211 réponses à ce sujet

[Klidi]

Wulfram wrote...

Klidi wrote...

Harrowmont is just more diplomatic and polite, that's the main difference between them.

Which is a good reason to regard him as the more competent one, likely to deliver the support of the Dwarves for the war, no?

And he has the big virtue of not starting the relationship by trying to trick the Warden into spreading lies.

That's like saying that Wardens using Coercion are 'more competent' than those using Intimidation.

It's just different approach. It has little to do with real competence.

[Wulfram]

Klidi wrote...

That's like saying that Wardens using Coercion are 'more competent' than those using Intimidation.

It's just different approach. It has little to do with real competence.

Someone using Intimidation is successfully projecting an image that serves their ends.

The only image Bhelen gives off - to me, at least - is of an unlikable untrustworthy bastard who is under the impression he's clever and charming.  Which doesn't appear to serve his ends very well.

Modifié par Wulfram, 23 mars 2012 - 11:02 .

[Klidi]

Wulfram wrote...

Klidi wrote...

That's like saying that Wardens using Coercion are 'more competent' than those using Intimidation.

It's just different approach. It has little to do with real competence.

Someone using Intimidation is successfully projecting an image that serves their ends.

The only image Bhelen gives off - to me, at least - is of an unlikable untrustworthy bastard who is under the impression he's clever and charming.  Which doesn't appear to serve his ends very well.

But that's personal preferrence, based on impression which he made on you.

And in the end, it always comes down to that, no?  To argue about that is about as useful as argue who is better LI, Morrigan or Leliana.

At least at that point in the game. Becaue the epilogues show that Harrowmont wasn't that competent.

[TEWR]

Bhelen doesn't seem to hold the Grey Wardens in as high a regard as he should, given what he says in the Origin story.

He's practically livid at the fact that the Wardens are fighting the majority of the Darkspawn in the expedition, saying that it makes the Dwarves look cowardly.

Bhelen may be the more competent king -- when it comes to him and Harrowmont anyway -- but I find him to be a foolish king all the same.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 25 mars 2012 - 01:56 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Wardens are definitely an idiotic organization that are in desperate need of a complete overhaul. No king in his right mind would count on them that much.

And no king in his right mind would not be cautious of a foreign order (which happens to have supported the Chantry in the past and are supported primarily by Orlais) flexing its muscles in his own backward. That does not make him foolish in the slightest. 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 mars 2012 - 05:23 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Oh it's this thread again...sigh.

[TEWR]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

The Wardens are definitely an idiotic organization that are in desperate need of a complete overhaul. No king in his right mind would count on them that much.

No they're not.

I'm not saying he should hold them as highly as Cailan did -- that would be absurd -- but he should rely on them somewhat. They can sense Darkspawn and would help minimize Dwarven casualties. There are plenty of ways he could've brought the Wardens to Orzammar to establish their own outpost whilst decreeing that they cannot be involved in Dwarven politics anymore -- the Warden's assistance being the only allowance.

Their purpose would be only to fight Darkspawn. Bhelen could just as easily decree that the moment they do become involved in politics, they're booted out of Orzammar.

He would rather have the entire Dwarven army go up against the majority of Darkspawn without Warden assistance in that Origin story mission just so that they could appear brave -- which would lead to more casualties -- then have the Wardens take on most of the fighting, thereby minimizing casualties.

He's a foolish king simply because he prides appearance in combat over intelligence. The Darkspawn line may have been pushed back, but based on what he said in the game I'm led to believe that it came with more death then was necessary.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 mars 2012 - 09:10 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
No they're not.

Yes they are.

Why in the world wouldn't they tell monarchs and heads of states the very reason why they are important? Why do they expect heads of states to believe that they are important, when the only explanation they provide is "cause I feel it." There is no reason why they would hide such information from those in very positions.

And before you tell me that history vindicates them, seeing how blights are centuries apart, they will need better evidence.

And before you tell me that they can feel darkspawn, the reverse is true, making them as much of a liability as an asset if not more so.

I'm not saying he should hold them as highly as Cailan did -- that would be absurd -- but he should rely on them somewhat. They can sense Darkspawn and would help minimize Dwarven casualties. There are plenty of ways he could've brought the Wardens to Orzammar to establish their own outpost whilst decreeing that they cannot be involved in Dwarven politics anymore -- the Warden's assistance being the only allowance.

And he never said he didn't want to rely on them. He said, relying on them too much to the point where it looks like they are doing most of the work, is imprudent and stupid, which is true.

Decreeing them to get out if they get involved in politics might be too late anyways, when we are talking aobut Orlais and the Chantry.

Furthermore, he needs to have a very good reason to militarize the casteless. Relying too much on Wardens jeopordizes that and by extention, his own power.

He's a foolish king simply because he prides appearance in combat over intelligence. The Darkspawn line may have been pushed back, but based on what he said in the game I'm led to believe that it came with more death then was necessary.

Except he didn't say the Wardens shouldn't be there. He said the wardens shouldn't lead the assault.
And appearance is half of power and any head of state who doesn't care about it obviously has no idea what he is doing. The death of a few more additional dwarves is very much worth a more solid appearance. Because appearing to be weak and dependent on foreign aid is as dangerous as weakeness itself. And certainly not in line with his project.

And ultimately, Bhelen is receptive of foreign assistance unlike Harrowmont, except he does it with prudence and makes sure that they are not doing most of the work, because he'd be stupid otherwise. So no, Bhelen is not foolish.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 mars 2012 - 09:42 .

[TEWR]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


Yes they are.

Why in the world wouldn't they tell monarchs and heads of states the very reason why they are important? Why do they expect heads of states to believe that they are important, when the only explanation they provide is "cause I feel it." There is no reason why they would hide such information from those in very positions.

Probably because if they said the reason that they know when Blights occur is because of the Joining -- which is a form of blood magic -- the populus would loathe them. Known practitioners of blood magic? Not a good thing.

Plus, when you tell them that the Joining is fatal and what it entails, that hurts recruitment efforts.

Besides, I think anyone that doubts when a Warden says it's a Blight is a fool. Society erroneously believed that because of the amount of Darkspawn killed in the last Blight, they were all killed. Society ignored the fact that the Dwarves were still plagued by the Darkspawn, but they didn't care. They didn't bother to check their facts, and it's not the Wardens' fault why no one believe them.

It's society's fault.

It's not so much a problem with the Wardens, but with how society would view them and how society acts. Society's the problem here, not the Order.

And before you tell me that they can feel darkspawn, the reverse is true, making them as much of a liability as an asset if not more so.

I think after a certain amount of time the Darkspawn can't sense the Wardens anymore. Or that the Darkspawn can only sense them when their Taint has progressed fully.

It's one or the other. I can't remember which.

Either way, the Darkspawn -- prior to the Disciples -- are mindless, barely capable of any measure of tactics outside of a Blight. So it's not much of a liability when you can easily predict your enemy's movements.

The only thing the Darkspawn have going for them outside of a Blight are numbers, which while good for an army can be defeated using certain tactics.

And he never said he didn't want to rely on them. He said, relying on them too much to the point where it looks like they are doing most of the work, is imprudent and stupid, which is true.

But they weren't doing most of the work. They were being escorted by Trian's men to where their mission was going to take place. Bhelen knew this. Duncan stated it earlier in the origin. The reason they were there in the first place wasn't to even do most of the work, but for them to find proof of the Archdemon's existence so that they could be taken seriously.

And the same could be said of Bhelen -- or Harrowmont -- sending the Warden on a crusade to find Branka, where Darkspawn are slain from the Aeducan Thaig all the way to the Anvil.

Bhelen already relied on the Wardens to do a crapton of fighting for him.

Decreeing them to get out if they get involved in politics might be too late anyways, when we are talking aobut Orlais and the Chantry.

Irrelevant. They no longer serve Orlais and the Chantry.

Furthermore, he needs to have a very good reason to militarize the casteless. Relying too much on Wardens jeopordizes that and by extention, his own power.

Again, I never said he should rely on them too much. But he doesn't seem to want to rely on them at all.

Except he didn't say the Wardens shouldn't be there. He said the wardens shouldn't lead the assault.
And appearance is half of power and any head of state who doesn't care about it obviously has no idea what he is doing. The death of a few more additional dwarves is very much worth a more solid appearance. Because appearing to be weak and dependent on foreign aid is as dangerous as weakeness itself. And certainly not in line with his project.

Sure, appearance is important. But should you pride yourself on maintaining a strong appearance when you sacrifice numerous Dwarves in the process, increasing the likelihood of your city going extinct?

The Dwarves have a low enough fertility rate as it is amongst themselves. I don't think Bhelen is proving himself a wise commander by sending the Dwarves to do the majority of the fighting just so he can maintain a strong appearance.

Certainly, he shouldn't rely heavily on outside aid. But he shouldn't rely too heavily on his own crumbling society either. It needs to be balanced -- based on what we know of the Dwarves, which affects how they should act militarily -- and I have seen nothing to support that this is what he's doing.

Appearance means nothing if you're the leader of a few thousand Dwarves as opposed to tens of thousands.

Of course, you and I have different opinions on how a ruler should rule Orzammar for a few areas, so perhaps we won't see eye to eye on this matter. My Aeducan is a reformer too, but I don't see Bhelen as doing what's best for Orzammar aside from the Casteless gaining more rights by fighting the Darkspawn.

A question, since you have returned to this thread: If you had the option for your Aeducan prince to take the throne using Orzammar's own politics and culture to your advantage, would you have done so?

And ultimately, Bhelen is receptive of foreign assistance unlike Harrowmont, except he does it with prudence and makes sure that they are not doing most of the work, because he'd be stupid otherwise. So no, Bhelen is not foolish.

But there's no real proof to support your suspicion that he did it with prudence. Sure he accepted it as opposed to Harrowmont, but we don't know how he accepted it other then "with open arms". The way I see it, what's presented in-game makes him a foolish commander while you see it as him being a wise commander.

And unfortunately, my faith in Bioware holding true to that epilogue slide isn't very high, considering the Magi Boon was trashed.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 mars 2012 - 10:22 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Probably because if they said the reason that they know when Blights occur is because of the Joining -- which is a form of blood magic -- the populus would loathe them. Known practitioners of blood magic? Not a good thing.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


Yes they are.

Why in
the world wouldn't they tell monarchs and heads of states the very
reason why they are important? Why do they expect heads of states to
believe that they are important, when the only explanation they provide
is "cause I feel it." There is no reason why they would hide such
information from those in very positions.

But they weren't doing most of the work. They were being escorted by Trian's men to where their mission was going to take place. Bhelen knew this. Duncan stated it earlier in the origin. The reason they were there in the first place wasn't to even do most of the work, but for them to find proof of the Archdemon's existence so that they could be taken seriously.

Something that Orzammar should have assisted them in, instead of going on a low key expedition in part to escort the Wardens to heavier fighting.

Bhelen evidently believes that Orzammar should be much more aggressive in its fight against darkspawn, which I agree with. I would agree that he would be foolish if he was a conservative like HArrowmont or Trian, except we know he is not.

In that sequence, he seems to be criticizing Harrowmont's half assed strategies at least as much as his reliance on Wardens.

Bhelen already relied on the Wardens to do a crapton of fighting for him.

He was not relying on him to take territory. His reliance on him was purely political and in Bhelen's case, not really necessary just convenient.

Though the whole involvement of the Warden in Orzammar's politics was too forced and badly done.

Irrelevant. They no longer serve Orlais and the Chantry.

Because they officially say that?
The Wardens have representation in the Orlesian Imperial court and guess which country has the most wardens and gives the Wardens the most stipends. Orlais.

Any belief that Orlais does not have influence over the Order is naive at best.

Again, I never said he should rely on them too much. But he doesn't seem to want to rely on them at all.

Except he never said that.

Certainly, he shouldn't rely heavily on outside aid. But he shouldn't rely too heavily on his own crumbling society either. It needs to be balanced, and I have seen nothing to support that this is what he's doing.

Except that is what he is doing. He never said he didn't want Wardens to be there and ultimately, that ends up being his policy.

In the scene you are referring to, he was not head of state and has no say in policy to show you what his policy would be.

A question, since you have returned to this thread: If you had the option for your Aeducan prince to take the throne using Orzammar's own politics to your advantage, would you?

No, I'd rather rule over Ferelden behind the scenes like my Aeducan did and collaborate with Bhelen for the greater good of Orzammar.

But there's no real proof to support your suspicion that he did it with prudence.

Him wanting to avoid looking corwardly is a prudent concern.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 mars 2012 - 10:23 .

[TEWR]

KnightofPhoenix wrote..

Yes they are.

Why in
the world wouldn't they tell monarchs and heads of states

And you think that they're any less a part of the populus? That they wouldn't let the stigma against blood magic cloud their judgement?

They could tell them, but it's just as much a detriment to their cause as it would be a boon.

Something that Orzammar should have assisted them in, instead of going on a low key expedition in part to escort the Wardens to heavier fighting.

Why? You do remember that the only time the Dwarves get a reprieve from their constant fighting with the Darkspawn is during a surface Blight, right?

Your nightmare is my everyday -- Kardol

If they were to assist the Wardens in that endeavor -- and they have no idea how long they would have to venture to even ascertain the proof the Wardens want -- that would mean the surface Blight ending would come even sooner. Which means the Dwarves go right back to fighting the Darkspawn.

In this case, a stronger appearance is detrimental to their survival. The surface has never helped them before and to help the surface now carries no possibility of them receiving any help in the future. It's basically banking on a possibility that hasn't ever made itself likely before, so why should they hope it would now?

Sure the Wardens could put in a good word for them, but you would think if the Wardens could've done that they would've done it... oh I don't know, in any of the previous four surface Blights, especially when Duncan acknowledges that the Dwarves are constantly warring with the Darkspawn, that they get no help, and that Dwarven Grey Wardens have been a great help against the Blights.

Bhelen evidently believes that Orzammar should be much more aggressive in its fight against darkspawn, which I agree with.

As do I -- and so does Xanthos Aeducan.
 

He was not relying on him to take territory. His reliance on him was purely political and in Bhelen's case, not really necessary just convenient.

It doesn't matter what the reasoning was for it. What matters is that they destroyed countless numbers of Darkspawn -- and a broodmother -- that lessened how much fighting the Dwarves would do in the future.

They did much of the fighting, whether Bhelen deigns to realize it or not.

Though the whole involvement of the Warden in Orzammar's politics was too forced and badly done.

How so? I mean, for a DN it's definitely bad -- I've stated as much numerous times in the past -- but for any other Warden I thought it was well done.

Because they officially say that?
The Wardens have representation in the Orlesian Imperial court and guess which country has the most wardens and gives the Wardens the most stipends. Orlais.

I thought the Anderfels had the most Wardens? Specifically Weisshaupt. I don't even remember where what you stated was stated. I'm guessing the books.

Additionally, we have records that show that the Wardens became politically neutral in the 2nd or 3rd Blight. To aid the Chantry is becoming politically involved again. To aid Orlais is to become politically involved again.

The Wardens were even pissed off at the PC's and Alistair's actions at getting politically involved. The only one that was really giddy at what they did was the First Warden, who said that the Wardens should have a political presence everywhere, Blight or no.

Sophia Dryden's justified rebellion kept the Wardens from becoming politically involved in the future, especially in Ferelden.

Finally, if the Chantry -- and by extension Orlais since the two are deeply intertwined -- was backing the Wardens, then they wouldn't have wanted to apprehend Anders once he was recruited into the Wardens during Awakening.

Any belief that Orlais does not have influence over the Order is naive at best.

Not so much naive. I think the problem is that Bioware is giving us conflicting types of information. And if they're called out on it, they'll probably try to desperately make it work, which probably won't work anyway.

Except he never said that.

It's how he seemed to imply it from my end.

Except that is what he is doing. He never said he didn't want Wardens to be there and ultimately, that ends up being his policy.

No it doesn't. There's no inkling that the Wardens are given a presence in fighting the Darkspawn in the games. The only time he uses the Wardens is when he sends the last two on a search for Branka, where they do much of the fighting anyway.

But afterwards? There's nothing to substantiate a claim of him allowing the Wardens in Orzammar to do any fighting at all.

Him wanting to avoid looking corwardly is a prudent concern.

Which would lead to the Eternal Blight of the Dwarves beginning anew once more, without leaving the Dwarves much time to recuperate or set up new fortifications.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 mars 2012 - 11:00 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
And you think that they're any less a part of the populus? That they wouldn't let the stigma against blood magic cloud their judgement?

They could tell them, but it's just as much a detriment to their cause as it would be a boon.

They are far less likely to be affected by social stigma if the Wardens present a case as to why they are important and actually right. Instead, they decide to not tell anyone and yet except everyone to believe their hunches.

At the very least, they could reveal this information when there is an actual blight.
Telling them might be a risk, but it's less of a risk than not telling them and then expecting them to believe you.

Why? You do remember that the only time the Dwarves get a reprieve from their constant fighting with the Darkspawn is during a surface Blight, right?

Your nightmare is my everyday -- Kardol

To precisely take advantage of the opportunity, take lost ground and fortify them.

In this case, a stronger appearance is detrimental to their survival. The surface has never helped them before and to help the surface now carries no possibility of them receiving any help in the future. It's basically banking on a possibility that hasn't ever made itself likely before, so why should they hope it would now?

The apperance of strength has less to do with the surface helping them and more to do with preventing the surface from thinking that they are a soft target with a critical resource.

It doesn't matter what the reasoning was for it. What matters is that they destroyed countless numbers of Darkspawn -- and a broodmother -- that lessened how much fighting the Dwarves would do in the future.

They did much of the fighting, whether Bhelen realizes it or not.

No, since that was only one broodmother. Kal Hirol had 3. That's what I would call a  much more signifcant contribution.

Plus that's gameplay that is clearly not aligned well with the story. Unless you really want to believe that the deep roads only had a few dozen darkspawns.

How so? I mean, for a DN it's definitely bad -- I've stated as much numerous times in the past -- but for any other Warden I thought it was well done.

Because both sides are too quick to trust. Harrowmont starts the relationship by showing how much of a weakling he is, which doesn't make that much sense. Getting involved with Bhelen makes more sense as his side reveals, rightly so, that they don't really need your help.

And too much responsibility is being placed on the shoulders of a foreigner.

Additionally, we have records that show that the Wardens became politically neutral in the 2nd or 3rd Blight. To aid the Chantry is becoming politically involved again. To aid Orlais is to become politically involved again.

They became *officially neutral* in the 3rd blight to broker an alliance between Orlais and Tevinter. It had a specific time and place. But to believe that the Wardens do not get invovled in politics is naive. Otherwise, why would the Wardens be involved in the Imperial court? And if they are reliant on Orlesian financial assitance, don't you think that would autmatically mean that Orlais has the most uinfluence?

Of course the Wardens are politically involved, regardless of their claims of neutrality. Why would anyone trust them not to be? Because they say so?

Not so much naive. I think the problem is that Bioware is giving us conflicting types of information. And if they're called out on it, they'll probably try to desperately make it work.

More and more, I am inclined to believe taht they had no idea what they were doing and any complexity in the story was probably done by accident.

But afterwards? There's nothing to substantiate a claim of him allowing the Wardens in Orzammar to do any fighting at all.

He welcomes foreign forces, I think it's a safe assumption taht he alloowed Wardens in, epsecially since his concern for looking cowardly no longer applies as he is doing most of the fighting.

Which would lead to the Eternal Blight of the Dwarves beginning anew once more, without leaving the Dwarves much time to recuperate or set up new fortifications.

And why would Duncan succeeding in his mission lead to that? Unless you believe that he was going to kill the archdemon with a small band of wardens here and there?

EDIT: anyways got to leave. And frankly, I don't see that much point in the conversation. The Orzammar choice will likely be inconsequential anyways.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 26 mars 2012 - 11:12 .

[TEWR]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

They are far less likely to be affected by social stigma if the Wardens present a case as to why they are important and actually right. Instead, they decide to not tell anyone and yet except everyone to believe their hunches.

At the very least, they could reveal this information when there is an actual blight.
Telling them might be a risk, but it's less of a risk than not telling them and then expecting them to believe you.

 
Fair point.

The apperance of strength has less to do with the surface helping them and more to do with preventing the surface from thinking that they are a soft target with a critical resource.

Anyone who is foolish enough to attack the Dwarves hasn't been paying enough attention to who can safely mine lyrium.

Only the Dwarves can do such a thing, and even then it has its own risks.

Anyone who attacks the Dwarves thinking they're a soft target is in for a rude awakening when they find out they've got the Darkspawn on their asses, whereupon they realize that the Dwarves weren't as soft as they believed if they kept the Darkspawn at bay for centuries.

Besides, it's not like the surface would know what they're doing. People never really gave a damn about what the Dwarves were doing before, so it's not like they would now.

No, since that was only one broodmother. Kal Hirol had 3. That's what I would call a  much more signifcant contribution.

A single broodmother can give birth to thousands of Darkspawn within its lifetime.

And yes, Kal'Hirol was definitely a more significant contribution. But that doesn't make Bownammar's broodmother's death any less significant. A broodmother can not only do what I stated above but is also guarded by Darkspawn, making it harder to kill.

Especially when they use their tentacles to grab you and slam you against the ground, possibly breaking bones.

Plus that's gameplay that is clearly not aligned well with the story. Unless you really want to believe that the deep roads only had a few dozen darkspawns.

I edited it to say countless. I don't believe the Warden only killed a few dozen here and there. But I know that he had to have been slaughtering them left and right for him to advance throughout the Deep Roads.

It's actually something that irked me about the Deep Roads. No random encounters with Darkspawn as you travel throughout, which made it not as believable.

He welcomes foreign forces, I think it's a safe assumption taht he alloowed Wardens in, epsecially since his concern for looking cowardly no longer applies as he is doing most of the fighting.

But those foreign forces were Fereldan soldiers, not the Wardens. The Wardens only had two -- maybe three -- people in Ferelden.

Awakening doesn't even state -- by way of Varel, Voldrik, or Dworkin -- that Wardens have a presence in Orzammar, when it'd clearly an important piece of information seeing as how the Wardens are important to that expansion.

Bhelen's welcoming is only directed at the Fereldan army, seeing as how that's who was arriving at his doorstep.

And why would Duncan succeeding in his mission lead to that? Unless you believe that he was going to kill the archdemon with a small band of wardens here and there?

Him seeing proof of the Archdemon would cement how the Wardens are a necessity to defeating the Blight, which means that the Blight could be appropriately defeated.

EDIT. And frankly, I don't see that much point in the conversation

That's what you said last time.

. The Orzammar choice will likely be inconsequential anyways.

Probably. Hell, Bhelen will probably be turned into a caricature of his self to those that liked him and Orzammar probably won't even have a presence in the Mage-Templar conflict -- which they should. Or Kal-Sharok should. Or both.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 mars 2012 - 11:54 .

[Tremere]

Corker wrote...

So do I really have in-game reasons to even consider picking him?

Without
metagaming? None. With metagaming? Still None, because the epilogues
are illogical ass pulls, as I said.

I'll tell my favorite Orzammar story.

First playthrough, f!Cousland do-gooder. (Surprise, right?)  She's a royalist, supports the orderly succession of power, likes Harrowmont.  Does *not* like Vartag or Bhelen, agrees to do both of Harrowmont's tasks. 

The whole time, my husband is telling me about epilogue slides and how I should support Bhelen.  I tell him Bhelen's a repulsive thug and an usurper, and Miss Cousland don't want none of that, and she can't see imaginary future epilogue slides.

So off to Dust Town to take out the Carta.

And the Smith Caste woman who was ordered to kill her newborn.

Because that's dwarven tradition.

I started to rethink Harrowmont.

By the time we got back from the Deep Roads, crown in hand, I was back to thinking, "Wellll, he is the legitimate successor and all..." but then he started yapping about tradition, tradition, tradition in the Assembly, and I thought about the Smith Caste woman I'd sent to the surface, and turned around and handed the crown to Bhelen.

I don't think he's a glorious crusader who'll establish a new underground utopia, no.  But it's a step away from the unjust and ossified system that Harrowmont worships, and I'll take that.

ETA: I see that you think Harrowmont could be gotten to agree to improve the lot of the casteless.  If that were true, I'd be happy to support him - but this isn't an option in the game, and I don't think it's an oversight.  Harrowmont is a compromiser, in the Assembly, with his peers.  He's also a man of principle, as you mention, and his principles include adherence to the caste system.  We don't get this happiness-and-rainbows Harrowmont-the-reformer option, and for good reason.

It seems to me that the writers constructed a choice between a good man who supports a bad system, and a bad man who wants to change it.  For his own purposes, yes; and in-game we don't know if the change will be for the better or for the worse in the long term.  There's supposed to be pros and cons on either side.

My sentiments exactly!

[Bhryaen]

Hanz54321 wrote...
I think it's funny that the OP said this is not a Bhelen vs Harrowmount thread.

It appears from the opening post that that was his intention: rather than a "Bhelen or Harrowmount- who do you prefer?" thread, it is decidedly a "Screw Bhelen and all the lame argumentation in favor of him" thread.

The OP makes such an extensive, thorough ripping into Bhelen, it's hard not to offer a "good work..." Read it all, was amused and interested throughout.

For me it primarily comes down to the fact that he otherwise kills your character (and does kill the DN slot if you don't play it). If you fall in the Deep Roads, he does kill you. So f- him. If I were playing an evil character like him, fine, he out-eviled me, but I don't (other than thievery). And to support him means you're ok being murdered- you know, in the dead type of murdered- for no other reason than that your brother finds his chances of siezing the throne for himself are best over your dead body. (No, he doesn't kill you outright, but no one expects you to survive the Deep Roads... or did he tell Duncan you'd be coming...? Nope.) I mean, there isn't an option in the DN origin story where you can help Bhelen take power with your (living) support, and it's not as if dwarf royal ascension doesn't include an Assembly vote at which you could offer such support, but Bro Bhelen was exclusively interested in removing his obstacles to power- including you... Thus it's death or f- 'im. With Bhelen around you're ultimately darkspawn/ spider food unless you fight for your life. Now I'm ok with self-sacrifice for the greater good and all, but... no freakin' way... and as the OP points out, you can't even know (without metagaming) about Bhelen succeeding in his rule better than Harrowmont when you're a DN in the origin story where you're otherwise murdered. All you know is that Bhelen murdered Trian outright and framed you. Mind you, it's Endrin who offers you a sword to survive the Deep Roads, not a secret Bhelen support... and it's Harrowmont himself who offers the sword to you.

The OP is right about the epilogue being a bit of an "ass pull" as well- and right about the "Bhelen sycophant" metagamers pretending in retrospect that the "signs" for the "ass pull" were all there in the origin and later. With all the decency of Harrowmont and connivery of Bhelen rather well-established in the information you get in Orzammar (ascension through forged documents? please...), it doesn't seem like Bhelen should do much more than establish a paranoid, bloody reign that manipulates the naive (a group which would grow smaller and smaller with each betrayal) and blood purges for those resisting. It's not clear how Harrowmont would instead do great, but he was the primary advisor to Endrin himself, the one conspicuously behind Endrin's supposedly effective rule, so... And the fact that Harrowmont apparently fails primarily on account of Bhelen supporters carrying on the same Bhelenlike bloodletting after his attempted coup... makes it a matter of "Bhelen should win, 'cause if he doesn't he's gonna ruin everything!" Not a mark of superiority, no.

For sure it doesn't feel as if the ones who wrote Orzammar's epilogue were the same ones who wrote, well, Orzammar.

That said, the one point in the OP's argument that doesn't succeed is the casteless aid Bhelen appears to offer. He brought a casteless to the very throne- albeit one of many who "graced" his royal sheets- and begins some (unspecified) social reforms that grant the casteless (unspecified) rights... in exchange for military service. heh (And can you imagine that, instead of blacks in the US having outright won the right to vote, rather they would be granted a vote only if they agreed to military service...? Now there's progress!) The caste system is what makes DAO dwarf society, well, inhuman... worse even than the treatment of elves by humans both in the alienages and when they "dare" to camp near a human settlement (in their own lands). The casteless are considered not just as "undesireables" but as literally nothings to be treated like "dusters..." just an intolerable arrangement otherwise bound to lead to oppression and criminality, as Lord Helmi (the guy you're to whom you're supposed to lie to help Bhelen take the throne) pointed out, and my DC likes to correct Duncan at the Provings when Duncan speaks as if all dwarves have a "house."

This one thing- where Bhelen appears to stand regarding the casteless vs where Harrowmont stands and what he does- will keep player support for Bhelen over Harrowmont, even given how small, ill-defined, and conditional is the improvement for the casteless with Bhelen. Yet the vague "casteless rebellion" which Bhelen the Violent Usurper is said in the epilogue to support (and would take place with or without him) would have just been seen as an engine Bhelen required for his ascension, an opportunist's moment to use chaos to his advantage, thereby orchestrating a "palace rebellion" to get one caste-happy ruler over another rather than leading a social revolution that wipes out the caste system altogether. Bhelen takes power using a lower house Vartag, making vague appeals to the casteless, and even potentially appealing to the casteless DC Warden... but this doesn't spell definitive or meaningful benefit to the casteless, even considering the overt writing of the epilogue.

And that's not to say that Harrowmont is a hero. As we metagame our way to the epilogue we see he'd use the golems to suppress the casteless rebellion and keep things exactly as crappy as they've been for 1000s of yrs. But with the type of ruler Bhelen demonstrates himself to be, why favor either heavily? The thing that the varying epilogue stories show is that- after curtailing the Blight- these things remain clear regardless of which side we choose to get troops: 1. the caste system remains an issue and comes to the fore without being toppled; 2. intrigue and coups remain the mainstay of rule; 3. your Warden's affect was ultimately only as a mention in the Shaperate... as a Warden, not a casteless. And truly, if support for the ruthless in favor of the casteless is really one's goal, we should all be unable to complete the game: Jarvia is touted as a ruthless Robin Hood, supported by many casteless because she at least uses some of the proceeds from her thuggish fleecing of the castes to feed and clothe Dust Town- or so some of the beggars tell us after she's dead- but both Bhelen and Harrowmont require us to kill her in order to proceed forward. So Jarvia for Queen of Orzammar! She'll give us the troops we need! Give her the Anvil!

For sure if anyone lauds Bhelen purely as a logistical genius or "shrewd politician:"

1. The OP's points about "deus ex machinima" are valid- the Bhelen successes from origin story to epilogue were simply not credible, the writing more involved than much else in DAO but just not convincing (we have to just take it as it is), as if the writers simply wanted to make the evil guy succeed regardless of it being convincing, perhaps just to make a sort of feint toward being "controversial" and "creative." I'm not saying it's "bad" writing, just forced.

2. Bhelen's "skill" was merely in taking power and establishing his rule, not overturning the caste system or improving society, dwarven or otherwise. If all he's good at is taking power, why not someone even more ambitious... since ambition is the only merit factor being considered. Even if the plots Bhelen hatched (forging documents is genius? lol) were genius, the dwarves of Orzammar (like mine and many NPCs I come across) deserve better actual leadership than an ambitious cutthroat, someone with integrity rather than just someone who can get the job done, whatever that job happens to be or do to people... Anyone thinking Bhelen with the Anvil is a good idea is just trollin'. If Harrowmont can misuse the Anvil's capability to put down the casteless, a Bhelen can misuse it to convert the casteless into the military he seems so intent on conscripting out of the casteless. And wouldn't that be shrewd of him? How "strong" Orzammar would be by turning those nothing casteless who should never have been born into an army of golem drones... *ahem* or how evil.

And this is what I get when I see the "gush" behavior for a Bhelen or Logain or Howe or even Vaughan (which I've also seen): such people seem to just enjoy the prospect of lauding villains to watch the fireworks and bask in the guffaws and protests... at best. At worst they may enjoy having been accorded such an opportunity to make allegorical excuses for their own actual poor behavior in life or poor role models. To me it's not that difficult: history bears out that the ruthless rulers have been the worst ones. Bhelen in particular reminds me of Stalin with his unpopularity and ascension through behind-the-scenes deals with the privileged, blood purges, and taking and consolidating power at any cost. So the DAO stories would never fare in real life, particularly not as "prettily" as they do in the game. But in the imagined world of DAO, ruthless scheming and murder can work better than leadership by decency, wisdom, and compromise. It's a fantasy world for some folks anyway. Fortunately we're not forced to endure the consequences of such fantasies enacted IRL...

A shame there aren't also people conspicuously making excuses for Howe murdering your human origin family "for Ferelden" or "for the greater good" as well, right? Clearly Howe was a "stronger" leader than Dad, right? Ah, what another grand idea...

Mind you, this wasn't meant as a character assassination for those pretending that, say, Logain's betrayal and murder of Cailan, the Wardens, all those troops and mabari, continued attempts to kill YOU, alliances with scum like slavers, the Crows, Circle Tower lunatics, and Howe... is "deep..." or strategically sound... It's just to say, I'm not impressed by these 2nd rate villains who such people take the time to laud and "squee"after, finding their cartoon existence just as 2-dimensional as to be expected. Yet whereas Logain comes loaded with a fanbase due to his alternate, more interesting hero (clearly not villain) backstory character in Gaider's out-of-game literature- and thus one can almost (but not quite) understand how people might attempt to force an uneasy continuity between that and Logain's in-game shallow antagonist role- Bhelen, on the other hand, has no such record of greatness from which to contrive a profundity where there is only a writers' arbitrary artistic liberty... and thus there remains a far more ridiculous a rationale for pretending Bhelen's a nifty, wholesome fella and the "people's choice."

Modifié par Bhryaen, 29 mars 2012 - 02:10 .

[Bhryaen]

Hanz54321 wrote...
Not quite sure why you quoted me though.  I was just pseudo-mocking how the OP thought he could dictate the terms of the discussion.  I always mock those people because they are delusional to think that threads won't take on a life of their own despite their insistence it stay within their boundaries.

Heck - if you check some of my recent threads, I responded to a thread with a "thread over" and people kept going.  A day later I mocked myself.

I'm about 50%/50% on this board between adding to the discussion and just posting humorous and bizzare observations about internet behaviour.

lol Good stuff- humorous/ bizarre observations are always appropos in a gaming forum, no?... No, only the initial comment was directed toward you, the rest just to add to, support, or rework the OP's comments generally.

It's true that putting a position "out there" tends to evoke a reaction, and I read enough of the initial pages to know he more or less kept fielding various different reactions, but I thought it worth mentioning initially that the OP's intent was for discussion regarding that particular point- or just to make that point, not discuss it. That's why your comment stood out for me at the time. I'm always tempted to go to the "Alistair squee" thread and mention how Alistair literally forces himself on your girl char with a grappling kiss at some point without provocation (I was glaring, wanting her to cast Frost on him or take out that mysterious dagger all Wardens seem to have behind their back) and then acts the ass with drastically lowered approval if you tell him to stop... even if it was just a matter of "not yet..." Irritates me... But the intent of that thread is rather explicitly to "squee," so it just seems needlessly disruptive for me to post there. Instead I could create an "Alistair's an Ass" thread... which probably wouldn't be as popular... And maybe I'm just jealous anyway. This thread in particular, however, seems to be intended to complain about villains- specifically Bhelen- and the absurd rationales people seriously go out of their way to concoct in order to explain away the villainy as if the only or even the best alternative that villain faced. So- especially since the OP wrote so much on the subject... I felt like joining in.


And don't get me wrong- the world isn't black-and-white and it's important to retain at least partially an impassive sense of ultimate consequences (whether known metagamingly or not), incorporating pragmatism where meaningful- and it's a strong story that can get you genuinely wondering at the "right" decision between two lesser evils, compelled to make such a choice. But to make a habit of ignoring ginormous character flaws and outright brutality in favor of pretentious claims about effective leadership... misses the point entirely. Apologism for villainy isn't the solution... and doesn't cut the mustard- not even a little. It's important to be able to recognize that dwarven society in DAO is, despite how otherwise colorful, involved, extensive, fleshed out, and, well, fun it does happen to be, nevertheless also is miserably flawed, that no choice you make will "fix" it, and that no matter how you proceed, the casteless will be hurt. The epilogue writers didn't want a happy ending for dwarves, it seems, or simply didn't figure out how to deliver one other than through a limited and rather jaded Bhelen contrivance... and given the ultimate dismissal of dwarves from DA2, this isn't really a surprise.

The lesson in history is that, when a nation or people is under pressure from some great event- say a war, disaster, or economic depression- usually the chance to change things at that point is reduced because the imperative is on survival itself (that is, with a genuine external invasion, not vague "terror" claims). With the blight in DAO there's no way to do anything other than get Orzammar back on its feet one way or another so as get them in fighting condition to defeat the darkspawn and archdemon. The real work on Orzammar would come after the victory- particularly immediately after- but by then we're long-since whisked away as Wardens.

I'd like to play an Aeducan who thwarts Bhelen's smarmy attempts on my life and freedom, gains the Assembly vote to become King over big brother Trian, jails 'em both indefinitely if necessary (even in a special royal holding cell), sends troops to fight the blight, and then in peacetime both establishes better trade with the surface and secretly and overtly undermines the caste system- which is a paper tiger kept in place only by agreement anyway... Ahh, but that's me, dwarf noble dreamer... My "commoner" Brosca would just as soon join a revolution regardless of consequence than accept a pittance of rights from smiths and warriors and, yes, nobles whining about losing their privileges to "people like me..."

Kruklya: "There, Mom. We just overturned the monarchy and caste system. We're officially people now: no more 'purity' nugsplatter- can you believe it?! Broscas are even the same as Aeducans by law! The Shaperate is taking our names down right now if you want to go up there with me to sign up for-"
Kalah: "Well, you and Rica can go get your names in lights after all the stunts you've been pullin', but those Shapers don't wanna know about us. They probably just toss our information to the lava soon as they get the chance!"
Kruklya: "Mom... 'they' are us. The formerly casteless are involved in Shaping now..."
Kalah: "Oh, so they're all high and mighty Shapers too now, huh? They couldn't give a bronto's ass all those chimneys I cleaned, and- oh, my back-"
Kruklya: "Nevermind..."
Kalah: "Make yourself really useful and gimme a drink!"

Modifié par Bhryaen, 31 mars 2012 - 05:59 .

[Uvvalon]

Looking at this thread, at first I didn't like the argument. I also didn't believe so many would be favouring Bhelen in these forums. But after looking at the debate, I really only have a few things to say.

I am totally with the OP. Why - 
When we read about the Golden Age that supposedly took place after the beginning of Bhelen's rule - like the OP says, this is nothing but propaganda. And Bioware is practically leading people on. They say what is propagated as the "official story"... and as a social experiment they can see how many people are willing to side with the winners, bare any (!) hints as to how this could be a plausible development. Bhelen probably instigated a totalitarian regime, where any dissent is violently brought down, where you have a few chosen who benefit, and he might even have recruited a few brown shirts from the lower caste to intimidate the public.
The dwarfs have their traditions. I love it how people are willing to completely ignore how a different culture functions, and have their arrogant believe that everything should change the way they are used to how things should be.

Harrowmont is so immensely the only possible fair choice for a ruler, and it is astounding and frightening how the lot in this forum is so easily manipulated into believeing an "official verison" of the story, and willing to deny all the evidence in front of their eyes. A lot also probably believe Bhelen is the "intelligent" choice, and this is how a "mature" plot is formed. This is really nothing but a bad joke. Cudos to the OP, well done in exposing this.

[Wereparrot]

Wulfram wrote...

I also find it difficult to reconcile the epilogue's genius reformer Bhelen with what we see in the game.
Since Bioware seem happy to ignore the epilogues, I will do the same.

So did I. Nevertheless, I went for Bhelen for the sake of strength and stability. Harrowmont, though kindly, would no doubt be a walkover.

[ShadowLordXII]

Here's my question: Why wasn't an option for the dwarven noble to become king/queen given?

Theoretical Scenario: Since the Assembly is shown not to question that you met a Paragon, had that paragon forge a crown and then said that the crown goes to whoever you chose as rule of Orzammar, why not say for yourself?

This scenario seems either absurd, cliche or fanservicy, but hear me out:

1) You are a Grey Warden, the dwarves hold Grey Wardens in high honor and it's apparently just as equal of an honor for a dwarf to join them in their fight against the darkspawn. So for a Dwarven Noble to return as a Grey Warden and fight to stabilize Orzammar either as redemption for murdering his brother or in spite of being wrongfully accused will give him a personage of selflessness and duty.

2) It was neither Bhelen nor Harrowmont who wiped out Jarvia and the Carta, but the Dwarven Noble. Theoretically, what would either lord be able to do if the DN stated that he acted alone to defeat the Carta? They don't have any proof to counter him and trying to lie about it would be a bad idea since the city's already divided on the two of them.

3) The third option is often the most favorable. It's simple symantics, the people are likely tired of arguing between Harrowmont and Bhelen, each with their own strengths and weaknesses with matching costs and benefits for the people. A DN would theoretically be a good middle ground for most of the people of Orzammar and the assembly. He could be lax on some of the more imposing rules of Dwarven society when necessary (possible reforms for the casteless, trade with the surface, more willing to work with outside forces) and still retain a degree of honor (wouldn't be an unreasonable jerk to his subjects, commit murder of family and family of rivals).

4) Endrin Aeducan's letter, this authentic letter clearly spells out that Endrin didn't want his son/daughter to be exiled, knew that Bhelen had schemed up the situation with Triam, and only allowed it because he was afraid of the dishonor on his house. He then says that wherever the DN is, the king is proud of him. Endrin was well-regarded amongst the dwarven people, so a last letter from a respected king would be able to clear up any doubts about the DN's legitimatcy as a possible candidate for the throne.

5) By this point, the DN has at the very least, slain the Carta, traversed the Deep Roads through areas that the darkspawn have held for hundreds of years, earned the respect of the Legion of the Dead, found a long lost Branka, found a longer lost Cariden, found the equally lost Anvil of the Void and possibly preserved it, and returns to Orzammar carrying a crown forged with skill undoubtably of Paragon hands.

6) Bhelen is too untrustworthy and there is proof of it, apart from Raonar's excellent analysis of how Bhelen fails, proof that he forged land deeds and the actual documents that you can show to the dwarven archiver, Endrin's letter, and his overall attitude, claiming the palace as his on hereditary grounds rather than his own merit, if he had any merit.

7) Harrowmont is probably a great man, a good lord and holds a great deal of honor. But he's also pretty old and while compromise is necessary, he tends to bend his knee a bit too much for someone whose supposed to be leading a charge. True, a good king heeds sound wisdom from his subjects and advisors, but he has to have authority and strength to back his own decisions and laws. Harrowmont just isn't kingly-material, in fact the only reason that he was trying to become king was to keep Bhelen from receiving the throne. He also yields very quickly to Bhelen if you select him as king. Maybe attacking Bhelen wouldn't be great, but he should have stood firmly and stood more opposed to the decision while retaining his noble statue.

8) Every other Origin has a similar opportunity to rise from the rags: the HN can become King or a Teryn; the CE can become a bann; the DE can create a new kingdom for the Dalish; the Circle Mage can earn autonomy for the Circle Mages in Ferelden; the DC can become a Paragon. Not to mention how all Origins end up as Arls of Amaranthine in addition to their other boons.

If the Human Noble can become king, then why can't the Dwarven Noble? The Human Noble had just as bad of circumstances as the Dwarven Noble if not worse. The HN's whole family was murdered and then slandered by Howe right before Loghain kills the current king and declares you and your order traitors while you're trying to stop the Blight. That's a pretty huge hill to climb.

The DN just has to deal with a younger manipulative brother and his cult of popularity. Most of the city already either tolerates the DN; respects his position as a Grey Warden or continues to respect him as the lord that he used to be. The DN wouldn't really have to try as hard, especially since Endrin was already considering the DN as his official heir and that letter you find confirms that it was never revoked.

Opportunity for future controversy: Being a Grey Warden and a Dwarven King would be problematic, especially since wardens are supposed to be politically neutral. Though the DN could just pull an Alistair and become king while being willing to come out of the "reserves" when a severe darkspawn threat or blight emerges.

Then there's the problem of not being able to produce an heir. Assuming that the DN didn't already father a son, it's stated that Wardens have difficulty having children after their joining. For a King, this is a serious problem. Potential rivals could easily murder the DN's child and/or Bhelen's son with Rica and then there goes the line of Aeducan once you're killed or called into the Deep Roads.

Just my take on the whole situation.

[WraithTDK]

OldMan91 wrote...

Not to go off-topic, but are you expecting people who usually only come to the forums as a pastime to read all of that? You've just written 10 pages worth (in Word, font 10) of ranting against:

- The people who made an in-game choice about which Dwarven noble will be the next king in a videogame.

- The developers who wanted to make this specific decision a controversial one.

- The limits of the in-game engine, story-telling, choice and consequences in an RPG.

I understand if you feel strongly about it. Many do, but you could have written an academic paper with all of this time and energy.

This. Regarding the OP; I don't usually "tl;dr" but come on...

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

WraithTDK wrote...

OldMan91 wrote...

Not to go off-topic, but are you expecting people who usually only come to the forums as a pastime to read all of that? You've just written 10 pages worth (in Word, font 10) of ranting against:

- The people who made an in-game choice about which Dwarven noble will be the next king in a videogame.

- The developers who wanted to make this specific decision a controversial one.

- The limits of the in-game engine, story-telling, choice and consequences in an RPG.

I understand if you feel strongly about it. Many do, but you could have written an academic paper with all of this time and energy.

This. Regarding the OP; I don't usually "tl;dr" but come on...

You think the original post is bad? I just skimmed the entire thread.

Pain. Ow. My head.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 09 août 2012 - 07:43 .

[tklivory]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

You think the original post is bad? I just skimmed the entire thread.

Pain. Ow. My head.

Well, at least now your avatar is honestly representing how you feel. 

[mousestalker]

To recap an earlier position, the single best way to decide on the dwarven king is the principle of simplicity.

When you first meet the proving master states that he will just call you warden as he can not handle your real name. At least one dwarf therefore has difficulty with names. A dwarven king must command respect and must be known to his subjects. Harrowmount has three syllables. Bhelen only has two.

Bhelen is therefore the better king. His name is easier to pronounce and therefore to remember.

Modifié par mousestalker, 13 août 2012 - 06:46 .