78 réponses à ce sujet

[MassEffect762]

I hated how both options turned out, damn dwarven politics.

[Ulrik the Slayer]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Ulrik the Slayer wrote...
Because human politics isn't played out the way dwarven politics are. Bhelen might appear evil and ruthless playing out the two brothers against each other, but in the end he was just a very good player when it comes to dwarven politics.

Human politics is the same in real life. Unless if you are talking about the politics of Ferelden, in which case, you would be right.

No I'm obviously talking about the politics of Uzbekestan.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Thor Rand Al wrote...

Ok I got a question. In my guide it says, "It really doesn't matter which politician you choose; they're both corrupt to some degree." The only one that I saw that was corrupt was Prince Bhelen well, it was his second-in-command Vartag. He gives you forged documents to turn a couple of people away from Harrowmont. What does Harrowmont do? I tried to play both sides, got as far as doing the Proving Grounds n Vartag confronted me about it n I lied n said something about what better way to spy on your enemy or some bs like that; but then I went to talk to a certain person n found out that the documents I had were forged n that pissed me off cause Harrowmont (Dulin) hadn't asked anything of me like that lol.

Unfortunately the game doesn't inform us well of either canditates. Harrowmont's "corruption" would be his noble pleasing attitude. In other words, he only cares about the nobility and doesn't care about the other castes (and merchants), let alone the casteless.

[Popemaster123]

I don't like either of them harrowmount is a crappy king, and bhelen is a crappy person so, epic fails all around.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Ulrik the Slayer wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Ulrik the Slayer wrote...
Because human politics isn't played out the way dwarven politics are. Bhelen might appear evil and ruthless playing out the two brothers against each other, but in the end he was just a very good player when it comes to dwarven politics.

Human politics is the same in real life. Unless if you are talking about the politics of Ferelden, in which case, you would be right.

No I'm obviously talking about the politics of Uzbekestan.

Eh, I am sure it's interesting. Unfortunately I haven't researched its politics...yet

[MadCat221]

A recommended read for Harrowmont advocates

[Crackseed]

I don't mind the 2 choices - what I dislike is that where most other origins gave you a good amount of time to rectify past things, the dwarven noble, for how amazingly setup it starts, gives you very little control/solid interactions when returning to Orzammar.

it's very "Oh hey the exile" blah blah but then from there you're just a grey warden. Allowing a Dwarven Noble to totally upstage and reclaim the throne while continuing to fight the Blight would have been a kick-ass and welcome change.

Sure Bhelen is the stronger choice for actually making the city work, but in the noble origin  you're actually respected/considered to be THE best choice over both Trian and Bhelen. It would have been an insanely fun plot to return, whoop your bro's ass and reclaim the throne and showing them both how to play the game. Besides it's entirely possible Harrowmount would support you anyway knowing you were framed.

Alas, I know they did a ton of work on the game so it's unfair to nitpick, I just think out of all the origins, the dwarf noble started up amazingly well and set a great stage and did not deliver on it or let you really sink your teeth in to affect change.

[Korva]

That would have been nice, yes, and really made the origins matter more (as it is, they don't matter much). Likewise for a human noble, it would have been interesting to be able to make a bid for the throne if you don't believe in that "we must have a Theirin king" crap or just don't want to force an unwilling friend on the throne.

In the end, I really don't like the whole situation with the dwarves, and simply didn't see any indication that Bhelen would be anything but a treasonous, bloody-handed tyrant. So my human noble picked Harrowmont. Seemed the sensible and more likeable choice to her, and if it doesn't work out ... well, as Riordan says about the civil war in Ferelden, if the dwarves are too stupid to save themselves, too bad.

I'm curious if all the Bhelen-supporters here would bend knee to Loghain if the game let us?

Modifié par Korva, 03 décembre 2009 - 09:20 .

[Original182]

Based on the epilogue, from what I can tell, Bhelen will improve Orzammar better than Harrowmont. Supporting a good ruler is one thing, but supporting someone who would have 2 of his own brothers killed is quite another.

[Kerilus]

As  the former prince of Orzammar who wields the shield of Aeducan, holds the letter of Endrid's last words AND the paragon's support, I saw no reason not be able to redeem my name and be king myself. Harrowmont would certainly support me and Bhelen's blood shall paint the floor of the assembly. Sigh. I ended up choosing Harrowmont for I knew his time will be short and the next best candidate will only be me.

Modifié par Kerilus, 03 décembre 2009 - 09:42 .

[ComTrav]

You can argue their methods, or what your character might see or think in-game.



But since after one playthrough you've 'seen the future' and know who does more good for the dwarfs, it's hard to argue against Bhelen. Harrowmont is 'the most honest man in Orzammer', but he's the wrong King for the times.

[Zalbaar]

Well as I played through the game I did both endings both ways and it turns out both Harrowmont and Bhelen are not good Kings, Orzammar was better off without a King but at least this way you get your army and in the end that is really all that matters isn't it?

[nuculerman]

 I always support Bhelan except as a Dwarf Noble.  I just don't know how you can do that.  It's one thing to say he played the game well.  But, for Christ's sake, he tried to kill me.  I mean, if he framed me with Trian's death, then suggested to Endrin that I be made a Gray Warden, I probably would have supported him.  But he killed our older brother, framed it on me, then stood by smiling while I was sentenced fight darkspawn with no armor and a crappy sword and shield until they killed me.  I barely made it out of there alive.  I had to loot armor from dead soldiers, fight my way through 20 darkspawn, and find Duncan.  Then, a few weeks later, I find out that in order to be a Gray Warden, I have to condemn myself to living half as long as most men.

I hate Harrowmont and his social regression as much as the next guy, but I just can't bring myself to support my brother after that.  

But then again, it's likely that Harrowmont himself poisoned Endrin.  He had just as much to gain as Bhelan did.  

I loved and hated Orzamar.  I loved it because it's so true to our own two party system.  90% of all elections I'm voting for the lesser of two evils.  The general election rolls around and probably every President save Obama was supported by voters who just felt they didn't have better options.  So, in that sense, the election is pretty realistic.  I hated it because it was realistic.  Both candidates are very obviously terrible choices.  Bhelan lies way too easily, murders his own brothers and possibly his father, and executes his opponent and anyone who supported him as soon as he wins.  Harrowmont possibly poisoned the king, clearly wants to return Orzamar to its glory days of stricter caste systems and removal from normal society, and in the end, just about destroys Dwarven society.

[Ponce de Leon]

If I had a chance, I'd instantly kill Bhelen on sight. Seriously. Harrowmont for me is 2000% the best choice. He might not be a good leader, but it was the late king's wish. And besides, we all know the PC dwarf noble would be the best king, or perhaps the other one, what was his name? The one killed by Bhelen. He might be rough, but as I have chosen to tell this to Bhelen, he's acting so just to be a good king, and he would have been.

It's just a shame that the word of a worthless noble dwarf means more than the word of heir...

[Frostaxt]

nuculerman wrote...

I loved and hated Orzamar.  I loved it because it's so true to our own
two party system.  90% of all elections I'm voting for the lesser of
two evils.  The general election rolls around and probably every
President save Obama was supported by voters who just felt they didn't
have better options.  So, in that sense, the election is pretty
realistic.

True words!^^  But we all know that´s the only(!!!) way how a truly great country can be ruled. More than having two parties just leads to chaos und is obviously the way into chaos, or even worse socialism, like it´s practised in a couple of this chaotic and weak european states with their ridiculous amount of parties....


To the topic. I am really annoyed, that as dwarf noble you can not claim the throne for yourself. After all Alistair as a grey warden can become king of Ferelden, so why not the obviously framed grey warden with the noble dwarf origin?
I actually even stopped plaing the noble dwarf, because of that and hope and wait for a mod which gives you a chance to become king/queen instead.

[FedericoV]

There is a letter written by Endrin in a chest in Harrowmont house that I've found only after completing the main quest that had made me feel unconfortable about Harrowmont background.



Something about the fact that the right king for Orzamar would have been the one who was exiled (the player in the origin? I'm not sure...). No talk about Harrowmont rights to the throne. After reading that document, I seriously doubt about Harrowmont "promise on the death bed" thing. Unfortunately Belhen was allready died. Anyone who has played the Dwarven noble origin could give me the context of that letter?



Well... this is The Game of Dwarves... "In the game of dwarves you win or you die, there is no middle ground".

[Roxlimn]

Yes, if the game permitted it, I might have supported Loghain, but that's got its own problems. Loghain failed to get Arl Eamon eliminated! If he'd seen to the deed himself and killed Bann Teagan to boot (as well as all the other banns who opposed him), then he would be a fantastic choice for king - because he would rule uncontested!



I'm not sure you guys are aware of this but Ferelden is not a democracy, and people don't support whoever wins an election. So with Orzammar. The good thing about a democracy (supposedly) is that while there are elections, once the election is over, you're supposed to get behind whoever wins in order to preserve the nation's power and unity. This is not how people act in a monarchy or a clan politics system.



In a monarchy, if you're King, you kill every other candidate who even looks at you halfway askance. That is the only way to secure stability in the nation, and stability is better than whether or not your King happens to lie about his personal life. If the King is an incompetent ruler, yes, that would be bad, but Bhelen showed no signs that he was an incompetent ruler. In fact, being that he had the stronger machinery when you come into the picture, so either he has good administrative skills, or he listens to someone who does.



Bhelen immediately moving to have Harrowmont executed is the surest sign that he's the better King.



If you don't like how that works, fine - initiate a campaign to change dwarven society wholesale (and in fact, this is one of Bhelen's platforms), but doing things that are bad for every other dwarf in the nation just so you can satisfy your own sense of morality is bad.

[Kerilus]

If you're Dwarven Noble, you can instead get the letter from your only true friend in the origin story. The letter says he regreted trusting Bhelen and always be proud of you as his only heir that truly uphold the honor of the Aeducans.

FedericoV wrote...

There is a letter written by Endrin in a chest in Harrowmont house that I've found only after completing the main quest that had made me feel unconfortable about Harrowmont background.

Something about the fact that the right king for Orzamar would have been the one who was exiled (the player in the origin? I'm not sure...). No talk about Harrowmont rights to the throne. After reading that document, I seriously doubt about Harrowmont "promise on the death bed" thing. Unfortunately Belhen was allready died. Anyone who has played the Dwarven noble origin could give me the context of that letter?

Well... this is The Game of Dwarves... "In the game of dwarves you win or you die, there is no middle ground".

[Auraad]

Oh ... and I thought it wouldn't matter ... you get your dwarfen support against the blight in any case, that's all that matters to *my* grey warden ...

[Herr Uhl]

Because he is a marvelous bastard.

[Sharog]

Majority of the Succession of our Imperial History start with bloodshed, killing all your brothers/political oppositions, technically wipe out anyone who stands in your way to the throne is something that every king has to do in order to secure his position. it is obvious to me that bhelen has what it takes and harrowmont just beeing an old fart and cant get stuff done.

[menasure]

as non dwarf i was asking myself why i even had to bother meddling with dwarven politics. behlen seemed like a more logical choice for a fight against the blight as the natural ruler of ozzomar. any other thoughts like their society structure and such were interesting but from an outsiders view also trivial and hindering my blight progress, although a more in depth gameplay as dwarf might yet show me some nuances i neglected on my first play through.

[Roxlimn]

I think it's a case of too many people not knowing their history. History is rife with examples of bloody civil war resulting from having a weak king or too many strong contenders that don't wipe each other out at the individual level. Needless to say, having a civil war is bad for nearly everyone concerned. That's politics for you - it's dirty and murderous and morally questionable, but there it is.



If Harrowmont really was a good guy, he would withdraw his claim to the throne and throw his support with Bhelen lock, stock, and barrel. He was advisor to Endrin, why not Bhelen? That way, there would only be one strong force in proper dwarven society and they can then focus their efforts against Jarvia, who they both consider a problem.



The fact that he's willing to tear Orzammar apart just to get a chance at the throne puts away any question about his morality - he has none. He's willing to go into political morality, and when you do that, The Prince is your bible, not the frakking Paragons.

[tigrina]

Well.. it is like Bhelen killed his brother and Harrowmont killed the former king by poisoning right? So based on that I would chose Bhelen since at least he killed a total idiot. That he also frames the noble dwarf player is an obvious player of the (politics) game moment imho.

[Herr Uhl]

tigrina wrote...

Well.. it is like Bhelen killed his brother and Harrowmont killed the former king by poisoning right? So based on that I would chose Bhelen since at least he killed a total idiot. That he also frames the noble dwarf player is an obvious player of the (politics) game moment imho.

Where did you get that Harrowmont poisoned Endrin?

Who would you rather have as a leader in a time of war, Chamberlain or Churchill?