180 réponses à ce sujet

[Persephone]

EH?

It wasn't a duel to the death but a duel until either party surrenders.

This isn't about legality. I t simply irks me to see something done out of bloodlust and vengeance being presented as the moral high ground.

Modifié par Persephone, 27 novembre 2011 - 08:01 .

[Persephone]

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

Morwen Eledhwen wrote...

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

Morwen Eledhwen wrote...

Actually, the agreed-upon terms of the deal is until someone yields. *ducks out of line of fire*

I stand corrected then.
Still the man is not that stupid as to not know what would happen to him.

He is not; I think he quite expects to die. He's certainly resigned enough to it once the battle's over. He most definitely would not have volunteered to join the Grey Wardens, even if he planned to sue for clemency. If you spare him, the first conversation you have in camp afterwards is basically him asking you "Okay, so here I am, weird as this whole situation is. What now?"

But he doesn't volunteer to join the Wardens.......Does he? Was that not Riordan's Idea. I do not recall Loghain saying 'Hey don't kill me, I'll join you instead'....

No, he doesn't volunteer. He expects to lose his life and won't beg or suggest anything else. In fact, recruiting him is the harsher punishment, all things considered. If you wish to be cruel to him, death is the easy way out and giving him what he wants at that point.

[ShimmeringDjinn]

Persephone wrote...

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

Morwen Eledhwen wrote...

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

Morwen Eledhwen wrote...

Actually, the agreed-upon terms of the deal is until someone yields. *ducks out of line of fire*

I stand corrected then.
Still the man is not that stupid as to not know what would happen to him.

He is not; I think he quite expects to die. He's certainly resigned enough to it once the battle's over. He most definitely would not have volunteered to join the Grey Wardens, even if he planned to sue for clemency. If you spare him, the first conversation you have in camp afterwards is basically him asking you "Okay, so here I am, weird as this whole situation is. What now?"

But he doesn't volunteer to join the Wardens.......Does he? Was that not Riordan's Idea. I do not recall Loghain saying 'Hey don't kill me, I'll join you instead'....

No, he doesn't volunteer. He expects to lose his life and won't beg or suggest anything else.

I rest my case.

[Morwen Eledhwen]

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

Morwen Eledhwen wrote...

He is not; I think he quite expects to die. He's certainly resigned enough to it once the battle's over. He most definitely would not have volunteered to join the Grey Wardens, even if he planned to sue for clemency. If you spare him, the first conversation you have in camp afterwards is basically him asking you "Okay, so here I am, weird as this whole situation is. What now?"

But he doesn't volunteer to join the Wardens.......Does he? Was that not Riordan's Idea. I do not recall Loghain saying 'Hey don't kill me, I'll join you instead'....

No, he simply says "I yield," and waits to abide by the Warden's judgment, as the terms of the duel require. If the Warden elects to kill him, he submits without a word of protest, objecting only to Anora's plea for his life. But if the Warden elects to conscript him, he accepts that too, and obeys the Warden's commands for the rest of the game (and with a bit more grace than Alistair, too, with none of that "I can't decide; you tell us what we should do/HOW COULD YOU DO THAT?!? -20 approval" nonsense).

If you cannot bring yourself to conscript him, then you can't. However, viewing conscription as letting him off easy, or somehow condoning his actions, is not entirely true. He hates the Wardens, and until just a second ago you were his enemy. Forcing him to join your order as your subordinate is not exactly a skip through the meadows for him. And you don't have to be nice to him, either --there are plenty of dialogue opportunities for the Warden to express his or her displeasure with him. So you could conscript him and still maintain your position, if you wish. Is all I'm saying.

[ShimmeringDjinn]

@Morwen.
I do not see conscripting Loghain as 'letting him off' I simply refuse to do it, because having read the books and played the games I HATE him.
He is nothing more than a sociopath, therefore there is no redemption or forgiveness for him.

Modifié par ShimmeringDjinn, 27 novembre 2011 - 08:35 .

[Morwen Eledhwen]

And I maintain that conscripting him does not automatically entail either redemption or forgiveness. You can accept his help, force him to do the Dark Ritual (if you're female and/or don't care to do it yourself), and then leave him at the gates for the Final Battle if you want. He ends his days in subjection and ignominy, pushed aside for a new generation of heroes. A fate worse than death, in some ways. But based on what you've said, I can't see you abiding his presence even for that, unless you were bent on getting the game achievement or something. So, oh well.

Modifié par Morwen Eledhwen, 27 novembre 2011 - 08:39 .

[ShimmeringDjinn]

Morwen Eledhwen wrote...
But based on what you've said, I can't see you abiding his presence even for that, unless you were bent on getting the game achievement or something. So, oh well.

I've had this game since April this year and have never gone after the achievement. I stand strong in my judgment of him, and nothing will change my mind on that. However, I have no problem with other people recruiting him, for it is their game not mine.
What I do have a problem with is people telling me my Warden is wrong for daring to want to kill a man who has hunted her all over the Country. I am not saying you have done this of course........It is merely a statement.
Happy gaming

[Morwen Eledhwen]

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

What I do have a problem with is people telling me my Warden is wrong for daring to want to kill a man who has hunted her all over the Country. I am not saying you have done this of course........It is merely a statement.
Happy gaming

And you too!

You're entitled to make whatever decisions you want, of course, which is one of the major strong points of the game --along with the fact that there are very few objectively "right" or "wrong" decisions to make here. Even some of the choices that I personally consider 100% black/white have proponents for the other side. But different roleplays give different perspectives. My first DA:O character executed Loghain without a thought, and was happy to turn the "honor" over to Alistair, as his just due and his heart's desire. My next character --a City Elf, no less-- still executed him but felt quite sick about it, actually, doing so mostly because Alistair refused to stay with the company if Loghain was conscripted. My third character conscripted him. . .as did my next two characters after that. . .No matter what I do to him as a companion, I don't think I'll execute him again.

[Persephone]

Morwen Eledhwen wrote...

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

What I do have a problem with is people telling me my Warden is wrong for daring to want to kill a man who has hunted her all over the Country. I am not saying you have done this of course........It is merely a statement.
Happy gaming

And you too!

You're entitled to make whatever decisions you want, of course, which is one of the major strong points of the game --along with the fact that there are very few objectively "right" or "wrong" decisions to make here. Even some of the choices that I personally consider 100% black/white have proponents for the other side. But different roleplays give different perspectives. My first DA:O character executed Loghain without a thought, and was happy to turn the "honor" over to Alistair, as his just due and his heart's desire. My next character --a City Elf, no less-- still executed him but felt quite sick about it, actually, doing so mostly because Alistair refused to stay with the company if Loghain was conscripted. My third character conscripted him. . .as did my next two characters after that. . .No matter what I do to him as a companion, I don't think I'll execute him again.

Similar experience here. First time I played the game I didn't even find out I could recruit him, as I let Alistair fight him and.... The whole scene sickened me. But as I was unaware of another way, I finished the game nonetheless. To add insult to injury, my Cousland found herself ditched by Alistair & didn't object, given the horrific scene invoking memories of her own father's death.

Then I found out that it need not be that way. I have played several Wardens since (Over 15 at least...) and only twomore executed him. His character arc post recruitment is darkly beautiful, deep and poignant; and I admit, Alistair's cannot compare in my opinion. "I would have expected you to kill me for what I did to you and you did not. You have proven....a friend. I thought all along that only I could save Ferelden but it was you. Please, I have done so much wrong. Allow me to do one last thing right." Still brings tears to my eyes.

[Klidi]

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

@Morwen.
I do not see conscripting Loghain as 'letting him off' I simply refuse to do it, because having read the books and played the games I HATE him.
He is nothing more than a sociopath, therefore there is no redemption or forgiveness for him.

I so agree. I spared him once and his pathetic, arrogant accusation of Wynne in Ostagar pissed me off. Wynne is a preachy old bat, but she is not a general, she was not the mastermind behind the strategy of the battle at Ostagar. She was just one of the soldiers. It was not her duty to know where the king was or to protect him.
If he showed any bit of regret, or if he at least admited that he was wrong, it wold be different.

Then I ordered the books because I heard again and again that I can't understand him without it and that I would change my mind about him if I did. 
Well, I didn't. In fact it made it worse - before I couldn't stand him, because I thought he was an arrogant bastard. Now I hate him, because, as you said, he's a sociopath.

[tklivory]

I think Loghain exemplifies a pivotal moment between metagaming and Role Playing.  The choice of his fate at the Landsmeet, almost more than any other choice in the game, reflects the player's attitude towards the game and its setting, and comes dangerously close to pulling the player into the character beyond the RolePlaying veil (particularly for those players who tend to 'play themselves').  The mere fact that he is so polarizing is more than the mark of a well-written character, it is the mark of a character that represents something which matters to the player (for some people, that is the betrayal that needs to be avenged, for others it is their reluctance to kill a man outside of the heat of battle or to kill a parent in front of a child, for still others sparing him or killing him represents a pure political decision.)

I've written the Landsmeet several times from the POV of several of my Wardens, and the breadth and depth I have managed to garner is astonishing - and that is just one player.  When you add in all the millions of people who play this game and make this decision each time...

As I said, the mark of a meaningful character.  Whether or not you like him or hate him, kill him or spare him, he is a vital part of the game, and the decision at the Landsmeet represents a vital part of establishing who, exactly, the Warden is during the course of the game.

Modifié par tklivory, 27 novembre 2011 - 11:36 .

[Persephone]

Klidi wrote...
Well, I didn't. In fact it made it worse - before I couldn't stand him, because I thought he was an arrogant bastard. Now I hate him, because, as you said, he's a sociopath.

If he showed any bit of regret, or if he at least admited that he was wrong, it wold be different.

He is a LOT of things, definitely. But a sociopath? Definitely not. He is far too emotionally involved. He is capable of both guilt and regret. None of which fit the disorder you attempt to pin on him.

And call me crazy but I LOVE how he shuts Wynne up at Ostagar. DLC was worth it just to hear them bicker.

Except that he does. I quote "Lives were in my hands and I failed. Nothing excuses that." Also, the quote I posted several posts back. Among others where he shows remorse, regret and self loathing of the most acute kind.

Modifié par Persephone, 27 novembre 2011 - 11:47 .

[Klidi]

@ tklivory - one of my major issues with the game is that it forces you to kill Loghain right there, in front ot Anora. If it was possible to put her in the Tower, why not Loghain? I hate that we're forced either to slaughter him as a cattle or recruit him to the Wardens. >

@ Persephone - we'll probably never agree on that. I never noticed any guilt or regret for his decision at Ostagar.
Wynne... is an old preachy lady who behaves like old preachy lady, and stand firm behind what she considers right. I admire her for that. My canon Warden sees her as his grandma, but my Zev hates her and loves to shut her up. But still, what Loghain told her in Ostagar was incredibly stupid and arrogant. That one she did not deserve. It really came as 'character bashing' to me, and I can't stand that.

[Persephone]

Klidi wrote...

@ Persephone - we'll probably never agree on that. I never noticed any guilt or regret for his decision at Ostagar.
.

Except that I do not think that that decision demands regret. It was the right decision in my opinion.

He disagrees though, given what I quoted.

And Wynne kept BAITING him by preaching about things she knows nothing of, I can't fault him for shutting her up.

[Klidi]

Ok, that's your opinion. Mine is different.

[Persephone]

Klidi wrote...

Ok, that's your opinion. Mine is different.

I figured. :happy:

[Morwen Eledhwen]

tklivory wrote...

I think Loghain exemplifies a pivotal moment between metagaming and Role Playing.  The choice of his fate at the Landsmeet, almost more than any other choice in the game, reflects the player's attitude towards the game and its setting, and comes dangerously close to pulling the player into the character beyond the RolePlaying veil (particularly for those players who tend to 'play themselves').  The mere fact that he is so polarizing is more than the mark of a well-written character, it is the mark of a character that represents something which matters to the player (for some people, that is the betrayal that needs to be avenged, for others it is their reluctance to kill a man outside of the heat of battle or to kill a parent in front of a child, for still others sparing him or killing him represents a pure political decision.)

I've written the Landsmeet several times from the POV of several of my Wardens, and the breadth and depth I have managed to garner is astonishing - and that is just one player.  When you add in all the millions of people who play this game and make this decision each time...

As I said, the mark of a meaningful character.  Whether or not you like him or hate him, kill him or spare him, he is a vital part of the game, and the decision at the Landsmeet represents a vital part of establishing who, exactly, the Warden is during the course of the game.

This, exactly. The Landsmeet decision remains one of the most polarizing and hotly-contested aspects of the game, long after the other arguments have gone stale. If Loghain was truly just a standard black-hat evil character or "sociopath" (people keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means), there would be no discussion, merely the sound of heads falling into baskets all over the gaming world. But it's not like that, and the ambiguity of this and all the other situations in DAO is what gives the game life.

[Klidi]

Morwen Eledhwen wrote...

tklivory wrote...

I think Loghain exemplifies a pivotal moment between metagaming and Role Playing.  The choice of his fate at the Landsmeet, almost more than any other choice in the game, reflects the player's attitude towards the game and its setting, and comes dangerously close to pulling the player into the character beyond the RolePlaying veil (particularly for those players who tend to 'play themselves').  The mere fact that he is so polarizing is more than the mark of a well-written character, it is the mark of a character that represents something which matters to the player (for some people, that is the betrayal that needs to be avenged, for others it is their reluctance to kill a man outside of the heat of battle or to kill a parent in front of a child, for still others sparing him or killing him represents a pure political decision.)

I've written the Landsmeet several times from the POV of several of my Wardens, and the breadth and depth I have managed to garner is astonishing - and that is just one player.  When you add in all the millions of people who play this game and make this decision each time...

As I said, the mark of a meaningful character.  Whether or not you like him or hate him, kill him or spare him, he is a vital part of the game, and the decision at the Landsmeet represents a vital part of establishing who, exactly, the Warden is during the course of the game.

This, exactly. The Landsmeet decision remains one of the most polarizing and hotly-contested aspects of the game, long after the other arguments have gone stale. If Loghain was truly just a standard black-hat evil character or "sociopath" (people keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means), there would be no discussion, merely the sound of heads falling into baskets all over the gaming world. But it's not like that, and the ambiguity of this and all the other situations in DAO is what gives the game life.

While I agree Loghain is interesting and polarizing charater (yes, even though I hate him) - I don't like the implication that I don't know what I'm talking about, the meaning of the word 'sociopath' or that I didn't think this over.

I say he is sociopath because I think he does have at least of three criteria mentioned here: http://en.wikipedia....nality_disorder . Of course, you can disagree - it's my personal interpretation of his character and I'm not saying it's the only possible or correct one. But please, don't try to make me a fool because of different opionon.

[Morwen Eledhwen]

Wow, never has a casual Princess Bride reference caused so much anger. Sorry about that.

I looked at that reference you offered, and I don't see the three markers you're talking about. But as you said, it's my interpretation.

[MyNameIsPower]

Persephone wrote...

This isn't about legality. I t simply irks me to see something done out of bloodlust and vengeance being presented as the moral high ground.

You just don't get it, do you?  I harbored no malice in killing Loghain.  Justice CAN be executed without "bloodlust" and "vengeance".

The land needed rest from the evil and bloodshed perpetrated by Loghain.  I simply could not move forward with him alive and neither could the country.  I did what was necessary and right.

I do not walk around on "moral high ground."  I leave that to .... others.

[Persephone]

MyNameIsPower wrote...

Persephone wrote...

This isn't about legality. I t simply irks me to see something done out of bloodlust and vengeance being presented as the moral high ground.

You just don't get it, do you?  I harbored no malice in killing Loghain.  Justice CAN be executed without "bloodlust" and "vengeance".

The land needed rest from the evil and bloodshed perpetrated by Loghain.  I simply could not move forward with him alive and neither could the country.  I did what was necessary and right.

I do not walk around on "moral high ground."  I leave that to .... others.

As much as you "get" it, I suppose. Never mind that I wasn't responding to you there.<_<

And that is your opinion, not a dogma. In my game Ferelden did just fine and most of its inhabitants (According to Bodhan) were relieved that I spared his life.

Necessary and right according to YOU, yes. The game does not punish you for sparing him, quite the opposite. So the idea of Ferelden needing him dead to move on is completely inaccurate. In fact, he is far more useful alive than dead.

As for you not doing that....."I did what was NECESSARY and RIGHT." belies your claim.

Modifié par Persephone, 29 novembre 2011 - 05:46 .

[ShimmeringDjinn]

Klidi wrote...

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

@Morwen.
I do not see conscripting Loghain as 'letting him off' I simply refuse to do it, because having read the books and played the games I HATE him.
He is nothing more than a sociopath, therefore there is no redemption or forgiveness for him.

I so agree. I spared him once and his pathetic, arrogant accusation of Wynne in Ostagar pissed me off. Wynne is a preachy old bat, but she is not a general, she was not the mastermind behind the strategy of the battle at Ostagar. She was just one of the soldiers. It was not her duty to know where the king was or to protect him.
If he showed any bit of regret, or if he at least admited that he was wrong, it wold be different.

Then I ordered the books because I heard again and again that I can't understand him without it and that I would change my mind about him if I did. 
Well, I didn't. In fact it made it worse - before I couldn't stand him, because I thought he was an arrogant bastard. Now I hate him, because, as you said, he's a sociopath.

Nice to see I'm not the only who thinks the same and openly admitts it

[Mike3207]

About the Landsmeet- I always felt it made no sense to have the Warden choose the next ruler. Have the nobles take a vote-like they did in removing Loghain. It also didn't make a lot of sense to not arrest Loghain, rather than have it end in a duel.

[ShimmeringDjinn]

Mike Smith wrote...

About the Landsmeet- I always felt it made no sense to have the Warden choose the next ruler. Have the nobles take a vote-like they did in removing Loghain. It also didn't make a lot of sense to not arrest Loghain, rather than have it end in a duel.

Agreed. But then again, the Nobles didn't agree to have him as Regent in the first place -he simply told them that, this is how it's going to be so live with it or die- so it would make sense to bring in a third party to decide the outcome.......Just as it did with the Dwarf's.

[Persephone]

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

Klidi wrote...

ShimmeringDjinn wrote...

@Morwen.
I do not see conscripting Loghain as 'letting him off' I simply refuse to do it, because having read the books and played the games I HATE him.
He is nothing more than a sociopath, therefore there is no redemption or forgiveness for him.

I so agree. I spared him once and his pathetic, arrogant accusation of Wynne in Ostagar pissed me off. Wynne is a preachy old bat, but she is not a general, she was not the mastermind behind the strategy of the battle at Ostagar. She was just one of the soldiers. It was not her duty to know where the king was or to protect him.
If he showed any bit of regret, or if he at least admited that he was wrong, it wold be different.

Then I ordered the books because I heard again and again that I can't understand him without it and that I would change my mind about him if I did. 
Well, I didn't. In fact it made it worse - before I couldn't stand him, because I thought he was an arrogant bastard. Now I hate him, because, as you said, he's a sociopath.

Nice to see I'm not the only who thinks the same and openly admitts it

It's the popular viewpoint, not a rarity at all, you know....

And again, he does not fit the diagnosis of that disorder whatsoever.

Modifié par Persephone, 29 novembre 2011 - 08:11 .