155 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarah1281]

The Dalish  probably would've had their werewolf problem so Duncan could've just let that one pass.

Only one clan was having werewolf problems and not even the one Duncan encountered during the Dalish origin.

Hanz54321 wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

According to the devs, the poison wasn't supposed to kill Eamon only incapacitate him. If Jowan weren't so incompetent he wouldn't have been caught. I can see Loghain poisoning Eamon before the battle without intending to desert. He probably would have called a Landsmeet to get Cailan removed from power. And if you think about it, if he had allied with Howe to do this that would explain why Howe felt secure killing the Couslands. Loghain didn't have to know that was what Howe would do if he just asked him to keep the Couslands out of the way (he himself, again, wasn't planning on killing Eamon) and that would leave Cailan with no choice but to either start listening to Loghain again or to have to fight to keep his crown without his strongest supporters.

Ah crap - you said you don't think he intended to desert.

Well, my point of contention still stands because he did intend to desert.  He knew about the Darkspawn in the Tower of Ishal.  He intended for the beacon to never be lit, and once the Wardens were over run he would soundthe retreat.

I guess then he could lie to Cailan and chalk it up as a mistake.  That might fool the kid long enough to get Cailan to agree with Loghain's plan.  But then I still don't know what Loghain was thinking by poisoining Eamon.

I'm gettin tired I gotta go to bed.

It's Word of God that Loghain did not make the final decision to desert until the Beacon was lit although he probably did consider it because I really an't imagine Loghain being that impulsive as to be fully committed to charging and then just change his mind at the last minute. If Cailan survived and, say, the loss of Ferelden's army could be blamed solely on his glory-seeking then that would strengthen Loghain's position of wanting to depose him and it's the only explanation I can see for why Loghain is so openly doubtful and 'the King is being foolish and reckless' which you'd think a man who'd been Teyrn for thirty years would know better than to do. He even makes the case for Cailan being a moron when he meets with the random GW recruit.

Of course, once Lohain did retreat and the King was dead his plan had to be scrapped and he took over the regency which caused problems but much less than had Cailan's supporters still been around.

[Sarah1281]

Hanz54321 wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...


It's Word of God that Loghain did not make the final decision to desert until the Beacon was lit

I believe you.  God wrote a giant plothole into the storyline then.

But that's fine - any story can be picked apart if one tries hard enough.

I'm not sure if that is a plot-hole, though. It leave room for Loghain to do his plotting and removing Cailan supporters (he said remove, not kill Howe) and makes sense of why he keeps trying to get people to see Cailan as an immature chid instead of the five-year ruler and how, once he did retreat, his plans started crumbling and a civil war started because he had to start improvising.

[phaonica]

Sarah1281 wrote...

Hanz54321 wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...


It's Word of God that Loghain did not make the final decision to desert until the Beacon was lit

I believe you.  God wrote a giant plothole into the storyline then.

But that's fine - any story can be picked apart if one tries hard enough.

I'm not sure if that is a plot-hole, though. It leave room for Loghain to do his plotting and removing Cailan supporters (he said remove, not kill Howe) and makes sense of why he keeps trying to get people to see Cailan as an immature chid instead of the five-year ruler and how, once he did retreat, his plans started crumbling and a civil war started because he had to start improvising.

I don't think it's a plot hole either. Before going to Ostagar, Loghain started making plans for a strategic retreat, if it was needed, that included retreating with Cailan. Loghain tried to temporarily remove Cailan's supporters because he knew that Cailan would be furious about retreating, even strategically. During Ostagar, however, the plan changed because Cailan decided to include the Orlesians, and a strategic retreat turned into a political one.

Edit: or probably better said, the retreat became a combination of political and strategic.

Modifié par phaonica, 23 mai 2010 - 07:14 .

[Tirigon]

We have to remember that a strategic retreat at Ostagar is dumb, too. Ostagar is way better to defend than every other town / castle in Ferelden, or at least more so than those we can visit in the game.

[phaonica]

Tirigon wrote...

We have to remember that a strategic retreat at Ostagar is dumb, too. Ostagar is way better to defend than every other town / castle in Ferelden, or at least more so than those we can visit in the game.

Whether or not it is dumb is a different argument than whether or not it is a plot hole, though.

[Sarah1281]

If they were going to have a strategic retreat it would have been from lack of troops and not 'oh, we can't defend this fortress even had we twice as many men.'

[Tirigon]

phaonica wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

We have to remember that a strategic retreat at Ostagar is dumb, too. Ostagar is way better to defend than every other town / castle in Ferelden, or at least more so than those we can visit in the game.

Whether or not it is dumb is a different argument than whether or not it is a plot hole, though.

Well, but Loghain being dumb is a plothole in itself as he´s considered to be the best general ever.


I must say, I like the young Loghain in Stolen Throne far better.

[Verly]

i do think Duncan is one of the most likable characters in the game ( I almost typed lickable..hmmm...) especially in the DC origin. .he seems to be the only person ever that stood up for him/her.

[phaonica]

Tirigon wrote...

phaonica wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

We have to remember that a strategic retreat at Ostagar is dumb, too. Ostagar is way better to defend than every other town / castle in Ferelden, or at least more so than those we can visit in the game.

Whether or not it is dumb is a different argument than whether or not it is a plot hole, though.

Well, but Loghain being dumb is a plothole in itself as he´s considered to be the best general ever.


I must say, I like the young Loghain in Stolen Throne far better.

I suppose if you think someone is being OOC, then it could be considered a plot hole, so I do see that point.

I don't think it's OOC because I don't believe it's strategically dumb to take the possible necessity of retreat into consideration, or to be completely fair I don't personally know enough about war strategy to think I know better, so I don't see it as an OOC move.

[Tirigon]

phaonica wrote...


I don't think it's OOC because I don't believe it's strategically dumb to take the possible necessity of retreat into consideration, or to be completely fair I don't personally know enough about war strategy to think I know better, so I don't see it as an OOC move.

It doesn´t take a strategic genius to see that it´s better to defend a strong bulwark like Ostagar and additionally protect the lands behind than to let your enemy roam freely across the land and fight them in a civil city.

[Sarah1281]

Verly wrote...

i do think Duncan is one of the most likable characters in the game ( I almost typed lickable..hmmm...) especially in the DC origin. .he seems to be the only person ever that stood up for him/her.

Other than Rica, of course, who raised them and even saved the DCF from being a NH but Duncan could do more.

[Costin_Razvan]

It doesn´t take a strategic genius to see that it´s better to defend a strong bulwark like Ostagar and additionally protect the lands behind than to let your enemy roam freely across the land and fight them in a civil city.

Sometimes you don't have a choice other then death. There was simply no way to win at Ostagar that night with their current troops. If there is anyone to blame for their lack of numbers, it's Cailan.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 24 mai 2010 - 03:37 .

[phaonica]

Edit: deleted. not hijacking another thread

Modifié par phaonica, 24 mai 2010 - 03:59 .

[Tirigon]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

It doesn´t take a strategic genius to see that it´s better to defend a strong bulwark like Ostagar and additionally protect the lands behind than to let your enemy roam freely across the land and fight them in a civil city.

Sometimes you don't have a choice other then death. There was simply no way to win at Ostagar that night with their current troops. If there is anyone to blame for their lack of numbers, it's Cailan.

That might be or not; to be honest, I tire of discussing this. However, I think it´s a foolish assumption that retreating increases their chances.

First, they give up the best defensive position available; second, the Darkspawn´s strength lies in their ridiculously rapid rate of procreation, the longer the battle is delayed the more, and thus stronger they will be; this is in fact the reason why Cailan doesn´t want to wait for reinforcements.

If Ostagar was truly unwinnable, that only means that the defeat in every other, later fought battle will be even worse.

[Emerald Melios]

Tirigon wrote...

phaonica wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

We have to remember that a strategic retreat at Ostagar is dumb, too. Ostagar is way better to defend than every other town / castle in Ferelden, or at least more so than those we can visit in the game.

Whether or not it is dumb is a different argument than whether or not it is a plot hole, though.

Well, but Loghain being dumb is a plothole in itself as he´s considered to be the best general ever.


I must say, I like the young Loghain in Stolen Throne far better.

At least the Warden & Morrigan point out his...inadequecies.

[Addai]

Hanz54321 wrote...

old book wrote...

. He was planning to get Cailan under control . . .

And there's the plot hole I was talking about.

Get him under control how?  I'm not directing that at you, OldBook.  I'm just saying in general - what would Loghain had done if Cailan elected to stay out of the fighting?  As soon as Loghain ordered the retreat Cailan would've had a fit and contacted his Uncle Eamon.  Cailan would've been told that Eamon was poisoned and that the Redcliffe Knights had caught a Maleficar sent by Loghain  . . . DOH!  Treason.

Or lets say Eamon died of the poison as expected and the Desire Demon never possessed Connor.  So Cailan is told Eamon is dead and he contacts his other Uncle Teagan and tells him to rally the bannorn, Loghain deserted at Ostagar, and Fereldan needs to see Loghain hang for . . . treason.

I mean really . . . how did Loghain think he  was going to get Cailan under control after Ostagar?  Lock him up?  That was Howe's answer when Anora caught on - but I don't think Loghain knew about that.

Sooner or later Loghain was going to have to kill Cailan or swing from the gallows.  I see no way around it.

(Husband posting)

I've wondered the exact same thing!

    It's my guess he was going to handle him exactly like he did Anora, keep him under lock and key.     Since Anora was running things, and later in game for a short time is willing to go along with being his puppet, I think it could end up the same way.    (Because while Cailan is lawful king he has abdicated most of his role to Anora.   Not to mention the people see her more as the true leader).

Modifié par Addai67, 28 mai 2010 - 07:53 .

[Addai]

Tirigon wrote...

Hanz54321 wrote...

But back to Duncan - I really did like him as a sort of "good" Loghain. But somebody made a good point I never thought of: he wasn't the best military strategist. I mean if the battle at Ostagar was a lost cause, he could've told Cailan to pound sand and come up with a more battle ready army. Sure he'd be angering his only supporter, but the Wardens would've lived to fight at a more appropriate time.

The important word here is IF. I really do not think the battle was unwinnable. Ostagar is a bulwark that can easily hold of way bigger armies than the defender´s.
I mean, the Fereldans defeated the Blight at Denerim - there, too, they were outnumbered 3 to 1, if not more, and they had worse territory AND the Archdemon in person killed many of them.
As the Fereldans won this battle it seems downright ridiculous to me to say Ostagar was unwinnable. After all, the Darkspawn´s power had grown since Ostagar, while Ferelden lost many.

(husband)


  

Yes but the player characters are x4 levels higher at Denerim that they were at Ostagar!   

I chalk it up to the "Conservation of Ninjitsu".   (The 3 to 1 ratio, I think was just an estimate made way back at the battle at the front gates.   Once you get further into the Battle like at the Palace, Fort Drakon, and the Arch Demon itself it seems like the ratio goes up quite a bit from that).

 tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ConservationOfNinjutsu

Modifié par Addai67, 28 mai 2010 - 08:16 .

[Addai]

(Sorry for the Double post)

Modifié par Addai67, 28 mai 2010 - 08:09 .

[Lord Gremlin]

When I started as a HNF my PC was quite hostile to Duncan. She forced her to join the Wardens against her will. So I think it depends on origin story. When I first played as city elf I found Duncan very likeable indeed.

[Addai]

(From Sara1281)
It's Word of God that Loghain did not make the final decision to desert
until the Beacon was lit although he probably did consider it because
I really an't imagine Loghain being that impulsive as to be fully
committed to charging and then just change his mind at the last minute.
If Cailan survived and, say, the loss of Ferelden's army could be
blamed solely on his glory-seeking then that would strengthen Loghain's
position of wanting to depose him and it's the only explanation I can
see for why Loghain is so openly doubtful and 'the King is being
foolish and reckless' which you'd think a man who'd been Teyrn for
thirty years would know better than to do. He even makes the case for
Cailan being a moron when he meets with the random GW recruit.

Of
course, once Lohain did retreat and the King was dead his plan had to
be scrapped and he took over the regency which caused problems but much
less than had Cailan's supporters still been around.



(husband posting)

Speaking of all this... one big problem that I've haven't seem addressed on this board and was never able to address in game (As a player I wanted to mention it at the Landsmeet) is him being refered as "King Loghain" by his emmisaries to the dwarves.


I actually think that a nice bit of supporting evidence for treason if you can lump in with other evidence but the game never gives that chance.    (My under standing of that based on Medieval politics is that should have been a Chancellor type position and not that of "King Regent").

Modifié par Addai67, 28 mai 2010 - 08:42 .

[Nerdage]

Addai67 wrote...

(From Sara1281)
It's Word of God that Loghain did not make the final decision to desert
until the Beacon was lit although he probably did consider it because
I really an't imagine Loghain being that impulsive as to be fully
committed to charging and then just change his mind at the last minute.
If Cailan survived and, say, the loss of Ferelden's army could be
blamed solely on his glory-seeking then that would strengthen Loghain's
position of wanting to depose him and it's the only explanation I can
see for why Loghain is so openly doubtful and 'the King is being
foolish and reckless' which you'd think a man who'd been Teyrn for
thirty years would know better than to do. He even makes the case for
Cailan being a moron when he meets with the random GW recruit.

Of
course, once Lohain did retreat and the King was dead his plan had to
be scrapped and he took over the regency which caused problems but much
less than had Cailan's supporters still been around.



(husband posting)

Speaking of all this... one big problem that I've haven't seem addressed on this board and was never able to address in game (As a player I wanted to mention it at the Landsmeet) is him being refered as "King Loghain" by his emmisaries to the dwarves.


I actually think that a nice bit of supporting evidence for treason if you can lump in with other evidence but the game never gives that chance.    (My under standing of that based on Medieval politics is that should have been a Chancellor type position and not that of "King Regent").

He may have just said that to try and get into Orzammar after being turned down so many times, he's a greasy little man and I'm glad they let you kill him.

Modifié par nerdage, 28 mai 2010 - 10:05 .

[Addai]

(Nerdage)
He may have just said that to try and get into Orzammar after being
turned down so many times, he's a greasy little man and I'm glad they
let you kill him.

(husband)

I thought about that too.   Another reason why I think its a valid potential motivation or plot point for the Loghain question is the fact in one scene where Anora questions her father about Cailan and Howe urges him to take the blight more seriously, Loghain is sitting on the throne.    (Which is usually considered a no no in most of the ancient / medieval societies that I've heard about....)

Modifié par Addai67, 28 mai 2010 - 01:08 .

[Nerdage]

Isn't the throne the one in the coronation room? I thought that was just some chair.