48 réponses à ce sujet

[Saurel]

She is not simple...Shes just underdeveloped

[Alastrian]

SeanMurphy2 wrote...

-I agree Cauthrien was wrong to stop Alistair from entering the Landsmeet. She really seems to lose it there. In your previous meeting with her, she seems focused on following the rules.

Yeah... at the Arl's estate, I usually go quietly... better not to compound the slander against the Grey Wardens with another bloodbath. I have to wonder, however, who tipped her off to there being a bloodbath in Howe's estate. I imagine the angry mob out front would make it hard for word to go in or out of the estate. Still... she's not wrong in that the Grey Warden may have 'murdered' Arl Howe (I'd plead self-defence or if I'm a Human Noble, 'temporary insanity' ).

-There was still a lot of conjecture about what happened at Ostager. I think it does not gain many Landsmeet votes if you accuse Loghain of betraying the King.

No it doesn't. There's no tangible proof of the treason... but there's plenty of tangible proof of the consequences... the refugees piling up in the north for example.

It is a crisis situation. Loghain is already in place as regent. There does not seem to be many other great generals. They could have supported Loghain during the war against the Darkspawn. And then dealt with the other issues later.

If Loghain is acting like such a bully now... how can he possibly be trusted to step down afterwards? Were he to face a trial after the Blight is ended, he'd probably be a dead man when his actions during his regency are brought up. Its the same dilemma that prompted Caesar to cross the Rubicon with his army instead of disbanding them and going back to Rome after his command in Gaul was finished.

- He is a respected war hero. So it means people may be easily biased towards his version of events. And since he is a famous general. They may feel that he is the only one who can defeat the Darkspawn. Rather than some unknown Grey Warden or another politician.

I can't argue that Loghain is proven to be an expert at defeating Orlesians... but I'd rather put my trust in the apolitical Grey Wardens who have already ended four Blights in the past. I know the specifics of how to slay an Archdemon are Grey Warden secrets, but every Blight thus far had one common outcome: the Grey Wardens led the charge, and a Grey Warden killed the Archdemon. Shouldn't be too hard to put 2 and 2 together and get 4 instead of 5 or 3.

- I don't know how much knowledge Cauthrien had of his schemes. I wish she was more visible in the mid game.

Yeah I was somewhat disappointed that after Loghain quit the field at Ostagar, the next you see of Cauthrien is when you arrive in Denerim with Eamon for the Landsmeet (and she has the nerve to tell my Human Noble off for not respecting his 'betters'). And I'd have liked to have seen her be the one to come to you before Anora's servant (who btw is Orlesian... how is it that Loghain lets his daughter get away with having an Orlesian in the house? ).

Anyway, being an accessory or enabler of evil doesn't make one evil, that's true... but they still bear at least some responsibility when the heads start rolling.

[SeanMurphy2]

Alastrian wrote...

And that makes slaving right how? If anything I'd say that him selling slaves to the Tevinters is actually detrimental to the goal of winning the civil war. The Landsmeet don't react too well to him when the slavery is brought up. And for someone who is so hostile to the idea of letting Orlesian 'tyrants' into Fereldan, it reeks of hypocrisy to be inviting Tevinter tyrants right in to the Alienage to kidnap and traffic elves who are completely innocent of any involvement one way or the other in the political situation.

The darkspawn were hardly disorganized at Ostagar. And given that there had been four Blights already, there's certainly enough historical precedent to defer to the judgment of the Grey Wardens when they say that it is a Blight. And its not like Cailin was rolling out the welcome mat for Orlesian Chevaliers... the Orlesian reinforcements were Grey Wardens.

If she was so 'simple'... why does she question Loghain's order to quit the field? She is not naive... she knows well enough that her hero is committing an act of treason. And one does not have to be involved in the scheming to be an accessory to it... or an enabler. As it is often said, the triumph of evil comes when good people do nothing. Regardless of how good she might be otherwise in other areas of her career and her persona... she is still an enabler of evil.

- I meant that Loghain is meant to be a brilliant general and quite cunning. But in the mid game he struggles to win the civil war. And he probably could have handled the nobles with more tact to stop an outright revolt. He seems uncharacteristically incompetent in the mid game.

- I don't think he would have forseen what a mess he would create. He assumed that there was no Blight. And that there would be a smooth transition of power.

- I think there have always been bands of Darkspawn. Only the Grey Wardens would realise it is an actual Blight. The last Blight happened well before he was born. He probably has vivid memories of the Orlesian occupation and is fixated on that.

- At Ostager Cauthrien questions his decision to retreat. But ultimately Loghain is the general and she has to assume he has a good reason for his decision or the King is already dead. I think she would gradually have conflicted thoughts about what was happening. But in the mid game her focus was probably on stopping the rebellion and restoring order.

Modifié par SeanMurphy2, 06 décembre 2009 - 04:46 .

[Alastrian]

SeanMurphy2 wrote...

- I meant that Loghain is meant to be a brilliant general and quite cunning. But in the mid game he struggles to win the civil war. And he probably could have handled the nobles with more tact to stop an outright revolt. He seems a bit incompetent in the mid game.

So by this point where he demonstrates incompetence as a Regent, this only strengthens the case of his detractors. Could chalk up his lack of tact or understanding of Fereldan politics to his rural commoner upbringing... but you'd think that years of serving Maric would have rubbed off on him. Apparently not.

- I don't think he would have forseen what a mess he would create. He assumed that there was no Blight. And that there would be a smooth transition of power.

Ostagar is a bottleneck. The darkspawn are south of that bottleneck... Lothering and large tracts of open land all the way north to Denerim are north of that bottleneck. I'd think it pretty obvious that letting the darkspawn overrun the bottleneck would doom the people trying to live north of it. What kind of brilliant general would be oblivious to that?

- I think there have always been bands of Darkspawn. Only the Grey Wardens would realise it is an actual Blight. The last Blight happened well before he was born. He probably has vivid memories of the Orlesian occupation.

There's a world of difference between a 'band' of darkspawn and a full blown horde. Even if there was no Archdemon, it would be better for Fereldan to clear up that horde quick. If one had to assume there was no Archdemon, you could say that doing everything possible to stop the darkspawn to the south as quickly as possible would then free up the army to then turn north and ease Loghain's paranoid delusions of the Chevaliers rolling back in and behaving as if they'd never left.

- At Ostager Cauthrien questions his decision to retreat. But ultimately Loghain is the general and she has to assume he has a good reason for his decision or the King is already dead. I think she would gradually have conflicted thoughts about what was happening. But in the mid game her focus was probably on stopping the rebellion and restoring order.

Well we don't know a whole lot about what was on her mind in the midgame... we just know that when you arrive at Denerim for the Landsmeet, she's back to being Loghain's mindless lapdog unless you can persuade her to step aside and let you and Alistair go into the Landsmeet and let justice be done.

[Palesblade]

CloudOfShadows wrote...

I got by her without killing her.

I didn't want to kill her either. She did plead for Loghains life, but in the end I killed him, as I didn't want Anora to be queen.

[Maria Caliban]

Palesblade wrote...

I didn't want to kill her either. She did plead for Loghains life, but in the end I killed him, as I didn't want Anora to be queen.

I'm not sure how the two are related. Anora can be the queen with Loghain dead or alive.

[menasure]

Original182 wrote...

Myrkale wrote...

You just skip a quest, and an interaction before the Landsmeet(where you kill her anyways).

You can succeed a persuade check and Cauthrien will admit she has doubts of Loghain. She let's you go and pleads that you somehow spare him.

Though this is a personal choice then. Why kill someone who knows the meaning of loyalty, even if misplaced? Cauthrien is clearly a good soldier who was just merely following orders, with no malicious intent.

funny, i have seen her express those doubts but i still had to fight her for some reason. probably a kamikaze moment where it is the other way around before the captured quest

Modifié par menasure, 06 décembre 2009 - 05:48 .

[kormesios]

One practical game/plot choice question before I move on:



If you fight Cauthrien (and lose) at Howe's estate, can you still make the persuade check before the Landsmeet? Or do you need to surrender?



On the broader topic, I'm firmly on the Loghain is evil camp, but I'm cutting Cauthrien some slack for Ostagar. Her order wasn't to kill the king; it was an order to retreat from battle. From a general with more experience and more knowledge trusted to make that decision. Even in modern times you'd be hard pressed to make a case that it was an "illegal order" that she had the option of disobeying. Even less so in medieval times, where her oath was likely to Loghain directly, not "Ferelden" or even the king. It's got to be a galling order, to retreat from a battle; and maybe it's suspicious at the time. But she can't be sure it's a treacherous.



Afterwards it seems like human rationalization: She has to believe Loghain's version of events or admit she helped a traitor seize the throne..So she buys in to the narrative: The battle was already lost, the Grey Wardens were traitors, Anora needs a regent, the Banns are power-hungry rebels.

[Serenity84]

SeanMurphy2 wrote...
I don't think it is unreasonable for her to be loyal to Loghain. He is the official Regent and his daughter is Queen. He is a war hero who liberated the country. It is a crisis situation and he is a proven leader and general. She also has a long history with him so presumably trusts him.

She doesn't believe in his cause without a doubt. If you press her on it (you need some persuasion skills for that), she admits that she doesn't agree with everything he did.

And it's not just about his past heroism either. There is a lot of personal loyalty in it. She comes from a poor background and Loghain took her in. She rose very high under his command and owes all her standing to him.

[XOGHunter246]

i have respect for her she saw sense in the end i didn't bother fighting her she knew at back of her head what loghain did was wrong but she had to follow orders.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

Heh, I have taken to killing her on principle. She is an accomplice to a traitor to the kingdom and knows it. She watched him betray her king. She deserves a traitor's death and I give it to her every chance I get.

[XOGHunter246]

What would you of done if someone higher up who you have respect for tell you do something like pull back the army she probably would of been killed if she didn't do it and at the point she thought loghain knew best.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

XOGHunter246 wrote...

What would you of done if someone higher up who you have respect for tell you do something like pull back the army she probably would of been killed if she didn't do it and at the point she thought loghain knew best.

Leaving my king to die... And then having the gall to keep defending him... Um no. When you use persuade on her, she fesses up to realizing that he isn't who he was.

Either way, a traitor and all his accomplices deserve their fate. She could have come clean earlier to the queen. She could have done a lot of things. She did nothing.

[KalosCast]

DeathWyrmNexus wrote...

XOGHunter246 wrote...

What would you of done if someone higher up who you have respect for tell you do something like pull back the army she probably would of been killed if she didn't do it and at the point she thought loghain knew best.

Leaving my king to die... And then having the gall to keep defending him... Um no. When you use persuade on her, she fesses up to realizing that he isn't who he was.

Either way, a traitor and all his accomplices deserve their fate. She could have come clean earlier to the queen. She could have done a lot of things. She did nothing.

You mean kill Ferelden's greatest tactician based on a tactical call he made with no evidence at the time that it was a power grab to the throne? 

She would have been relieved from command and Loghain's orders carried out regardless at best, or killed on the spot and Loghain's orders carried out regardless at worst. She wasn't in a position to do anything.

[XOGHunter246]

Yeah i not saying she did the right thing I'm saying she didn't exactly have a choice then. You really think anora would of believed her?

[DeathWyrmNexus]

KalosCast wrote...

DeathWyrmNexus wrote...

XOGHunter246 wrote...

What would you of done if someone higher up who you have respect for tell you do something like pull back the army she probably would of been killed if she didn't do it and at the point she thought loghain knew best.

Leaving my king to die... And then having the gall to keep defending him... Um no. When you use persuade on her, she fesses up to realizing that he isn't who he was.

Either way, a traitor and all his accomplices deserve their fate. She could have come clean earlier to the queen. She could have done a lot of things. She did nothing.

You mean kill Ferelden's greatest tactician based on a tactical call he made with no evidence at the time that it was a power grab to the throne? 

She would have been relieved from command and Loghain's orders carried out regardless at best, or killed on the spot and Loghain's orders carried out regardless at worst. She wasn't in a position to do anything.

Ya, I kill a traitor for abandoning his king...
If I did decide to just go with it because he might know best, I wouldn't be defending his ass like the King of Allmighty Bacon when deep down I knew he betrayed his king, as well as MY KING!

[biomag]

I have no problem with her thinking the retreat was the right decision at that moment. If your commander had success in his past and excelled in his duty, then you trust his judgment.



BUT: Once she returned to the capital she saw what he did to the elves and his political foes. He blamed the Wardens and accused them to be traitors and murders. That's the moment she could have realized that Loghain was not trying to safe his army at Ostagar, but to gain personal power - making him a traitor not only to the king (in the end, who cares whats the guys name, as long as the ruler cares about his country), but foremost he endangered all people of Ferelden, making him a traitor to all of them. That's the part were she became guilty of supporting him and all he did. She could have joined the opposition or at least tell the truth about the retreat, but she decided not to betray her commander who betrayed his whole nation.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

biomag wrote...

I have no problem with her thinking the retreat was the right decision at that moment. If your commander had success in his past and excelled in his duty, then you trust his judgment.

BUT: Once she returned to the capital she saw what he did to the elves and his political foes. He blamed the Wardens and accused them to be traitors and murders. That's the moment she could have realized that Loghain was not trying to safe his army at Ostagar, but to gain personal power - making him a traitor not only to the king (in the end, who cares whats the guys name, as long as the ruler cares about his country), but foremost he endangered all people of Ferelden, making him a traitor to all of them. That's the part were she became guilty of supporting him and all he did. She could have joined the opposition or at least tell the truth about the retreat, but she decided not to betray her commander who betrayed his whole nation.

Precisely, thank you for putting it so eloquently.

[KalosCast]

DeathWyrmNexus wrote...
Ya, I kill a traitor for abandoning his king...
If I did decide to just go with it because he might know best, I wouldn't be defending his ass like the King of Allmighty Bacon when deep down I knew he betrayed his king, as well as MY KING!

Except that you have no proof that he betrayed the king at that point in time, in fact, the most evidence you ever really get unless you actually recruit Loghain is that his pulling from the field was "suspisciously beneficial." There would be no point in throwing even more troops at a losing battle.

Modifié par KalosCast, 06 décembre 2009 - 08:39 .

[DeathWyrmNexus]

KalosCast wrote...

DeathWyrmNexus wrote...
Ya, I kill a traitor for abandoning his king...
If I did decide to just go with it because he might know best, I wouldn't be defending his ass like the King of Allmighty Bacon when deep down I knew he betrayed his king, as well as MY KING!

Except that you have no proof that he betrayed the king at that point in time, in fact, the most evidence you ever really get unless you actually recruit Loghain is that his pulling from the field was "suspisciously beneficial." There would be no point in throwing even more troops at a losing battle.

Except that it wasn't a losing battle until he didn't show up... Also, take note of how coldly he sounded the retreat and how he was questioned. Those aren't exactly the actions of a tactician but a traitor and a snake.

[KalosCast]

DeathWyrmNexus wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

DeathWyrmNexus wrote...
Ya, I kill a traitor for abandoning his king...
If I did decide to just go with it because he might know best, I wouldn't be defending his ass like the King of Allmighty Bacon when deep down I knew he betrayed his king, as well as MY KING!

Except that you have no proof that he betrayed the king at that point in time, in fact, the most evidence you ever really get unless you actually recruit Loghain is that his pulling from the field was "suspisciously beneficial." There would be no point in throwing even more troops at a losing battle.

Except that it wasn't a losing battle until he didn't show up... Also, take note of how coldly he sounded the retreat and how he was questioned. Those aren't exactly the actions of a tactician but a traitor and a snake.

Yeah, because "a cold tone of voice" is clearly compelling evidence for getting you off the hook for killing one of Ferelden's most well-known heroes. That's why "he looked at me cross-ways" is the most common defense for getting people off the hook for murder.

And once again, claiming that it wasn't a losing battle until he didn't show up would have been the word of essentially a nobody vs, once again, the man who is believed at the time to be the greatest tactical mind in Ferelden. So once again: this ends with you (as Cauthrien) being unceremoniously killed and Loghain's army still pulling from the field.

[XOGHunter246]

Some people are blind to things in this case Ser Cauthrien was but anyways i want her sword next playthrough so i going to kill her

[kormesios]

DeathWyrmNexus wrote...
Except that it wasn't a losing battle until he didn't show up... Also, take note of how coldly he sounded the retreat and how he was questioned. Those aren't exactly the actions of a tactician but a traitor and a snake.

There's no question that Loghain is a traitor and a snake, the question was whether Cauthrien knew at the time of Ostagar.  Since we are never told what Loghain or Cauthrien know when Loghain gives the order, it's quite a stretch to say she knew at the time the order was treachery.  People in the field don't have some birds eye view of the battlefield that we get in computer strategy games.

I find it almost impossible to imagine that, when Loghain gave the order, she instantly knew it was treachery.  A brilliant tactician and loyal subject orders a retreat, why do you think it's anything other than a military move?  Your first instinct might be to question whether it's necessary, but malicious intent would not come up.  Even if they were both watching the battle, and seeing the same thing, Cauthrien would have to assume her commander saw something or knew something she didn't.

After Ostagar, when exactly how convenient Loghain's retreat was became clearer, things change a bit.  But at the time there's not much evidence it's treachery.

[SeanMurphy2]

Alastrian wrote...

Yeah... at the Arl's estate, I usually go quietly... better not to compound the slander against the Grey Wardens with another bloodbath. I have to wonder, however, who tipped her off to there being a bloodbath in Howe's estate. I imagine the angry mob out front would make it hard for word to go in or out of the estate. Still... she's not wrong in that the Grey Warden may have 'murdered' Arl Howe (I'd plead self-defence or if I'm a Human Noble, 'temporary insanity' ).

No it doesn't. There's no tangible proof of the treason... but there's plenty of tangible proof of the consequences... the refugees piling up in the north for example.

If Loghain is acting like such a bully now... how can he possibly be trusted to step down afterwards? Were he to face a trial after the Blight is ended, he'd probably be a dead man when his actions during his regency are brought up. Its the same dilemma that prompted Caesar to cross the Rubicon with his army instead of disbanding them and going back to Rome after his command in Gaul was finished.

I can't argue that Loghain is proven to be an expert at defeating Orlesians... but I'd rather put my trust in the apolitical Grey Wardens who have already ended four Blights in the past. I know the specifics of how to slay an Archdemon are Grey Warden secrets, but every Blight thus far had one common outcome: the Grey Wardens led the charge, and a Grey Warden killed the Archdemon. Shouldn't be too hard to put 2 and 2 together and get 4 instead of 5 or 3.

Yeah I was somewhat disappointed that after Loghain quit the field at Ostagar, the next you see of Cauthrien is when you arrive in Denerim with Eamon for the Landsmeet (and she has the nerve to tell my Human Noble off for not respecting his 'betters'). And I'd have liked to have seen her be the one to come to you before Anora's servant (who btw is Orlesian... how is it that Loghain lets his daughter get away with having an Orlesian in the house? ).
Anyway, being an accessory or enabler of evil doesn't make one evil, that's true... but they still bear at least some responsibility when the heads start rolling.

- At Howe's estate Cauthrien does not know that Anora has been kept prisoner or was even in the house. I don't think she was fully involved in Loghain's and Howes plans. But may have realised afterwards.

She seems to view your party as lowly troublemakers that are rebelling against the establishment. She respects Loghain as someone who has won independence and is a legitimate leader. She can't imagine why anyone would hand power to a bunch of Grey Wardens and an unknown bastard son.

- I agree it is difficult to understand how someone who loves his country can stand by and watch Southern Ferelden be destroyed by the Darkspawn. After Ostager Loghain does seem to neglect the Darkspawn. He moves a lot of armies north and is only focused on securing power.

He must not have taken the Blight seriously. And just thought that the horde would remain in the Wilds unless provoked. He never seems to realise the importance of the battle at Ostager. He views it as luring and culling Darkspawn.

- The Blight and the Darkspawn does not seem to be taken seriously by a lot of people. The last Blight occurred 400 years earlier so people have no living memories of what it was like. It would be like us trying to relate to some historical event that happened in 1600. A lot of people did not even think it neccesary to send the King's army to Ostager.

- Cauthrien was in a close position to Loghain. She should have expressed her concerns to Loghain. Though maybe she did. And her justifications at the Landsmeet were the answers Loghain gave to her.

I would have liked her to be more involved in the mid game. And show the increasing tension in her relationship with Loghain. She initally hero worships him and is blindly loyal. Maybe she does start to question him and feels conflicted with what she is doing.