176 réponses à ce sujet

[Riot Inducer]

All in all I must say I don't see how anyone could say Loghain did the right thing at Ostagar at the very least. Evil plots and regicide be damned, by retreating his force Loghain didn't just round-about kill off Cailin and the Grey Wardens, he sacrificed a significant portion of Ferelden's standing army AND failed to defeat the immediate threat of the darkspawn leaving it to go unopposed in the south. If there was in fact an Orlesian plot to retake Ferelden, as Loghain was convinced, his actions weakened Ferelden far greater than any sabatoge Orlesian agents could inflict.



Politics aside, how could "Ferelden's greatest general" a military hero by all accounts, be stupid enough to let a large portion of his army be utterly routed and fail to prepare a plan to deal with the force that routed them?

[westiex9]

ReubenLiew wrote...

How dare ye! All kings in power are obselete! Off with their heads!

No, seriously, regicide is the best thing since sliced cake. Ask modern politics!

There will always be kings regardless of what you choose to call them

But to get back to the question:NO loghain betrayed his king and the grey wardens as well as allowing a blight to spread unchecked across the land. Politics and intrigues have no place during an event as serious as a blight.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Alastrian wrote...
I have trouble believing that Maric's best friend of more than thirty years wouldn't know if Maric's intimate escapades had produced a bastard son. Do best friends not share just about everything with each other? Why wouldn't Maric confide in his best friend if one such rendezvous produced a bastard who could potentially cause trouble for his legitimate son further down the line?

I'm beginign to wonder jsut how good of freinds there were. Their friendship seems to be deterioarating trought the books.

So, I think Loghain knew enough not to kill the nobles that were fighting him.  He needed them defeated, not dead.  Dead, their armies vanish and are no longer useful to him.

Since when do armies simply "vanish"?

[Alastrian]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I'm beginign to wonder jsut how good of freinds there were. Their friendship seems to be deterioarating trought the books.

Strange that Maric would make Loghain the Teyrn of Gwaren if their friendship has deteriorated... I mean rewarding someone with the title of Teyrn is a huge thing given that they're only one step down the hierarchy from the king.

Or is it after Loghain is made Teyrn of Gwaren that the friendship deteriorates?

[Alastrian]

DariusKalera wrote...

Alistair knows becuase he was told by Eamon.  Goldanna, Eamon, and Teagan all know because they were there when it happens.  Maric did know and had it kept quiet because if it came out, then Cailin's claim was in jeopardy.  Which, actually, might mean the Alistair is older than Cailin but because he was illegitimate, it would not be good for the country to have him on the throne.

Legitimate sons always surpass bastard sons when it comes to succession. The possibility of Alistair becoming king is only a realistic notion if something happens to Cailin, which is why Alistair is dreading the prospect so much after Ostagar that he puts off telling anyone as long as he can. He knows that without Cailin... some people are going to want him on the throne and Eamon was likely to be using his royal blood in his plan to oppose Loghain's regency and Anora's claim as queen.

Though I could imagine Maric wanting to keep as few people as possible from knowing, given that even if bastards don't have as strong a claim as their legitimate siblings, they can still cause trouble should they feel the desire to be king. That's true. Still, nothing to say that Loghain couldn't have known. He seems the type to want to try and find out if a royal bastard could threaten the unity of the kingdom when its been less than half a century since a long and brutal struggle against a foreign occupier had ended.

Loghain does not surely have to know.  I do not know who all my best friend of 15 years has slept with, nor do I know if any of them have had his kid.  For all we know, it was simply a one night stand for Maric that had an unforeseen consequence.  If Loghain was not at Recliffe when it happened, then there is no reason for him to know and no reason for Maric to tell him.  Especially since Maric wanted it to remain secret and the mroe people you tell a secret to, the less secret it becomes.

Be that as it may... your best friend is not a king and you're not the teyrn who fought with him against the occupying foreign empire and won his rebellion.

I doubt Loghain would like the idea of there being royal bastards he doesn't know about running about Fereldan with the potential to cause division and make the kingdom vulnerable to that imaginary second Orlesian invasion he's so paranoid about. He'd have to know because he'd want to know.

If he did know, he would have figured out some way to get rid of him at Ostagar with Cailin and the other Grey Wardens.

Well he didn't really object that strongly to him being sent into the tower, which was likely to be in danger, given the tunnel situation beneath it. The soldiers in the tower all died too in the end... and there is no way in heaven or hell he could have possibly anticipated Flemeth rescuing him afterwards. Most likely, she's just a silly little Chasind myth as far as he's concerned... if he's even heard of her. 

If Flemeth were not in the equation... the tower would have been no safer for him than the battlefield... in fact even less so given that there are fewer exits from a tower than a battlefield. At least out in the battlefield you'd have a chance (however slim) of either disappearing into the wilds if you're south of the bottleneck, or fleeing to Lothering if you're somehow north of it. Not that Alistair would want to escape... he'd likely prefer to die by Duncan's side than flee the battle while his father figure and brothers in arms are being slaughtered.

In the tower, for Alistair to escape without Flemeth's unexpected help, he'd have to fight through a swarm of darkspawn, down three staircases, across four floors and out the front door, only to have to fight the horde of darkspawn that will have overrun the outer ruins. It would take an ungodly amount of luck to be able to make it down one floor of the tower, let alone out into the King's Highway.

I don't think Loghain was too worried about Alistair getting away either way... at most he likely believes in Flemeth about as much as Morrigan believes in the Maker.

Modifié par Alastrian, 09 décembre 2009 - 03:23 .

[Alastrian]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So, I think Loghain knew enough not to kill the nobles that were fighting him.  He needed them defeated, not dead.  Dead, their armies vanish and are no longer useful to him.

Since when do armies simply "vanish"?

Many soldiers who have lost their liege might turn to banditry, which doesn't exactly help either side in the civil war. No lord to serve means nobody to pay them... and not to mention the breakdown of law and order that comes with civil wars.

It would certainly make it easier for both the darkspawn or a second Orlesian invasion for Fereldan's soldiers to be plundering their own nation instead of defending it. I suppose its not unreasonable for Loghain to prefer to have those soldiers loyal to rebel lords than nobody at all. Too bad for him he's so lacking in tact and diplomacy that he has to resort to intimidation, blackmail and deception to try winning their loyalty.

[Adria Teksuni]

For those citing Loghain's foul deeds (abandoning the battlefield, slavery, etc) as reasons to crucify him, you might want to take a long look at some of history's "Greatest Rulers". Particularly when it comes to familial heir monarchies. Verra not pretty.

[Draconis6666]

the discussion on the number of Orlesian ttroops that were with the grey wardens and their ability to actually invade seems to be somewhat difficult when its hard to even get a standard answer from in game converstations between various people and even conversations with the same people. Riorden at one point mentions that they ahd several dozen divisions of cavalry. Which if we assume a division is similar to a modern day divsion and that several implies at least two you end up with at least 24 divisions and if you figure a divison is like 3-4 regiments and probably aroudn 15-16,000 that seems like a retarded number of chevaliers. So its hard to trust anything anyone says as far as the actual size of the Orleasian forces since no one gives you hard numbers and just uses cryptic unit type designations that aren't even the same in every conversation.

[Vansen Elamber]

That is the main problem with the Grey Warden's they should not keep everything such a secret, in the case of the Warden having to be sacrificed in order to stop an Archdemon that should be part of their public glory, so to speak. Everyone respects them because they are willing to make that sacrifice so that the Blight can be stopped. If it was all out in the open like that, then Logain's plan never would have worked because his own men would have dissobeyed his order to retreat knowing they would all be completely doomed if all the Warden's died.



At the very least Logain's troops would have stormed the tower and rescued the PC and Alistar. Thats that mistake the Warden's make about their order, they need to let everyone know exactly what it means to be a Grey Warden.

[Alex Savchovsky]

Vansen Elamber wrote...

That is the main problem with the Grey Warden's they should not keep everything such a secret, in the case of the Warden having to be sacrificed in order to stop an Archdemon that should be part of their public glory, so to speak. Everyone respects them because they are willing to make that sacrifice so that the Blight can be stopped. If it was all out in the open like that, then Logain's plan never would have worked because his own men would have dissobeyed his order to retreat knowing they would all be completely doomed if all the Warden's died.

Think again.
Revealing the secrets of the Wardens makes it very easy to mislead the people with arguments like "surely, we can't trust them, can we? they bear the darkspawn taint, who knows how it affects their minds/actions, etc." Blights are quite rare event, so I think it's not practical to suffer a serious disadvantage all the time just to avoid the minor probability of some idiot deciding to betray the wardens just in front of a coming Blight.

[Adria Teksuni]

Alex Savchovsky wrote...Think again.
Revealing the secrets of the Wardens makes it very easy to mislead the people with arguments like "surely, we can't trust them, can we? they bear the darkspawn taint, who knows how it affects their minds/actions, etc." Blights are quite rare event, so I think it's not practical to suffer a serious disadvantage all the time just to avoid the minor probability of some idiot deciding to betray the wardens just in front of a coming Blight.

Agreed.  Also, Gray Wardens need to be able to think for themselves and show initiative, fostering a suicide mission mentality tends to detract from that.

[Dark83]

Adria Teksuni wrote...

For those citing Loghain's foul deeds (abandoning the battlefield, slavery, etc) as reasons to crucify him, you might want to take a long look at some of history's "Greatest Rulers". Particularly when it comes to familial heir monarchies. Verra not pretty.

So? How is this relevant?
"This guy is an evil bastard." "Well, there's all these other evil bastards over here. So he's not." "...what?"
Further, if you want to look at "history's Greatest Rulers" - guess what? They succeeded, but Loghain was a failure labouring under utterly incorrect information, and did nothing right. History judges on two criterias - results, with reputation as an addendum. Loghain was a failure, and history will record the former hero as a traitor fighting shadows, with a list of warcrimes to his name. There's a bunch of those in our history books too.

Draconis6666 wrote...

I'm pretty sure it came up in
converstation at some point that Cailan knew about Alister, and that
Anora also knew, which makes it very unlikely that Loghain didnt

"Greetings, your highness." "Ooh, swords!"

[Adria Teksuni]

Which goes with my previous point, Dark83, which pretty much cites history is written by the victor. Loghain's foul deeds are a matter of subjective viewpoint. It all depends on how you look at it.



And in point of fact, if Anora is made queen, she rewrites a bit of history and chooses to have her father portrayed as a hero, not a villain. She was the victorious ruler, she gets to say how her father is seen, recorded as a valiant defender of Ferelden against the Orlesians. It's moreso if you let (or order him) to him sacrifice himself by killing the Archdemon.



I never said he wasn't an evil bastard, I'm simply saying that whether he was right or wrong is subjective.

[Mnemnosyne]

Alex Savchovsky wrote...

Vansen Elamber wrote...

That is the main problem with the Grey Warden's they should not keep everything such a secret, in the case of the Warden having to be sacrificed in order to stop an Archdemon that should be part of their public glory, so to speak. Everyone respects them because they are willing to make that sacrifice so that the Blight can be stopped. If it was all out in the open like that, then Logain's plan never would have worked because his own men would have dissobeyed his order to retreat knowing they would all be completely doomed if all the Warden's died.

Think again.
Revealing the secrets of the Wardens makes it very easy to mislead the people with arguments like "surely, we can't trust them, can we? they bear the darkspawn taint, who knows how it affects their minds/actions, etc." Blights are quite rare event, so I think it's not practical to suffer a serious disadvantage all the time just to avoid the minor probability of some idiot deciding to betray the wardens just in front of a coming Blight.

Revealing that the Wardens use the darkspawn taint is bad, but making sure everyone is aware that only a Warden can actually kill an Archdemon is different.  From what I gather, nobody really knows that at all, they only know that Wardens are the ones who defeated all the previous Blights - but given the timeframe involved, only historians and scholars would know many details about those fights.  

It could be assumed that the Wardens defeated the previous Blights because they were the only force powerful enough to do so.  It could be that at the time everyone else was too weak to face the darkspawn.  Perhaps they had tactics that were new and innovative at the time, or perhaps they were simply willing to make the sacrifices (militarily speaking) necessary to win, such as abandoning one area to the blight in order to fortify or attack from a different region.

You can say that the Archdemon will be reborn if anyone other than a Warden kills it without also saying that the reason for this is that Wardens have some of the darkspawn taint in them.  You can simply say that the ritual the Wardens go through allows them to kill the Archdemon permanently.  Which is entirely true.  And there's no reason to explain the ritual or what's involved.

[Mr7.7]

Loghain was wrong to do what he did,he was a fool and quite clearly insane,for only the insane would ally themself with a blood mage.

[EricHVela]

Loghain was right in stepping down. That's about it. (If he let himself be executed or sacrificed himself to kill the archdemon, those are right, too.)

[Dark83]

Adria Teksuni wrote...

Which goes with my previous point, Dark83, which pretty much cites history is written by the victor. Loghain's foul deeds are a matter of subjective viewpoint. It all depends on how you look at it.
<snip>
I never said he wasn't an evil bastard, I'm simply saying that whether he was right or wrong is subjective.

Except that we, as outside observers, see it objectively. He was literally wrong about everything.

[Alastrian]

Dark83 wrote...

Except that we, as outside observers, see it objectively. He was literally wrong about everything.

Let's see...

- Wrong to abandon a defensible bottleneck that could keep them at bay and prevent half the kingdom from being swallowed by the Blight... check
- Wrong to demand obedience from the Bannorn instead of requesting their support as a proper king or regent of Fereldan would... check
- Wrong to openly associate with Arl Howe, the most despised noble in all of Fereldan and allow him free reign to imprison and torture family members of potential Landsmeet allies... check
- Wrong to send an idiot maleficarum to poison his most powerful political enemy and risk alienating himself from the Chantry by imprisoning the Templar that was sent to hunt said maleficarum... check
- Wrong to sell Fereldan citizens to the Tevinters when slavery is almost universally frowned upon in Fereldan... check
- Wrong to allow Arl Howe to kidnap and possibly murder his own daughter, the popular queen who could have actually been an asset in his efforts to reunite Fereldan and handle the administration tasks that a warrior of commoner upbringing such as he wouldn't have had a chance to learn... check
- Wrong to refuse to gracefully step down when defeated at the Landsmeet... check

And last of all... despite how much Loghain fanboys like to plead ignorance as a 'valid' excuse...

- Wrong to assume that a Blight can be ended without Grey Wardens... CHECK

So... yes... sounds about right... and its a pretty long list even before applying moral principles. He took a lot of desperate, foolish risks, and of course, whether he wins the Landsmeet or not, they do not pay off.

Hell... even if he wins at the Landsmeet and can secure the throne against Eamon's counterattack... Fereldan won't have much time left before the Blight consumes it all. Since he turned away the nearest remaining Grey Wardens from Orlais, it would be too late for Fereldan before Grey Wardens can end the Blight.

His ignorance of the Grey Wardens' importance in slaying an Archdemon and ending a Blight is irrelevant. Without Grey Wardens, Fereldan's downfall would be inevitable regardless of whether or not Loghain knows simply because Grey Wardens he'd be least likely to turn away would take months to arrive seeing as how the closest outside of Orlais would be in the Free Marches and Nevarra. So in that... he is wrong... and not just in the 'ethical' manner.

Modifié par Alastrian, 09 décembre 2009 - 05:04 .

[Xandurpein]

The argument "He made the right decisions given what he was true" can only be steched so far. It is a fact that paranoid delusional persons can go to great length to justify their own actions, this does not excuse their actions really, and I would certainly argue that by the time of the Battle of Ostergard Loghain certainly was a good way towards being paranoid delusional.



He is not very consistent in his justifications either. At Landsmeet he argues that his withdrawal was the only possible way to save his army from being swallowed along with the Kings. If so he ought clearly to have argued more forcefully with the King. "You are getting us killed Cailin, are you out of your mind!" And this is not consistent with his argument that the horde is in fact not a blight, but a minor incursion.



His defence is based on the argument that the Darkspawn horde was too big for his force combined with Cailins Royal Army and the Gray Wardens, while at the same time small enough for him to defeat witohut the Wardens, while fighting a a civil war and possibly a war with Orlais too. Not very convincing logic.

[Revik]

Dark83 wrote...

Adria Teksuni wrote...

Which goes with my previous point, Dark83, which pretty much cites history is written by the victor. Loghain's foul deeds are a matter of subjective viewpoint. It all depends on how you look at it.

I never said he wasn't an evil bastard, I'm simply saying that whether he was right or wrong is subjective.

Except that we, as outside observers, see it objectively. He was literally wrong about everything.

How can you be literally wrong?  I suppose if he had the word WRONG painted on his armor that could suffice as being literally wrong.  Remember literally is not a word to express emphasis as you appear to be using it here.  Words like very, absolutely, completely, even 'soding' would suffice but not literally. 

Modifié par Revik, 09 décembre 2009 - 07:34 .

[Ulicus]

Alastrian wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I'm beginign to wonder jsut how good of freinds there were. Their friendship seems to be deterioarating trought the books.

Strange that Maric would make Loghain the Teyrn of Gwaren if their friendship has deteriorated... I mean rewarding someone with the title of Teyrn is a huge thing given that they're only one step down the hierarchy from the king.

Or is it after Loghain is made Teyrn of Gwaren that the friendship deteriorates?

It's not "deteriorating", really. It does change towards the end of TST, because Loghain "hardens" Maric in a particularly cruel fashion... and, sure, Loghain doesn't visit Denerim at all between 9:3 and 9:11 Dragon (while Rowan is Queen), but Maric still makes trips to Gwaren and, once Rowan dies, they mourn together and are once again in each other's pockets.

I certainly didn't get any sense from The Calling that they weren't friends.  There are certainly tensions there, but Loghain clearly cares about Maric a great deal. Besides, Loghain had every right to be pissed with Maric in the most recent book, considering what he did.

[Dark83]

Revik wrote...

Dark83 wrote...

Except that we, as outside observers, see it objectively. He was literally wrong about everything.

How can you be literally wrong?  I suppose if he had the word WRONG painted on his armor that could suffice as being literally wrong.  Remember literally is not a word to express emphasis as you appear to be using it here.  Words like very, absolutely, completely, even 'soding' would suffice but not literally. 

He is literally wrong. The word is used correctly. Check the dictionary.

Not figurative or metaphorical. True to fact; not exaggerated; actual or factual. Being actually such, without exaggeration or inaccuracy.

You are literally ignorant of the definition of literal.

[DariusKalera]

Alastrian wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So, I think Loghain knew enough not to kill the nobles that were fighting him.  He needed them defeated, not dead.  Dead, their armies vanish and are no longer useful to him.

Since when do armies simply "vanish"?

Many soldiers who have lost their liege might turn to banditry, which doesn't exactly help either side in the civil war. No lord to serve means nobody to pay them... and not to mention the breakdown of law and order that comes with civil wars.

It would certainly make it easier for both the darkspawn or a second Orlesian invasion for Fereldan's soldiers to be plundering their own nation instead of defending it. I suppose its not unreasonable for Loghain to prefer to have those soldiers loyal to rebel lords than nobody at all. Too bad for him he's so lacking in tact and diplomacy that he has to resort to intimidation, blackmail and deception to try winning their loyalty.

We are never given any information on whether Feraldan has an actual standing army or not.  It seems that they use something close to the mediavel fuedal system.  In this system, a noble would parcel out his land to lesser nobles who in turn would parcel it out again.  When it came time to raise an army, each of the lower ranking nobles would be required to provide "x" number of troops to the noble above them.

"IF" Fereldan uses the same feudal priciples as medieval Europe, which it seems they at least use some of them, when a lord, or in this case a Bann, dies, then the oaths of loyalty given by the knights and other lesser nobles beneth him become null and void.  It is at this point that the knights would return to thier lands with thier troops and an army would dissolve and vanish. 

[Ulicus]

Dark83 wrote...

Revik wrote...
How can you be literally wrong?  I suppose if he had the word WRONG painted on his armor that could suffice as being literally wrong.  Remember literally is not a word to express emphasis as you appear to be using it here.  Words like very, absolutely, completely, even 'soding' would suffice but not literally. 

He is literally wrong. The word is used correctly. Check the dictionary.

Not figurative or metaphorical. True to fact; not exaggerated; actual or factual. Being actually such, without exaggeration or inaccuracy.

You are literally ignorant of the definition of literal.

How is Loghain actually and factually a word ascribed to a concept, rather than a bloke with the quality of "wrongness" from time to time? 

[Alastrian]

DariusKalera wrote...

Alastrian wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So, I think Loghain knew enough not to kill the nobles that were fighting him.  He needed them defeated, not dead.  Dead, their armies vanish and are no longer useful to him.

Since when do armies simply "vanish"?

Many soldiers who have lost their liege might turn to banditry, which doesn't exactly help either side in the civil war. No lord to serve means nobody to pay them... and not to mention the breakdown of law and order that comes with civil wars.

It would certainly make it easier for both the darkspawn or a second Orlesian invasion for Fereldan's soldiers to be plundering their own nation instead of defending it. I suppose its not unreasonable for Loghain to prefer to have those soldiers loyal to rebel lords than nobody at all. Too bad for him he's so lacking in tact and diplomacy that he has to resort to intimidation, blackmail and deception to try winning their loyalty.

We are never given any information on whether Feraldan has an actual standing army or not.  It seems that they use something close to the mediavel fuedal system.  In this system, a noble would parcel out his land to lesser nobles who in turn would parcel it out again.  When it came time to raise an army, each of the lower ranking nobles would be required to provide "x" number of troops to the noble above them.

"IF" Fereldan uses the same feudal priciples as medieval Europe, which it seems they at least use some of them, when a lord, or in this case a Bann, dies, then the oaths of loyalty given by the knights and other lesser nobles beneth him become null and void.  It is at this point that the knights would return to thier lands with thier troops and an army would dissolve and vanish. 

Except that some knights and the levied soldiers might not have land to return to. Remember that much of Fereldan is swallowed up by the Blight fairly quickly and if you look at the travel map when you're just about to go back to Eamon and inform him you're ready for him to call the Landsmeet, nearly all of Fereldan is blighted.

Everything a knight was to own, other than the weapons and armour he took on campaign (and horse... though we're not seeing any horses in this game) would be back at his estate, and thus if its in the middle of the Blight he'd have no way of going back to it. And of course, the commoners beneath the knights that are levied into a Bann's army wouldn't have had much to go home to even if they could... with nobody above to pay them and issue them any orders, they'd face the choice of either becoming destitute or turning to banditry.