211 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Pyral Harrowmont
Bhelen Aeducan

Same number of syllables. And Bhelen has a silent h to throw you off. And Aeducan is a minefield - EE du can? ay duke CAN? aye DUCK en?

So Harrowmont is clearly the better choice

[Fiacre]

But the dwarves have had generations to get used to Aeducan and learn how to pronounce it. They might need generations again to get used to Aeducan. So it's still better to keep the name they're familiar with.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Choosing based off that makes no sense. They're both high ranking noble families: every single noble in Orzammar knows how to pronounce both Aeducan and Harrowmont.

(Unless you crown Bhelen. Then he kills all the Harrowmonts, and nobody in Orzammar ever has to pronounce his name again. Unless Hawke saves Pyral's nephew, which would just be uncalled-for.)

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 12 août 2012 - 11:57 .

[TEWR]

ShadowlordXII wrote...

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

I've asked it, argued it, come up with reasons why it should've happened -- that mirrored your post in a few areas --, and many other things and there really is no reason why the option wasn't present. Thus, it makes A Paragon of Her Kind mediocre when playing a politically savvy DN, unless you pull a KoP style Aeducan.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 18 août 2012 - 06:12 .

[ShadowLordXII]

What's a KOP style Aeducan?

A Paragon of Her Kind honestly is the weakest of the game's story arcs. It essentially forces you to take the eviler choice for a "better outcome."

If I can persuade an Insane Branka into destroying the Anvil herself after everything she's sacrificed to get it, why can't I persuade Cariden to preserve the Anvil and save the Dwarven kingdoms? It would require a High Persuasion Check, but why not tell Cariden about the dying state of the Dwarven thaigs since he became a golem and convince him that the Anvil is necessary to save his own people? Maybe make a deal to only allow a certain amount of golems to be created and only from volunteers?

Sure the DN can become a Paragon which is the equivalent of a King, but there's literally nothing stopping the DN from declaring that the Paragon (Branka or Cariden) gave them the crown to become Orzammar's next King/Queen and by Dwarven law, nothing would be able to stop them.

Especially if you were a sneaky DN who kept those forged land contracts that Vartag gave him as proof against Bhelen's trustworthiness and planted evidence against Harrowmont in Jarvia's hideout. All it takes is a shadow of a doubt...

[KnightofPhoenix]

A "KoP syle Aeducan" (named after me) is an Aeducan that puts Bhelen on the throne of Orzammar and puts a weak unhardened Alistair on the Ferelden throne with him / her as chancellor. Essentially the Aeducans end up ruling Orzammar and Ferelden.

An illustration (that's my dwarf, Dain Aeducan)



http://jenn-y.devian...ery:jenn-y&qo=0

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 03 septembre 2012 - 10:45 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Does being a hardened one's mistress count? Because hardened or not, he still lets the Warden make the decisions, probably doubly so if she can threaten to put on a chastity belt.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 04 septembre 2012 - 09:35 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Well it wouldn't be called "KoP style" cause I didn't do it haha, but yea it could work as well.

[TEWR]

ShadowLordXII wrote...

Sure the DN can become a Paragon which is the equivalent of a King, but there's literally nothing stopping the DN from declaring that the Paragon (Branka or Cariden) gave them the crown to become Orzammar's next King/Queen and by Dwarven law, nothing would be able to stop them.

I know! It's seriously somewhat mind-boggling how Bioware couldn't even recognize that the politics they created for Orzammar would allow a Dwarf Noble to take the throne. The entire lore/history/culture of Orzammar supports the option, but there is nothing that would support it not being there.

Then when you remember this is Bioware we're talking about -- whose idea of integrating politics into the story is rather... bad -- then it just ceases to be mind-boggling. But it becomes doubly infuriating.

See here for more information.

[Fiacre]

Would the other dwarves accept it though? We know Bhelen and his allies won't accept it if the Paragon supposedly chose Harrowmont -- if the DN as an exile who's possibly still not cleansed of the accusations of killing Trian (I think you only get evidence that Bhelen used the Carta to kill Trian if you doublecross him?) -- if he didn't actually kill him -- maybe even Harrowmont's supporters would turn on him and oppose that. They're not all absolutely loyal, after all, I doubt Helmi and Dace were the only ones he simply bought; and if Bhelen has him executed, none of them stand up for him, so I'm not sure they'd listen to him if he supported you.

[TEWR]

A few Dwarven nobles comment that many are deeply regretting that the Dwarf Noble was exiled and that Bhelen is now in the running for the throne. I believe the Helmi daughter you meet in the Commons says as much when you first arrive, if you say "At one point, I was considered for the throne" or something like that.

Remember, the DN was much loved in the origin story. If news and evidence that he didn't kill Trian was brought to light, it would rekindle the favor that he lost when people did believe that.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 09 septembre 2012 - 05:05 .

[Fiacre]

What if that evidence is never found? Or is it always when you're a DN who didn't kill Trian?

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Remember, the DN was much loved in the origin story.

Bhelen turned the assembly against the DN long before Trian's death, which doesn't really matter it's simply a justification. The Deshyrs turned on the DN most likely because of favors and promises from Bhelen and / or the hope that they could control a seemingly weaker Aeducan (lol). 

[TEWR]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Bhelen turned the assembly against the DN long before Trian's death, which doesn't really matter it's simply a justification. The Deshyrs turned on the DN most likely because of favors and promises from Bhelen and / or the hope that they could control a seemingly weaker Aeducan (lol). 

Ah, that's right. I remember Gorim saying that half of the Assembly was ready to turn against the DN and completely disregard tradition, and Gorim believes that Bhelen was making back-room deals for weeks if not months.

That said, Harrowmont and Gorim state that other parts of the Deshyrs are gathering together -- though not quickly enough -- to oppose Bhelen. So it wasn't a universal thing.

Though you have to wonder how the DN would've failed to pick up on things like Bhelen going through with that, as I'm sure the DN had his own network of people to rely on -- evident if you order Bruntin Vollney assassinated, as Gorim gives the orders to other people.

I'd imagine it's a bit of both, coupled with some earnestly believing the DN did kill Trian. Some were in Bhelen's pocket, others thought since he wasn't really part of the political scene he could be a puppet king, and others may have been duped.

Still, come A Paragon of Her Kind and many nobles are regretting that decision -- whether they were part of it or not -- and are backing Harrowmont, simply because he's opposed to Bhelen and was Endrin's choice for successor. But, there's nothing stopping Harrowmont and his supporters from supporting the DN as a new candidate in the running, since as I've said they regret exiling the DN.

Fiacre wrote...

What if that evidence is never found? Or is it always when you're a DN who didn't kill Trian?

It exists always if you didn't kill Trian -- Jarvia probably wanted to keep it as leverage on Bhelen -- but is only obtainable if you betray Bhelen -- which seems a bit absurd and like poor writing if you're a DN.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 10 septembre 2012 - 04:52 .

[CoGDork]

 I know this is a serious necro, and I'm a huge lurker, but I just read this thread now (saw the link in a slightly related google search), and felt I had to weigh in.
KoP, Raonar, YOU ARE BOTH RIGHT.
Raonar is IMO correct in the fact that Bhelen is a bastard. He is wrong, however, in his saying that Bhelen is incompetent and that Harrowmont is better (again, IMO).
KoP is correct in that, in the long term, Bhelen is the better choice for Orzammar's future, that he is more competent than Harrowmont, and that his reforms are needed. It's just that Bhelen is doing the right things for selfish reasons--what's "right" just happens to be what suits his purposes. Fortunately, from the way I see it, since the reforms help Orzammar anyway, he won't throw them away for a more bastard-ish plan anytime soon. Hopefully he kicks it before that changes, but that's a long way off.
What I took from the game--and from this thread--is that Good people do not always have positive effects on their societies, and even evil people with evil intentions can end up helping things in the long run. Does that make Bhelen's morals any more acceptable? No. He's still a bastard. But in purely practical terms, he's still Orzammar's best hope for survival.
Basically, in troper-ese (what Raonar seems to speak--represent, man), it's the Godzilla Threshold. The situation in Orzammar is so ****ty that even putting a tyrant on the throne is better than having someone who, despite best intentions, would screw things up worse.

[Ulmaric]

Very well written thread, took me quite a while to read the whole thing but it was worth it. I agree with the OP on many levels with the exception of some of his speculations on the epilogues. Even if the outcome is "better" for Behlen I think in the long run Harrowmont is still the better option.

I also believe that relations with the surface can still improve after his death and that internally Harrowmont was still the better option.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

ChainsawNinjaZX wrote...

Very well written thread, took me quite a while to read the whole thing but it was worth it. I agree with the OP on many levels with the exception of some of his speculations on the epilogues. Even if the outcome is "better" for Behlen I think in the long run Harrowmont is still the better option.

I also believe that relations with the surface can still improve after his death and that internally Harrowmont was still the better option.

I'm lost. How do you figure that?

[TEWR]

Yeah Harrowmont is never the better option. Perhaps if the Dwarves were at peace, maybe. But they're in war all the time against the Darkspawn -- Blight or no -- and they need a unified front.

Harrowmont slaughters the casteless because they're "not people" when they could bolster Orzammar's military strength. He isolates Orzammar even further, hoping that "Dwarven prowess" would help them win against the Darkspawn. Trade with the Dwarves goes down to the bare minimum under him.

Harrowmont is never the better option.

[Dabrikishaw]

Does Raonar even come here anymore? this is a year old thread.

Modifié par Dabrikishaw, 18 novembre 2012 - 05:00 .

[Trolldrool]

I've gone through quite a lot of dwarven characters, some whom have been deleted because they never went anywhere, or because I realized they were just too similar to the dwarves I had before.

My first DN sided with Harrowmount because he had seen Bhelen's ruthless and scheming nature and wanted vengeance for Trian's death in the conspiracy and on the belief that Bhelen would turn Orzammar into an oppressive dictatorship. He admired Harrowmount for his honour and honesty and believed that Harrowmount intended to govern Orzammar with the same fairness reliability as the DN's father before his death.

My second DN was a spoiled brat who treated everyone as if they were beneath her and failed to see Bhelen's plotting (even if I obviously did as the player) due to her arrogant belief that she knew how the intricate game of cloak and daggers worked in the dwarven society. After spending time on the surface, she came to realize what the weak and the outcast were capable of and began to reflect on her own past views on the casteless in Orzammar and how her home might benefit if they were given more rights. This lead her to choose Bhelen. She didn't confuse him for a benevolent reformist who saw the casteless as anything more than a resource, but she came to the conclusion that Harrowmount was too conservative to even notice the casteless or their worth.

I'm currently playing a dwarf noble who sided with Bhelen for no other reason than because he admired the skill with which Bhelen executed his plot. He understands why Bhelen perceived his popularity as a potential threat and doesn't blame him for acting on it. In fact, he was planning to do the same, only two years later. He is, naturally, not very excited that Trian had to be caught in the middle of the conspiracy, but all in all he believes Bhelen's ability to bribe, threaten and cheat his way through the hierarchy proves that he knows how the dwarven system works and that Orzammar will benefit from having a king who can mimic the cunning of their ancestral predeccessors.

And that's pretty much what I like about Origins. It allows me to make choices based on the personality I envision for the characters I create. Sometimes they make sense, sometimes they're questionable and sometimes they're downright ridiculous. I'm not forced to act upon my own feelings. In my own opinion, I find Loghain has redeemable qualities. My HN characters almost never does.

Who do I think is the better dwarf? I am inclined to like Bhelen, predictably, only because he is willing to provide reforms that will benefit the casteless. He is in no way a generous, benevolent revolutionary who wants to free the facebrands from oppression. He is an oppurtunist who is willing to look past conservative tradition to exploit a resource that will serve his own ambitions. In this case, the exploitation means more benefits for the minio-ehem, casteless. Of course, Orzammar might not be ready for all these sudden changes and it could turn out that the progression actually does more unintended harm than good, but for now we have no sources that indicate this.

As for how the epilogue says that Orzammar is divided on whether or not he is a tyrant or a progressive ruler, I think it's pretty safe to assume that the ones who call him a tyrant are the conservatives in the warrior and noble caste who feel his changes are diminishing the ancestors and their legacy. One man's liberator is another man's terrorist. But then again, I could be horribly mistaken.

[ZehnWaters]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Yeah Harrowmont is never the better option. Perhaps if the Dwarves were at peace, maybe. But they're in war all the time against the Darkspawn -- Blight or no -- and they need a unified front.

Harrowmont slaughters the casteless because they're "not people" when they could bolster Orzammar's military strength. He isolates Orzammar even further, hoping that "Dwarven prowess" would help them win against the Darkspawn. Trade with the Dwarves goes down to the bare minimum under him.

Harrowmont is never the better option.

How do you know he doesn't see them as people?  He kills them in one of the endings.  Do you honestly thing Bhelen would have done differently?  His spat with Branka indicates otherwise.  And the only listed reason for the isolation is that they were the only laws he *could* pass.  We have no idea what other laws he may have tried to pass. 

I agree with the OP; the only reason Bhelen somehow got a good ending is because of the writers and not any logical reasoning.  This is why in my head-canon (where all 6 Wardens are recruited) after becoming a Paragon, the DC forces reforms.

Modifié par ZehnWaters, 10 janvier 2013 - 10:29 .

[BlazingSpeed]

I can't believe that I wasted 10 minutes reading this thing seriously....

[Keita1990]

My first character was a ND, since then i can't stop the urge to kill him in all of my other plays

[fgalkin]

Dwarven society is utterly evil. I simply could not stomach Harrowmont blathering on about honor, while treating a large segment of his own population as unpeople. It's hypocricy of the highest order, and just because Harrowmount is blinded by centuries of tradition and doesn't realize this does not make it less so.

Bhelen might be a despicable worm with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the face, but his powerbase lies with those at the bottom of the Dwarven society, not with the highborn parasites preying on it. If he purges the nobles from the military and replaces them with the casteless, that alone would be a massive improvement in the lot of the majority of Orzammar's people. Yes, he intends to use them as cannon fodder, and yes, he treats them with as much contempt as Harrowmount. He still gives them a way back into dwarven society that they didn't have before. His reasons for doing this are unimportant- plenty of leaders who were utter scum have still ended up helping their people for selfish reasons.

Just one visit to Dust Town had convinced me to pick Bhelen over Harrowmount every time.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Modifié par fgalkin, 30 janvier 2013 - 06:44 .

[jpbreon]

I was not surprised, at all, to see the massive Bhelen worship. I'll tell you why: Bhelen represents the real world impetuses that drive Western cultures to remold and remake foreign cultures with differing and often opposing values systems. If you doubt this, just read some of the replies to this thread where people list their reasoning.

In short, Bhelen is DAO's version of the Shah of Iran.

His motivations don't matter. That he is ruthless, ego-maniacal, paranoid, and authoritarian are immaterial - he will ply Orzammar's culture to more resemble the foreigner's culture, thereby serving the goals and interest of the foreigners themselves. A little thought experiment makes this obvious.

Bhelen allows upward class movement. This results in more warriors, more miners, more merchants. Would any foreign group have a vested interest in this? Would the Grey Wardens like more dwarven warriors in the Deep Roads? Would the Chantry and Circle like a greater supply of lyrium because of more miners? Would the human nations like Orzammar's market opened up more to facilitate trade?

Viewed this way, Bhelen makes sense in the real world's paradigm, When an Arabic nation's government topples, the next leader is almost always a sympathetic figure, Western educated, liberal - his faults are pushed from view or outright ignored. The members of that culture who decry this action are destroyed, and resentment of the usurper and his backers increases to the point that an even more reactionary government comes into power - Iran is the poster child for this.

Anyway. I always made sure to save the Anvil if I was making a Bhelen play through, so there was some poetic justice as he was rebuffed by Branka.