would have openly opposed Loghain which means she could be killed.

Yes, we are in total agreement... however, the reprecussions of her choosing her Father's side should also be death - as you say she could not be half-hearted in her support. She ended uppicking the losing side, yet she escapes all consequences for doing so, that is how it is written.

[The Angry One]

ReubenLiew wrote...

That would make Maric a poor king as well, as we all know Loghain was the true power behind the throne.
Well by the time she let her father be installed as Regent she had just received word of her fathers death and that the Grey Wardens did it. Loghain had been planning this for quite some time, I gather, and he has a far more powerful political base than she did considering he IS her father and he was there when Maric pieced together Fereldan. It was only later she began to have her doubts about Loghain but by that point she had already let Loghain be regent, and it was too difficult to pull him out of his seat of power without some serious firepower, ie; you.

Horse manure.
Loghain never declared himself into a position of power during Maric's rule. He never pissed off the Bannorn. He never started a civil war.
He did do all of this under Anora's watch. As Queen she would have the political connections to put Loghain down before he got power. If she didn't, then she's no Queen.
It doesn't matter what excuse you make for her, either way she's unfit to rule.

Although I don't see why failing once is so bad. Is making one mistake somehow makes one irredeemable? I think it was human, her love of her father overpowering her more cynical side until the cynical side won over before she could rectify her mistake.

That is just her biggest failure, not her only one.
If she proved herself a capable trustworthy person in spite of that, maybe we could let it go.
But since she instead proves herself a despicable lying manipulative tyrant, she gets no freebies, sorry.

[ReubenLiew]

Probably. I don't quite see how that relates to the question though?

[SeanMurphy2]

Maybe she did not think Loghain would kill Cailan. She may feel a lot of uncertainty. Loghain did a lot of ruthless things to gain control.



She is used to be treated as a queen. So it may be a shock to be imprisoned by Howe and find herself without much of her power.

[Akka le Vil]

ReubenLiew wrote...

In the storyline you can make alistair king, and leave her out of the equation, and lock her away or be assassinated quietly after everything's died down, so yes you have the choice.

Let me repeat myself : if Alistair dies, she come back into power as if nothing happened.

What I don't understad is why nobody seems to take this as a choice. What I see is that people are asking to PERSONALLY murder the ex-queen in the middle of the landsmeet, where her crimes (in the eyes of the landsmeet in any case) are virtually none.
I do not think it was poorly written at all. It makes a lot of sense that you cannot be her personal executor, and later on in the epilogue nothing is mentioned of her, maybe people want closure on that but that is a minor point.

Well, it would be more satisfying to kill her personnally, but honestly I think that people wanted an option to have her offed. Not exclusively doing it yourself right before the eyes of the Landsmeet.

She never did ask Alistair to be killed before the landsmeet, she does after Alistair goes mad and declares that he wants to be king in order to kill loghain. For all her calm demenour I took it at that point she loses her calm a bit and wants him dead before he goes and do something stupid like lead a revolt against her father.

No, she wants him dead so he can't challenge her power. She even says so. You're trying to hard to show what's actually happening in the game in a positive light for Anora

And killing her then would be... disastrous. For one, the only way you meet her is AFTER Howe was dead, and then immediately after that you fight Ser Cauthrien. I'm sure anybody could put 1 and 1 together and piece together who murdered the Queen, which would bring so much more complication to the matter. Plus it's much easier to put the blame on an organization that's already an outlaw than a dead Arl.
And the part about saying it's poor written wasn't directed at you, sorry.

Loghain abandonned the king with half the army as witnesses, and though it DID caused problems, he still was able to convince half the country that he was a hero doing so.
The option of killing the Princess and blaming Howe should not necessarily works perfectly (I actually even said so in the previous post ), but it could be an attempt with some interesting results.

[ReubenLiew]

The Angry One wrote...

ReubenLiew wrote...

That would make Maric a poor king as well, as we all know Loghain was the true power behind the throne.
Well by the time she let her father be installed as Regent she had just received word of her fathers death and that the Grey Wardens did it. Loghain had been planning this for quite some time, I gather, and he has a far more powerful political base than she did considering he IS her father and he was there when Maric pieced together Fereldan. It was only later she began to have her doubts about Loghain but by that point she had already let Loghain be regent, and it was too difficult to pull him out of his seat of power without some serious firepower, ie; you.

Horse manure.
Loghain never declared himself into a position of power during Maric's rule. He never pissed off the Bannorn. He never started a civil war.
He did do all of this under Anora's watch. As Queen she would have the political connections to put Loghain down before he got power. If she didn't, then she's no Queen.
It doesn't matter what excuse you make for her, either way she's unfit to rule.

Although I don't see why failing once is so bad. Is making one mistake somehow makes one irredeemable? I think it was human, her love of her father overpowering her more cynical side until the cynical side won over before she could rectify her mistake.

That is just her biggest failure, not her only one.
If she proved herself a capable trustworthy person in spite of that, maybe we could let it go.
But since she instead proves herself a despicable lying manipulative tyrant, she gets no freebies, sorry.

Loghain made all the difficult decisions for Maric, most likely a lot of the Bannorn knew that. And I don't recall Anora pissing off half the Bannorn either. The question here remains is WHY wouldn't want to put her father in power? He proved pretty capable before this, she had no reason to not acquiesce to his decision to be regent in times of war. She only turns when she later on realizes he's off his freakin' rocker, by then she had already made her decision and couldn't risk changing without some significant repurcussions. And knowing Loghain won't kill her doesn't mean he won't put her in a tower and shut her there till the entire thing was over.

You have quite the Morrigan in you, don't you? You only have one chance, fail that and die. I prefer mercy, myself.

[ReubenLiew]

Akka le Vil wrote...

ReubenLiew wrote...

In the storyline you can make alistair king, and leave her out of the equation, and lock her away or be assassinated quietly after everything's died down, so yes you have the choice.

Let me repeat myself : if Alistair dies, she come back into power as if nothing happened.

What I don't understad is why nobody seems to take this as a choice. What I see is that people are asking to PERSONALLY murder the ex-queen in the middle of the landsmeet, where her crimes (in the eyes of the landsmeet in any case) are virtually none.
I do not think it was poorly written at all. It makes a lot of sense that you cannot be her personal executor, and later on in the epilogue nothing is mentioned of her, maybe people want closure on that but that is a minor point.

Well, it would be more satisfying to kill her personnally, but honestly I think that people wanted an option to have her offed. Not exclusively doing it yourself right before the eyes of the Landsmeet.

She never did ask Alistair to be killed before the landsmeet, she does after Alistair goes mad and declares that he wants to be king in order to kill loghain. For all her calm demenour I took it at that point she loses her calm a bit and wants him dead before he goes and do something stupid like lead a revolt against her father.

No, she wants him dead so he can't challenge her power. She even says so. You're trying to hard to show what's actually happening in the game in a positive light for Anora

And killing her then would be... disastrous. For one, the only way you meet her is AFTER Howe was dead, and then immediately after that you fight Ser Cauthrien. I'm sure anybody could put 1 and 1 together and piece together who murdered the Queen, which would bring so much more complication to the matter. Plus it's much easier to put the blame on an organization that's already an outlaw than a dead Arl.
And the part about saying it's poor written wasn't directed at you, sorry.

Loghain abandonned the king with half the army as witnesses, and though it DID caused problems, he still was able to convince half the country that he was a hero doing so.
The option of killing the Princess and blaming Howe should not necessarily works perfectly (I actually even said so in the previous post ), but it could be an attempt with some interesting results.

Well, don't let Alistair die then And she was the rightful queen, I don't see people wouldn't just fall over themselves to make her queen again so they don't fall over in civil war over who would be the next monarch.

I don't even recall her wanting to kill Alistair in my playthrough, so I can't comment about this. As far as I know she only suggested that with that situation I brought up, so maybe I'm arguing with lack of information here.

Actually he abandoned the king with HIS army as witnesses. Those were his own men if I'm not wrong, and who are they to question their captain? Plus even with all this people still go around calling him out on abandoning the king anyway, so no plan in fullproof.
Granted it could be pretty interesting, but way, way too out there to make a properly good story I think.

[The Angry One]

ReubenLiew wrote...

Loghain made all the difficult decisions for Maric, most likely a lot of the Bannorn knew that.

He didn't declare himself regent though, did he? THAT'S what angered them so much.
Besides, Maric was a warrior king. War leaders don't make the best leaders; George Washington may have been the first President of the U.S. but he made a far better general than politician.
Anora is no warrior, but a peacetime leader. If in 5 years while "wielding the true power" she didn't have the knowhow and connections to rule by herself and stop Loghain, she's no leader at all.

And I don't recall Anora pissing off half the Bannorn either.

She let her father do so, is this not obvious?

The question here remains is WHY wouldn't want to put her father in power? He proved pretty capable before this, she had no reason to not acquiesce to his decision to be regent in times of war.

Because half the nation doesn't want him to be regent?
They don't want a commoner on the throne, it's that simple. That alone should've led Anora to tell him to bugger off.

She only turns when she later on realizes he's off his freakin' rocker, by then she had already made her decision and couldn't risk changing without some significant repurcussions. And knowing Loghain won't kill her doesn't mean he won't put her in a tower and shut her there till the entire thing was over.

He was acting the tin pot tyrant from the start. As soon as he gets to Denerim he's threatening Teagan and the other Banns. Shortly after the Bannorn demands he step down. Shortly after THAT civil war breaks out.
During this time Anora twiddles her thumbs, and only does something about it when HER POSITION is directly threatened by Howe.

You have quite the Morrigan in you, don't you? You only have one chance, fail that and die. I prefer mercy, myself.

Again, I give chances to those who deserves it. Anora repeatedly throws in her lot on the side of tyranny and stupidity.
She's a hopeless prospect.

Modifié par The Angry One, 22 novembre 2009 - 07:47 .

[The Angry One]

ReubenLiew wrote...

Actually he abandoned the king with HIS army as witnesses. Those were his own men if I'm not wrong, and who are they to question their captain? Plus even with all this people still go around calling him out on abandoning the king anyway, so no plan in fullproof.
Granted it could be pretty interesting, but way, way too out there to make a properly good story I think.

Several people survived and saw Loghain abandon his King deliberately, like Wynne.
Only the most stubborn loyalists and deluded twits believed Loghain.

[ReubenLiew]

The Angry One wrote...

ReubenLiew wrote...

Loghain made all the difficult decisions for Maric, most likely a lot of the Bannorn knew that.

He didn't declare himself regent though, did he? THAT'S what angered them so much.
Besides, Maric was a warrior king. War leaders don't make the best leaders; George Washington may have been the first President of the U.S. but he made a far better general than politician.
Anora is no warrior, but a peacetime leader. If in 5 years while "wielding the true power" she didn't have the knowhow and connections to rule by herself and stop Loghain, she's no leader at all.

And I don't recall Anora pissing off half the Bannorn either.

She let her father do so, is this not obvious?

The question here remains is WHY wouldn't want to put her father in power? He proved pretty capable before this, she had no reason to not acquiesce to his decision to be regent in times of war.

Because half the nation doesn't want him to be regent?
They don't want a commoner on the throne, it's that simple. That alone should've led Anora to tell him to bugger off.

She only turns when she later on realizes he's off his freakin' rocker, by then she had already made her decision and couldn't risk changing without some significant repurcussions. And knowing Loghain won't kill her doesn't mean he won't put her in a tower and shut her there till the entire thing was over.

He was acting the tin pot tyrant from the start. As soon as he gets to Denerim he's threatening Teagan and the other Banns. Shortly after the Bannorn demands he step down. Shortly after THAT civil war breaks out.
During this time Anora twiddles her thumbs, and only does something about it when HER POSITION is directly threatened by Howe.

You have quite the Morrigan in you, don't you? You only have one chance, fail that and die. I prefer mercy, myself.

Again, I give chances to those who deserves it. Anora repeatedly throws in her lot on the side of tyranny and stupidity.
She's a hopeless prospect.

She made the decision before she had a chance to find out half the bannorn didn't want that. Maybe that was a fault of hers, but hardly enough to be that hateful of her. She declared him regent because she was the only one capable at that, and she wouldn't really have questioned her father at the point.
And they were at a state of war, it was logical to put Loghain as Regent since he's such a good war leader.
And there was no evidence of half the Bannorn hating her, but they did not like Loghain being Regent, sure. They rebelled because of Loghain, not because of her. For all we know they loved her but saw that she was being coerced by her father, because surely it's not that hard to see that fathers normally have a very large influence on what their daughters do.
And Anora was a commoner too without Cailan, telling her father to bugger off would be same as saying screw this throne, I don't want it since I'm not royalty either technically.
And as I said, she's torn between doing what she feels is right with her gut and betraying her father, as opposed to not doing anything and being a good daughter. There are plenty of evidence of daughters doing all sort of insane things for the appreciation of their father, I don't particularly see this as her weakness.
To each their own I suppose. I thought she'd make a particularly good peacetime ruler, although obviously through all this event she was a terrible wartime leader.

[The Angry One]

ReubenLiew wrote...

She made the decision before she had a chance to find out half the bannorn didn't want that. Maybe that was a fault of hers, but hardly enough to be that hateful of her. She declared him regent because she was the only one capable at that, and she wouldn't really have questioned her father at the point.

Are you seriously saying she didn't know that the nobility would be miffed if a commoner was made regent?
What, did they think they'd throw a tea party in his honour?
Hero or no, aristocrats are notoriously hateful of commoners, ESPECIALLY commoners elevated to the nobility like Loghain. They may have respected Maric's decision in that regard, but declaring himself regent is going way too far.

And they were at a state of war, it was logical to put Loghain as Regent since he's such a good war leader.

As.. er.. opposed to the role he already had of Teryn and general?

And there was no evidence of half the Bannorn hating her, but they did not like Loghain being Regent, sure. They rebelled because of Loghain, not because of her. For all we know they loved her but saw that she was being coerced by her father, because surely it's not that hard to see that fathers normally have a very large influence on what their daughters do.

It's easier to declare opposition and civil war against Loghain than the Queen, they could lose a lot of support by openly defying the reigning monarch as opposed to the despot who usurped the throne.
Besides which, this has nothing to do with who hates Anora, it's to do with the fact that she let it happen.

And Anora was a commoner too without Cailan, telling her father to bugger off would be same as saying screw this throne, I don't want it since I'm not royalty either technically.

Her mother was a noble by birth, apparently. And she was married to the king as illegitimate as her claim is compared to Alistair's. Point is, she has a better claim than Loghain and one which the Bannorn would support if only in defference to the late king.

And as I said, she's torn between doing what she feels is right with her gut and betraying her father, as opposed to not doing anything and being a good daughter. There are plenty of evidence of daughters doing all sort of insane things for the appreciation of their father, I don't particularly see this as her weakness.

It's a weakness when she's the ruler of Ferelden and her father doesn't even hide the fact that he's a tyrant and guilty of regicide.

To each their own I suppose. I thought she'd make a particularly good peacetime ruler, although obviously through all this event she was a terrible wartime leader.

Yes, until the next usurper comes along and deposes her easily while she's busy plotting to kill people who could be on her side if she wasn't a selfish, paranoid fool.

[Lord Dagon]

Anora seemed seemed like a cold hearted **** to me and remarkably unaffected by the impending threat before the Landsmeet only interested in getting my support so I wasn't surprised when she showed up just as Loghaine was doing the shouty posturing thing. She seemed unnaturally cold and unaffected when I executed Loghaine for his betrayal. With all the blood spatter on her face you'd have thought she would be slightly traumatised from the shock! Alistair had no interest in ruling and after a while his whining got on my nerves.

In the final battle I was the last man standing so its always funny to see him standing around after the battle with not a scratch besides the fake looking blood spatter.The epilogue was very satisfying acknowledging all my efforts.

[ReubenLiew]

Then I guess we are an impasse. I disagree with your view on how she was wrong, just as you do on why she isn't in mine.

You think she should be the shining example of an immaculate queen, and falls flat. I see her as a shining example of a good daughter that happens to be queen, and therefore she was just as flawed as any other character in the game, lots of which I have shown mercy to, ie; Isolde and her son even though many died because of them.

[Tankenminnet]

 Manipulative and ruthless is what I think. ****. Still, probably a more capable ruler then alistair.

[The Angry One]

This has nothing to do with perfection, but with the simple fact that every single time Anora has been called upon to put the good of her nation first, she puts herself first instead.

This kind of selfish, inept rule would go down like a lead balloon in North Korea, let alone Ferelden.

[Akka le Vil]

The Angry One wrote...

This has nothing to do with perfection, but with the simple fact that every single time Anora has been called upon to put the good of her nation first, she puts herself first instead.

This.

[ReubenLiew]

I don't know if I can call it 'everytime', simply the most 'crucial' time, which I think it's fair, maybe she didn't act as ruthless as she should've, but she's only human, acting that ruthless on her own father I might add is a little hard for people to stomach. I'm not quite sure if you yourself could turn on your own parent even if the greater good called for it, which she did anyway later on. She knew her father stood a very good chance to die, but hell she's only human, what loving daughter wants her father to die, be he a power hungry crazy madman or no?

She made a mistake (edited, damn my lousy english) in a moment of extreme pressure, which is hardly cause to call her an ineffective ruler, to which the game epilogue also agrees that she turns out as a wonderful peacetime ruler. You are basing her entire character on the fact of several personal mistakes that she makes, none of which were entirely her fault, but rather a victim of circumstance.

Maybe that will in turn bite her in the ass, but that's for the next game to cover up methinks.

Modifié par ReubenLiew, 22 novembre 2009 - 08:25 .

[Taerda]

ReubenLiew wrote...

I don't know if I can call it 'everytime', simply the most 'crucial' time, which I think it's fair, maybe she didn't act as ruthless as she should've, but she's only human, acting that ruthless on her own father I might add is a little hard for people to stomach. I'm not quite sure if you yourself could turn on your own parent even if the greater good called for it, which she did anyway later on. She knew her father stood a very good chance to die, but hell she's only human, what loving daughter wants her father to die, be he a power hungry crazy madman or no?

She made a mistake (edited, damn my lousy english) in a moment of extreme pressure, which is hardly cause to call her an ineffective ruler, to which the game epilogue also agrees that she turns out as a wonderful peacetime ruler. You are basing her entire character on the fact of several personal mistakes that she makes, none of which were entirely her fault, but rather a victim of circumstance.

Maybe that will in turn bite her in the ass, but that's for the next game to cover up methinks.

All of this is what being a ruler means. Loghain may be a traitor, etc. but he ruled by making the tough decisions and then standing by them for better or ill.

As far as loving her father and all of that goes ... I would not a ruler that puts family before nation ruling my nation for any reason, which she did.

Rubein, I admire you sticking up for the flawed Anora, but as you said I do not think we shall ever meet inthe twain.

[ReubenLiew]

And Loghain went mad for doing exactly that I appreciate a certain ruthlessness is required to be a leader, even to go as far as to put the good of the country above certain things, although I wouldn't want a leader thats too ruthless either.



Yeah, I think at this point we're not furthering the discussion anymore, although it has been good to see that many people should feel so strongly about a fictional character

[Akka le Vil]

Actually, Anora IS ruthless. What she lacks is not ruthlessness, what she lacks is, on the contrary, empathy and compassion (and morals).

[Cpl_Facehugger]

The Angry One wrote...

Besides, Maric was a warrior king. War leaders don't make the best leaders; George Washington may have been the first President of the U.S. but he made a far better general than politician.

Counterpoint: Augustus Caesar. A skilled general and politician who created  perhaps the most infamous empire in the world. 

Anora is no warrior, but a peacetime leader. If in 5 years while "wielding the true power" she didn't have the knowhow and connections to rule by herself and stop Loghain, she's no leader at all.

Please, explain exactly what Anora is supposed to do in the situation. Because from where I'm sitting, there's not much she can do. Loghain and Howe have the troops. Loghain himself is immensely charismatic and well-loved by the people of Ferelden. Loghain has basically just pulled a military coup. Unless she's got a handy army on hand, there's very little she can do. 

You can't just say "she's no leader because she didn't use her ill-defined "connections" 

She let her father do so, is this not obvious?

Let? And what exactly is she supposed to do to stop him? Speaking out against her father even in private got her locked up for her trouble. 

Because half the nation doesn't want him to be regent?
They don't want a commoner on the throne, it's that simple. That alone should've led Anora to tell him to bugger off.

There's a difference between "being on the throne" and "being regent."

Again, I give chances to those who deserves it. Anora repeatedly throws in her lot on the side of tyranny and stupidity.
She's a hopeless prospect.

And yet when she actually gets power, she acts with remarkable foresight, leading Ferelden into what sounds suspiciously like a golden age. The only real blemish on her rule, at least in my game, being cracking down on the elves. But then, pretty much any ruler would crack down on a riot. 

It's pretty clear that she's not hopless. And she certainly doesn't deserve to be repeatedly raped by horrible inhuman monsters as some people in the beginning of the thread suggested. 

[The Angry One]

Cpl_Facehugger wrote...

Counterpoint: Augustus Caesar. A skilled general and politician who created  perhaps the most infamous empire in the world.

There are always exceptions.
Though a lot of his victories could be put down to Marc-Antony's ineptitude.

Please, explain exactly what Anora is supposed to do in the situation. Because from where I'm sitting, there's not much she can do. Loghain and Howe have the troops. Loghain himself is immensely charismatic and well-loved by the people of Ferelden. Loghain has basically just pulled a military coup. Unless she's got a handy army on hand, there's very little she can do. 

You can't just say "she's no leader because she didn't use her ill-defined "connections"

So she has no troops loyal to her? No real power?
Then she's no leader, is she? This is a medieval fantasy era, if you don't have the military strength to solidify your position, get the hell out.

Let? And what exactly is she supposed to do to stop him? Speaking out against her father even in private got her locked up for her trouble.

Nip it in the bud. Speak out in public. Gain the support of the Bannorn.
Would Loghain's troops be so loyal without the tacit approval of the queen? I think not.

There's a difference between "being on the throne" and "being regent."

Are you joking? Regency is the power of the throne without a royal title.

And yet when she actually gets power, she acts with remarkable foresight, leading Ferelden into what sounds suspiciously like a golden age. The only real blemish on her rule, at least in my game, being cracking down on the elves. But then, pretty much any ruler would crack down on a riot.

Something that happens with or without her (this supposed golden age) so how much influence might she have had on that?
Even if it were so, it is due to writer's fiat and not due to her character.

It's pretty clear that she's not hopless. And she certainly doesn't deserve to be repeatedly raped by horrible inhuman monsters as some people in the beginning of the thread suggested. 

A treacherous snake deserves whatever fate that befits their actions.

[Cpl_Facehugger]

[quote]The Angry One wrote...

There are always exceptions.
Though a lot of his victories could be put down to Marc-Antony's ineptitude.[/quote]

Exceptions usually mean that the rule is mistaken. How about Marcus Aurelius? Trajan? Hadrian? In American history, what of Eisenhower? Kennedy? 

[quote]
So she has no troops loyal to her? No real power?[/quote]

The royal army just got wiped out at Ostragar.

[quote]Then she's no leader, is she? This is a medieval fantasy era, if you don't have the military strength to solidify your position, get the hell out.[/quote]

There are other forms of leadership than military. It's just that there's not much those forms of leadership can do to counter-coup against a large army. 

[quote]Nip it in the bud. Speak out in public. Gain the support of the Bannorn.[/quote]

Speak out in public and say... What, exactly? By the time she realized that Loghain might have actually been responsible for murdering her husband, the exigencies for speaking out against Loghain had pretty much passed. And actually speaking out without any strong and visible  would end up with her potentially dead or permanently imprisoned. 

I hope you're not saying she should immediately distrust her father before his craziness became evident.  I mean, before the craziness, Loghain was a pretty decent person. Initially she'd have no reason to disbelieve his story.  

[quote]Would Loghain's troops be so loyal without the tacit approval of the queen? I think not.[/quote]

Why not? We saw that Loghain's troops were loyal enough to run away from Ostragar and leave their king to die. Hell, we saw they were loyal enough to believe Loghain's lies about the Wardens turning on Cailan when they were there to watch it all go down. Why should they be more loyal to their queen than their captain?  
[quote][/quote]
[quote]Are you joking? Regency is the power of the throne without a royal title.[/quote]

It's the title that's important though. Remember how concerned everyone was with Alistair's blood.

[quote][/quote][quote]Something that happens with or without her (this supposed golden age) so how much influence might she have had on that?[/quote]

Wasn't the "Alistair as King" stuff basically "Alistair becomes a popular king by spending time with the commonfolk rather than actually ruling like he should be doing"? Unless you harden him and turn him more like Anora? 

[quote]Even if it were so, it is due to writer's fiat and not due to her character.[/quote]

I disagree. She showed herself very intelligent and shrewd in her decision making. Those are the traits you want in a ruler. Moreoever, she's so respected that even other nations admitted that she was the brains behind Cailan's throne, according to her codex entry. 

[quote]A treacherous snake deserves whatever fate that befits their actions.

[/quote]

Her only crimes are loving her father too much, letting that get in the way of her otherwise rational decisionmaking process, and trying to secure the throne for herself; with her only doing anything remotely objectionable towards that end when Alistair shows what most people would consider quite unkingly traits.

None of that is remotely enough to justify turning her into a brood mother.