20 réponses à ce sujet

[G_Admiral_Thrawn]

Is there a mod that gives a third option for Dwarf Nobles, because I LIKE Bhelen's ending, but he's worse than Loghain (atleast he had a good reason to betray Cailan - fear of Orlais). Whereas Harrowmount is a guy I'd like to invite for tea, however, his policies are disasterous for Orazammar. Ergo, there should be a third option. Taking the crown for yourself (and it'd be even better to work for Bhelen, then say "Sorry, you backstabbing little ****, I'm keeping it and becoming king. My first act is to execute you an appoint Harrowmount as my closest advisor.")

[Bhryaen]

Nice idea, though Harrowmont's brand of rule might entail advice that conflicts with your own. Still it would be nice to have a 3rd option (including take the throne yourself), but unless you mod it in (and I presently know of no mod myself), it seems we're stuck with the rock and the hard place.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Faerunner wrote...

No, there doesn't seem to be "third option" for Orzammar. You are stuck between a rock and a hard place and you've just got to try to shimmy your way out. (A relatively small problem with the first game that Bioware apparently fell in love with and went crazy over in most games after it.)

It's kind of frustrating, especially if you visit Orzammar last, because every other quest has a "third option" or at least a "lesser of two evils" choice that can make you feel relatively good about your decision. This is one of the few ones that makes you feel like crap no matter what you decide, and if you get to it last then it can come as an unpleasant shock. (I know it did for me the first time I played. I literally got a massive headache as I tried to decide which undesirable ruler got the crown.)

There is a lesser of two evils: if nothing else, Bhelen is mildly egalitarian, and more concerned with fighting the darkspawn than fighting to isolate Orzammar from the world. (The problems with Harrowmont as king get worse if you preserve the Anvil. Bhelen starts a civil war when Branka tries to pull rank, Harrowmont lets her turn Orzammar into a full-blown rogue state.) So, nothing near as rock-and-a-hard-place as choosing between siding with the Harvester and siding with Meredith.

Making yourself king as a DN... it can theoretically be done, if your PC is willing to wait the three years for Harrowmont to kick the bucket. Bhelen apparently lasts long enough for his son to grow up. As for a mod that lets you take it right there and then instead of giving it to one of the two, never heard of one.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Faerunner wrote...
Someone once said that Harrowmont is a good man but a weak ruler, while Bhelen is a cruel man but an effective ruler. That has a lot of potential for people to feel that rock-and-a-hard-place sensation not too unlike the Harvester and Meredith. (In that no matter who you choose, it still gives you a feeling of "Heads? They win. Tails? You lose.") 

Isn't it in Harrowmont's platform that the casteless should have been drowned at birth as a mercy? He's a good man by Orzammar's flawed, classist definition of such, and since that's all he has going for him, Bhelen is still the better option.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 29 mai 2012 - 02:50 .

[Bhryaen]

Is it actually stated as such somewhere- "should have been drowned at birth?" More importantly is it stated as such somewhere that your character encounters in-game?

That's the tricky aspect of the contrast between the actual gameplay and the epilogue slides- Harrowmont seems like the upstanding, honest guy compared to the sleazy powergrabber Bhelen, and there's nothing decisive to determine your decision otherwise roleplaywise (unless you're a DC with the welfare of sis and Mom at stake). Then the epilogue slides play and whatever you chose reverses in terms of what one would do if one knew as the character.

But whereas the Harrowmont slides are fairly clear about him pitted against the casteless, it's not so clear that Bhelen then comes out as the "good guy." For sure it can be construed that he devotes himself to furthering the cause of the casteless even at the risk of losing the crown he'd murdered so many to obtain. Bhelen apparently offers greater "freedom" for any casteless who join the military agianst the darkspawn (and live), but it doesn't state what that "freedom" entails, how many actually received it, or how deplorable it is to grant freedom only at the end of military service. Did Lincoln emancipate blacks from slavery only if they serve in the US military? And the thing that Harrowmont is trashed for is that he's a "weak" ruler, ultimately falling to, wouldn't you know it, Bhelen wannabes. But what happens to Bhelen? He becomes isolated and even dissolves the Assembly to rule by martial law indefinitely. Even if Bhelen had a heart of gold behind his actions, he still gets stymied... and is thus also a "weak" ruler.

This is why your choices are rock and hard place: you select what appears to be the just man who ends up a brutal ruler over the casteless, a stifling isolationist, and incapable of keeping coups at bay; and a slime mold who weasels, connives, and murders his way to the throne and beyond, and despite increasing trade with the surface (which is necessarily the right thing?) becomes isolated and tyrannical with what appears the whole of the castes of Orzammar deadlocked against him and the sense that caste bigotry against the casteless was at a fever pitch. The epilogue slide writers left no happy ending for Orzammar's future, no, other than if you choose to get Anora/ Alistair to send troops to aid Orzammar against the darkspawn, I suppose. Even the Anvil (which I thought was destroyed??) turns up again to plague dwarven society. Our choice is only which unhappy ending we prefer (if we choose to metagame it)...

And so, yes, it would be nice if there were a 3rd option. And really I'd love my Aeducan to be able to take the crown instead. But I don't actually resent the lack of a happy ending path. It's sobering, but not desultory. The only disappointment is in recognizing that they probably just did that to make the human Fereldan outcome look more squeaky clean.

And, mind you, the existence of what we may perceive as a "lesser evil" does not negate the reality of that "lesser evil" being the rock rather than the hard place (or visa versa).

Modifié par Bhryaen, 29 mai 2012 - 05:27 .

[HiroVoid]

Bhelen's a better king than most protagonists would be anyway. Orzammar is slowly dying as one of the last two Dwarven cities, and their policies pushes it further toward that death having only 'Warrior' castes being able to fight along with many other stubborn traditions. He's not the king they may want, but he's the one they need. I wouldn't really care to hang out with him though.

[Klidi]

G_Admiral_Thrawn wrote...

Is there a mod that gives a third option for Dwarf Nobles, because I LIKE Bhelen's ending, but he's worse than Loghain (atleast he had a good reason to betray Cailan - fear of Orlais). Whereas Harrowmount is a guy I'd like to invite for tea, however, his policies are disasterous for Orazammar. Ergo, there should be a third option. Taking the crown for yourself (and it'd be even better to work for Bhelen, then say "Sorry, you backstabbing little ****, I'm keeping it and becoming king. My first act is to execute you an appoint Harrowmount as my closest advisor.")

Lol so you recognize that Harrowmont is incompetent, and that his policies are disasterous for Orzammar - but you'd still take him as your closest advisor? As a Warden, you have also other duties, and when you're busy it's your closest advisor who rules in your name...

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Faerunner wrote...

 By what definition would Bhelen be considered a "better option"? Especially since his character dictates his method of rule?

By that standard, all that Bhelen has going for him is that he gives the casteless marginally higher rights, but it's only if they join the military to fight darkspawn (which is very likely to get them killed) and how much higher those rights are are never delved into (as Bhryaen has said), so when you strip that away he really doesn't benefit Orzammar all that much either. He increases trade (and thus Orzammar's dependence on the surface), but otherwise he's a bully and a tyrant that throws his weight around in the Assembly and brutally crushes anyone that might oppose him. Oh joy.

The alternative is that surface trade is cut off entirely. I don't see how that's better, or even just as good. For that matter, I don't know where it says that only the casteless who sign up to very probably die get the new rights.

Granted, I choose Bhelen more often than not since slightly more rights and money to the lower classes is better than nothing, but I don't consider him to be a better candidate than Harrowmont. His policies lean slightly toward what many of my characters  value in governing, but not everyone has the same values as they do (if you don't care about the casteless or the merchants, or you value tradition and self-sufficience over reform and trade, Bhelen will seem very much like the worse candidate) and even then I still don't consider him a better man or a better ruler. Just a more ruthless and cut-throat one who happens to turn his blade a little more often against issues I'd rather he cut.

Tradition and self-sufficient? Good on paper, no denying that. The problem is that they don't work in Orzammar. Their traditions include the caste system, and the casteless system. As for slightly more rights to the casteless and merchants being better than nothing, doesn't that imply that Bhelen is the slightly better candidate? Not to mention that it doesn't mention Harrowmont taking back any more thaigs. Forget Orzammar: darkspawn dying is good for everybody.

Much for the reasons Bhryaen has mentioned, I don't think choosing Bhelen is choosing the lesser of two poisons, but an equally potent brew that attacks different organs from the kind I want to preserve a little longer. Either way, it does equal damage to the body as a whole.

So, basically, he's chemotherapy? (Actually, given how screwed Orzammar is, that's a good analogy.)

He's not as much better as one might want (otherwise, would he survive in Orzammar?) but he's noticeably more egalitarian, and arguably smarter. Not to mention that if the Anvil does survive, Harrowmont shows his true colors by allowing Branka to enslave elves and humans with it to protect the dwarves. I don't know if there's people arguing that he's a better man morally, but if there still are, how does that work?

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Bhryaen wrote...

Is it actually stated as such somewhere- "should have been drowned at birth?" More importantly is it stated as such somewhere that your character encounters in-game?

It's a quote from a fanfic by Sarah1281. More to the point, I'm pretty sure the Shaper uses those exact words as well. Even to a Dwarf Commoner Warden, and he shows no remorse if you point it out. That man is meant to personify the system Harrowmont intends to let control itself. And from what little I recall of my Harrowmont playthroughs (I stopped doing that awhile ago) he writes it off because they live up to Orzammar's scorn anyway, nevermind that they have no other choice.

That's the tricky aspect of the contrast between the actual gameplay and the epilogue slides- Harrowmont seems like the upstanding, honest guy compared to the sleazy powergrabber Bhelen, and there's nothing decisive to determine your decision otherwise roleplaywise (unless you're a DC with the welfare of sis and Mom at stake). Then the epilogue slides play and whatever you chose reverses in terms of what one would do if one knew as the character.

I also remember Sarah1281 noting that a DN can tell he'd be a weak ruler because he had both law and tradition on his side and couldn't get him a fair trial. Would that issue have occured to me? Probably not. Would it have occured to a DN? Why not? It's the world he/she lives in. Another important point she raises is the first confrontation in the Commons. Piotin gets ticked off and hacks a guy to death. Harrowmont panics and runs. So, that's both their character flaws in a nutshell. Bhelen's complete amorality by any standard, and the fact that Harrowmont just can't get anything done. I think this would occur to anybody raised as a noble.

And in the event that you approach Dulin Forender for "A Lord's Trust: The First Task" with Zevran in the party, he hears that Harrowmont's two best fighters backed out, and questions why you are supporting a candidate for king whose own supporters won't fight for him. I'd only seen that scene because I looked for it, (if I'm not playing rogue, I use Leiliana) but still, it doesn't get much more obvious than that.

But whereas the Harrowmont slides are fairly clear about him pitted against the casteless, it's not so clear that Bhelen then comes out as the "good guy." For sure it can be construed that he devotes himself to furthering the cause of the casteless even at the risk of losing the crown he'd murdered so many to obtain. Bhelen apparently offers greater "freedom" for any casteless who join the military agianst the darkspawn (and live), but it doesn't state what that "freedom" entails, how many actually received it, or how deplorable it is to grant freedom only at the end of military service. Did Lincoln emancipate blacks from slavery only if they serve in the US military? And the thing that Harrowmont is trashed for is that he's a "weak" ruler, ultimately falling to, wouldn't you know it, Bhelen wannabes. But what happens to Bhelen? He becomes isolated and even dissolves the Assembly to rule by martial law indefinitely. Even if Bhelen had a heart of gold behind his actions, he still gets stymied... and is thus also a "weak" ruler.

Yeah, the Assembly stonewalls both of them. The reason I say Harrowmont is weak? It doesn't stop Bhelen. He simply overpowers them, and when they try to make him pay with his life, they fail. That doesn't say anything about him morally, but it is Harrowmont's downfall, and the defeat Bhelen avoids.

This is why your choices are rock and hard place: you select what appears to be the just man who ends up a brutal ruler over the casteless, a stifling isolationist, and incapable of keeping coups at bay; and a slime mold who weasels, connives, and murders his way to the throne and beyond, and despite increasing trade with the surface (which is necessarily the right thing?) becomes isolated and tyrannical with what appears the whole of the castes of Orzammar deadlocked against him and the sense that caste bigotry against the casteless was at a fever pitch. The epilogue slide writers left no happy ending for Orzammar's future, no, other than if you choose to get Anora/ Alistair to send troops to aid Orzammar against the darkspawn, I suppose. Even the Anvil (which I thought was destroyed??) turns up again to plague dwarven society. Our choice is only which unhappy ending we prefer (if we choose to metagame it)...

Hey, don't diss metagaming. It's fun. (Which is kind of the point.)

And so, yes, it would be nice if there were a 3rd option. And really I'd love my Aeducan to be able to take the crown instead. But I don't actually resent the lack of a happy ending path. It's sobering, but not desultory. The only disappointment is in recognizing that they probably just did that to make the human Fereldan outcome look more squeaky clean.

Squeaky-clean is not a word I would use to describe anyone in Thedas. Though, yes, they might have been trying to draw a contrast there. And the third option thing? That would be an interesting mod, actually. As I'm pretty sure I've already mentioned though, you can become Harrowmont's heir.

And, mind you, the existence of what we may perceive as a "lesser evil" does not negate the reality of that "lesser evil" being the rock rather than the hard place (or visa versa).

Okay, good point. But it's not as bad as the stuff Bioware pulled with Merideth and the Harvester, or Corypheus getting away either way.

[Bhryaen]

Faerunner wrote...
Much for the reasons Bhryaen has mentioned, I don't think choosing Bhelen is choosing the lesser of two poisons, but an equally potent brew that attacks different organs from the kind I want to preserve a little longer. Either way, it does equal damage to the body as a whole.

Actually I wasn't saying this exactly. I would say that Bhelen has advantages for Orzammar's rule that Harrowmont obviously doesn't, and that therefore he would be a lesser evil. As you mentioned: "Granted, I choose Bhelen more often than not since slightly more rights and money to the lower classes is better than nothing." So there is some reason to favor him. My point was only to emphasize that, as the lesser evil, he's still an evil, not ultimately a good.

And you can ask cancer patients how healthy those chemo-"therapy" injections make them...

No, I think the way Orzammar's fate has been written is very consistent with how the devs wanted to proceed to DA2: with dwarves further marginalized. Thus they give dwarven society a caste system that they just can't seem to dislodge from society despite how it's compromising their future, they setup a series of choices for the player, none of which will succeed in saving Orzammar, and thus hand-wringing sets in and ultimately it can become credo such catch-phrases as "Orzammar is slowly dying as one of the last two Dwarven cities." What better way to write dwarves out of the series than to show them as either excessively ruthless or incompetant and thus destined to fail?

Thus you get Tweeledum and Tweedlekillyouifyougetinmyway, but either one becomes a rationalization for letting Orzammar pass out of the series as a hopeless cause... *grumble* After all my DC did to clear the Deep Roads and everything... which is why the DC origin is ultimately the most oppressed- even by the devs! (hehe)

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Bhryaen wrote...

And you can ask cancer patients how healthy those chemo-"therapy" injections make them...

Cancer is a desparate disease. That's why chemo exists. One might argue that that makes it the perfect analogy for Bhelen: he's the only thing left that might conceivably work.

No, I think the way Orzammar's fate has been written is very consistent with how the devs wanted to proceed to DA2: with dwarves further marginalized. Thus they give dwarven society a caste system that they just can't seem to dislodge from society despite how it's compromising their future, they setup a series of choices for the player, none of which will succeed in saving Orzammar, and thus hand-wringing sets in and ultimately it can become credo such catch-phrases as "Orzammar is slowly dying as one of the last two Dwarven cities." What better way to write dwarves out of the series than to show them as either excessively ruthless or incompetant and thus destined to fail?

I really hope that's not the way this series goes. And after I got them a Circle and everything too.


But if nothing else: Bhelen is trading with the surface. So, mutual benefit. Harrowmont, by comparison, ignores them at best. (I think. Does anyone know what quest you unlock in DA2 if you gave Harrowmont the throne? I get the feeling it'll give a hint as to how he did, and I kind of feel I might be missing something big by not knowing what happened. I know if Bhelen's king, he wipes out the entire Harrowmont family. I've never argued he's a saint. Merely a potential savior.)

Oh, and your "lesser of two evils" point... exactly. That's what I'm trying to say. It's not two equal evils (which I thought was Faerunner's point.) There is a definete, preferable candidate here.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 29 mai 2012 - 10:21 .

[Corker]

Bhryaen wrote...

That's the tricky aspect of the contrast between the actual gameplay and the epilogue slides- Harrowmont seems like the upstanding, honest guy compared to the sleazy powergrabber Bhelen, and there's nothing decisive to determine your decision otherwise roleplaywise (unless you're a DC with the welfare of sis and Mom at stake). Then the epilogue slides play and whatever you chose reverses in terms of what one would do if one knew as the character.

Thread old-timers can probably hum along to this; I've told the story before.

My first PT, a goody-goody Cousland, was not unspoiled.  I had my husband hovering at my shoulder for much of it, urging me to "Pick Bhelen!  Pick Bhelen!  You get better epilogue slides!"

And I told him, "My Cousland is a staunch royalist and prefers the rule of law. Harrowmont was the chosen heir, he gets the throne; and besides, Bhelen's a slime."

And then I met Zerlinda in Dust Town.  You know, the miner caste woman with the casteless baby?  Who was instructed by her father to abandon it in the Deep Roads?

I should mention that I was playing the game while on maternity leave.

She made an impression. So much so that, when I had the crown and was standing in the Assembly Chamber, and Harrowmont started thundering about "preserving dwarven traditions," I said to myself, "Screw your traditions" and handed the crown to Bhelen.

I've also known players who've said Zevran's verbal take-down of Dulin Forender decided them for Bhelen (or at least, against Harrowmont).

I agree that it's obviously set up so that Harrowmont looks like the "good" option, with the full consequences only becoming obvious after the fact.  (And hey, you know - that happens.  Nothing wrong with the Warden making the best decision with the information they have at the time.  It's not the Warden's fault that they can't see the future.)  But there are role-playing reasons, available in the game, for a not-wicked PC to go with Bhelen.

[Bhryaen]

Corker wrote...

Bhryaen wrote...
there's nothing decisive to determine your decision otherwise roleplaywise

Thread old-timers can probably hum along to this; I've told the story before...

Yes, I've read this one elsewhere... and I like it, able to visualize it even, but my point was that you can't know decisively that Harrowmont would favor how Zerlinda was treated or that Bhelen would make some reform that would've averted Zerlinda's plight- not even with the epilogue slides, much less at that point. You went with your gut- no pun intended- but you couldn't be certain it would pay off as a solution... well, except for the voice over your shoulder, but still.

Corker wrote...
I agree that it's obviously set up so that Harrowmont looks like the "good" option, with the full consequences only becoming obvious after the fact.  (And hey, you know - that happens.  Nothing wrong with the Warden making the best decision with the information they have at the time.  It's not the Warden's fault that they can't see the future.)  But there are role-playing reasons, available in the game, for a not-wicked PC to go with Bhelen.

My own first playthrough (unfinished, but she did all up to Landsmeet) was with a "goodly" elf mage lady... who had informed on Jowan immediately and was content to betray him, just wishing Lily wouldn't suffer. So tradition and established order weren't such a bad thing to her. She helped Zerlinda as well, but, being an elf (and new to the game anyway) she didn't know that Zerlinda's father wasn't an exception to dwarven society's rule. After all, he can relent and take his daughter back- though this didn't make him a good guy in Sywynlae's eyes, just a clear example of how "traditions" in dwarven society is an amorphous term and could refer to something else more meaningful. If the "cast your daughter out if she won't kill her casteless baby" is a tradition, she reasoned, it's not a tradition enforced by law if Zerlinda's caste-happy father can, in fact, back down- i.e., making it a personal choice of each noble family rather than something that will get anyone thrown in jail.

Traditions like that can change without tossing the entire society to the dogs, and IRL such traditions usually do have more likelihood to change when one doesn't throw society to the dogs- i.e., by voting for the sleazier candidate. And that's what it looks like you're doing by choosing Bhelen- from the sleaze that Bhelen has your char do to the way that it appears that Harrowmont is actually the underdog in terms of support in the Assembly, with Bhelen's thugs coming out to kill you right there on the streets as you do anything for Harrowmont. (At the time I didn't recognize that Harrowmont's thugs do the same. hehe But then again my character wouldn't know regardless.) So my elven mage was fairly certain she was making the clear best possible decision, particularly as her primary concern was with stabilizing Orzammar in order to get troops, and Harrowmont appeared to be the one more likely to respect the Gray Warden Treaties (a tradition) and return Orzammar to whatever stability and prosperity had existed under Endrin.

My DC had a similar experience, particularly with Bhelen reminding her so much of Beraht, and I ran her betraying her family for Harrowmont until she met up with Rica who disowned her. The way it felt I knew Kruklya would never have done that, so I replayed it staying with Bhelen the entire way, and it felt "right" for her, even if with her reservations about Beraht Bhelen. She was just so happy to see Rica happy and Kalah, well, still grumpy but out of that stifling pit of alcoholism anyway. Since the marriage of Bhelen to a "noble hunter" casteless wasn't necessarily an indication of how his reign would turn out, Kruklya just looked at it as that no king ever gave a damn about the casteless anyway in their privileged houses- all them appearing equally cruel- so what difference would one make over the other... except to her family. Even then though, there is nothing stable about the decision. After Bhelen takes power, if you go down the street in the Diamond Quarter you'll overhear two noble women discussing how they still want to dress up for the public celebrations even though Bhelen has announced his marriage to Rica because they figure they might still have a chance with him given that Rica's only a noble hunter. It's not clear if this is an indication of Bhelen's lack of fidelity or commitment to the DC's sis, especially after the rumors of Bhelen taking more than your sis to his bed (though I may be confusing the DN's experience on that point).

Actually a similar example to Zerlinda's came up that was a lot more
convincing to me of that point about tradition, though only as a DC. As a non-DC he just talks about the plight of the casteless as deriving from some ridiculous fable. That's offensive enough, but if you talk through his dialogue as a DC you get some option for asking him if your DC being a casteless matter to him, and he basically states that without your Warden status you're a nothing. It's not quite so bad as Riverdaleswhiteflash describes, but it ended my DC's discussion with him immediately. (And then she made a "dual sweep" animation into him... lol) There's a smaller example for the DC to talk to a Harrowmont supporter immediately after the initial "turf war" scene on entering Orzammar only to find her such a snob as to say she was only speaking to you because she thought you were a surfacer- somehow better than the Dust Town casteless. The thing is- none of these things indicated that Harrowmont as ruler would use the Anvil to forcibly conscript others and put down the casteless in a bloodbath. There seems no such brutal side to him, only to Bhelen.

@Riverdaleswhiteflash: I'm excluding fanfic from the running which again goes to my point of there being insufficient in-game reasons to make the ultimate choice decisive. The Zevran opinion is also just that- an opinion. You can even be in a romance with Zevran when he makes such an assessment, but if you investigate the matter yourself, does Zevran react to the way his two Proving champions were blackmailed and misled out of it rather than giving up on Harrowmont on their own? I haven't run with Zevran yet- planning to next run. So the Zevran encounter isn't exactly decisive either. In fact, it shows the player how opinion and reality are two different things.

You mention also the scene upon entering Orzammar where Bhelen's thugs kill Harrowmont's thugs. This didn't appear to me a demonstration of how Bhelen was stronger and Harrowmont weak. When I witnessed my entire home and family overrun and butchered by Howe's thugs, my thoughts weren't "Hm, Bryce Cousland weak, Arl Howe strong." When confronted by Tamlen's eagerness to kill the shems it's not my first thought, "KIlling them would be strong, letting them go weak." My city elf (before being smacked unconscious, of course,) didn't see Vaughan and think, "This guy is so strong, while us elves are just weak." It's a rather revolting way of seeing it. The only thing that was clear to me was that thugs were committing murder in the streets of the dwarven city without consequence during the social chaos (so watch out), that tensions were at a blood fever pitch regarding installing a new king, and that Bhelen's types were the more ruthless and brazenly violent than Harrowmont's.

On that note, Harrowmont's seemingly less thuggish background and group of supporters tends to make him appear to be in good company. Denek Helmi is one of my favorite DAO chars and at least starts out as a Harrowmont supporter, only changing his vote due to a lie you tell him. The two Harrowmont Proving champions seem like good guys too,
particularly Baizyl who, we find, had been pursuing love despite the caste system and backed down not for himself but for the sake of his beloved.

All that said though, my primary point is that the epilogue slides are not decisively represented in the experiences you have in Orzammar playwise, certainly not enough to guess how they'd turn out. If we'd see Harrowmont order a servant killed for acting out of her caste or order casteless out of the Diamond Quarter "by tradition" or make some remark about the casteless like the Shaper does... that would be more decisive. Or if Bhelen were to confide in your Warden early on that his efforts are intended simply to hack through an already brutal caste establishement by whatever means necessary in order to make reforms... or confide it to Rica or Vartag who can tell you... then your character would have a clue. Instead Bhelen proceeds in such a way as to make entirely inconspicuous his pro-casteless leanings, presumably in order to keep the noble and warrior caste from turning on him in the Assembly and having him removed themselves.

And of course this is a completely differerent question than which one is a better choice or which one actually is good for Orzammar.

Modifié par Bhryaen, 29 mai 2012 - 05:44 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Bhryaen wrote...

Corker wrote...

Bhryaen wrote...
there's nothing decisive to determine your decision otherwise roleplaywise

Thread old-timers can probably hum along to this; I've told the story before...

Yes, I've read this one elsewhere... and I like it, able to visualize it even, but my point was that you can't know decisively that Harrowmont would favor how Zerlinda was treated or that Bhelen would make some reform that would've averted Zerlinda's plight- not even with the epilogue slides, much less at that point. You went with your gut- no pun intended- but you couldn't be certain it would pay off as a solution... well, except for the voice over your shoulder, but still.

Corker wrote...
I agree that it's obviously set up so that Harrowmont looks like the "good" option, with the full consequences only becoming obvious after the fact.  (And hey, you know - that happens.  Nothing wrong with the Warden making the best decision with the information they have at the time.  It's not the Warden's fault that they can't see the future.)  But there are role-playing reasons, available in the game, for a not-wicked PC to go with Bhelen.

My own first playthrough (unfinished, but she did all up to Landsmeet) was with a "goodly" elf mage lady... who had informed on Jowan immediately and was content to betray him, just wishing Lily wouldn't suffer. So tradition and established order weren't such a bad thing to her. She helped Zerlinda as well, but, being an elf (and new to the game anyway) she didn't know that Zerlinda's father wasn't an exception to dwarven society's rule. After all, he can relent and take his daughter back- though this didn't make him a good guy in Sywynlae's eyes, just a clear example of how "traditions" in dwarven society is an amorphous term and could refer to something else more meaningful. If the "cast your daughter out if she won't kill her casteless baby" is a tradition, she reasoned, it's not a tradition enforced by law if Zerlinda's caste-happy father can, in fact, back down- i.e., making it a personal choice of each noble family rather than something that will get anyone thrown in jail.

Traditions like that can change without tossing the entire society to the dogs, and IRL such traditions usually do have more likelihood to change when one doesn't throw society to the dogs- i.e., by voting for the sleazier candidate. And that's what it looks like you're doing by choosing Bhelen- from the sleaze that Bhelen has your char do to the way that it appears that Harrowmont is actually the underdog in terms of support in the Assembly, with Bhelen's thugs coming out to kill you right there on the streets as you do anything for Harrowmont. (At the time I didn't recognize that Harrowmont's thugs do the same. hehe But then again my character wouldn't know regardless.) So my elven mage was fairly certain she was making the clear best possible decision, particularly as her primary concern was with stabilizing Orzammar in order to get troops, and Harrowmont appeared to be the one more likely to respect the Gray Warden Treaties (a tradition) and return Orzammar to whatever stability and prosperity had existed under Endrin.

My DC had a similar experience, particularly with Bhelen reminding her so much of Beraht, and I ran her betraying her family for Harrowmont until she met up with Rica who disowned her. The way it felt I knew Kruklya would never have done that, so I replayed it staying with Bhelen the entire way, and it felt "right" for her, even if with her reservations about Beraht Bhelen. She was just so happy to see Rica happy and Kalah, well, still grumpy but out of that stifling pit of alcoholism anyway. Since the marriage of Bhelen to a "noble hunter" casteless wasn't necessarily an indication of how his reign would turn out, Kruklya just looked at it as that no king ever gave a damn about the casteless anyway in their privileged houses- all them appearing equally cruel- so what difference would one make over the other... except to her family. Even then though, there is nothing stable about the decision. After Bhelen takes power, if you go down the street in the Diamond Quarter you'll overhear two noble women discussing how they still want to dress up for the public celebrations even though Bhelen has announced his marriage to Rica because they figure they might still have a chance with him given that Rica's only a noble hunter. It's not clear if this is an indication of Bhelen's lack of fidelity or commitment to the DC's sis, especially after the rumors of Bhelen taking more than your sis to his bed (though I may be confusing the DN's experience on that point).

I'm well aware this does not help Bhelen's point. I'm pointing it out for the sake of accuracy, because that's how I am. He's not marrying Rica. He's keeping her as a concubine. He comes right out and admits to planning to find an actual wife to a DC, though he points out that merely being his wife's child rather than Rica's will not mean that the wife's kid outranks the DC's nephew.

Actually a similar example to Zerlinda's came up that was a lot more
convincing to me of that point about tradition, though only as a DC. As a non-DC he just talks about the plight of the casteless as deriving from some ridiculous fable. That's offensive enough, but if you talk through his dialogue as a DC you get some option for asking him if your DC being a casteless matter to him, and he basically states that without your Warden status you're a nothing. It's not quite so bad as Riverdaleswhiteflash describes, but it ended my DC's discussion with him immediately. (And then she made a "dual sweep" animation into him... lol) There's a smaller example for the DC to talk to a Harrowmont supporter immediately after the initial "turf war" scene on entering Orzammar only to find her such a snob as to say she was only speaking to you because she thought you were a surfacer- somehow better than the Dust Town casteless. The thing is- none of these things indicated that Harrowmont as ruler would use the Anvil to forcibly conscript others and put down the casteless in a bloodbath. There seems no such brutal side to him, only to Bhelen.

The brutality isn't coming from him, its coming from Branka. (Or at least the bit where he allows the surface raids: attacking rebels with everything he has is just something a king does, and I'm not making any judgements there.) Allowing a Paragon to do such a thing, however, is the logical extent of his philosophy. The tradition is that a Paragon can do anything, and if he doesn't care about casteless, why would he care about non-dwarves?

And if I didn't quite have Harrowmont's conversational tone right? Sorry, like I said, been a while.

@Riverdaleswhiteflash: I'm excluding fanfic from the running which again goes to my point of there being insufficient in-game reasons to make the ultimate choice decisive. The Zevran opinion is also just that- an opinion. You can even be in a romance with Zevran when he makes such an assessment, but if you investigate the matter yourself, does Zevran react to the way his two Proving champions were blackmailed and misled out of it rather than giving up on Harrowmont on their own? I haven't run with Zevran yet- planning to next run. So the Zevran encounter isn't exactly decisive either. In fact, it shows the player how opinion and reality are two different things.

How would I know whether Zevran reacts to the blackmail thing? Although given his life philosophy, I think he'd just see how easily Bhelen crippled Harrowmont's team as confirmation of his first impression. Especially the one who was misled rather than blackmailed. Zevran would probably see that as hilarious.

Oh, and the fanfic thing? Yeah, weak, but I did mention where those exact words can be found ingame, by a man who is supposed to personify the system Harrowmont is seeking to let rule itself.

And while I did get the point where Harrowmont had both law and tradition on his side and couldn't get the PC a trial from a fanfic, I don't see how that invalidates the point that a in-game Dwarf Noble could figure that out for themselves. Does it make it decisive? No, but I didn't think that was the argument.

You mention also the scene upon entering Orzammar where Bhelen's thugs kill Harrowmont's thugs. This didn't appear to me a demonstration of how Bhelen was stronger and Harrowmont weak. When I witnessed my entire home and family overrun and butchered by Howe's thugs, my thoughts weren't "Hm, Bryce Cousland weak, Arl Howe strong." When confronted by Tamlen's eagerness to kill the shems it's not my first thought, "KIlling them would be strong, letting them go weak." My city elf (before being smacked unconscious, of course,) didn't see Vaughan and think, "This guy is so strong, while us elves are just weak." It's a rather revolting way of seeing it. The only thing that was clear to me was that thugs were committing murder in the streets of the dwarven city without consequence during the social chaos (so watch out), that tensions were at a blood fever pitch regarding installing a new king, and that Bhelen's types were the more ruthless and brazenly violent than Harrowmont's

There are characters ingame who think in that revolting way. Including much of Orzammar, that elf who rats you out, Tamlen and probably most of the other Dalish, etc. Is it valid? Arguably so, arguably not. The fact remains that its how a large (arguably disturbingly so) portion of Thedas thinks. Oh, and one thing this display shows is that Harrowmont's followers were more likely to turn tail than defend themselves. (Not that I can blame them. It's Piotin.)

And I did mention that Bhelen comes off as amoral in this scene. I should also have mentioned that he left completely non-chalantly, rather than at a dead run like he thought his life was in danger.

On that note, Harrowmont's seemingly less thuggish background and group of supporters tends to make him appear to be in good company. Denek Helmi is one of my favorite DAO chars and at least starts out as a Harrowmont supporter, only changing his vote due to a lie you tell him. The two Harrowmont Proving champions seem like good guys too,
particularly Baizyl who, we find, had been pursuing love despite the caste system and backed down not for himself but for the sake of his beloved.

They are trying to make Harrowmont look like the more moral option. We've already mentioned that. There is evidence that he isn't the best pragmatically, and if your PC uses inductive logic when looking at Orzammar's traditions, they can guess that Bhelen at least as conventionally moral as Harrowmont. I remember a merchant saying that at least as many people say Harrowmont killed Endrin as say Bhelen did: he comes right out and admits neither is better morally (though I draw issue with him there, admittedly on stuff that's more obvious from a metagaming position) and that therefore they should go with the choice that's better financially. I thought the discussion was whether or not there was a more moral option, though? We already agree on that, how'd we get to arguing about something else?

All that said though, my primary point is that the epilogue slides are not decisively represented in the experiences you have in Orzammar playwise, certainly not enough to guess how they'd turn out. If we'd see Harrowmont order a servant killed for acting out of her caste or order casteless out of the Diamond Quarter "by tradition" or make some remark about the casteless like the Shaper does... that would be more decisive. Or if Bhelen were to confide in your Warden early on that his efforts are intended simply to hack through an already brutal caste establishement by whatever means necessary in order to make reforms... or confide it to Rica or Vartag who can tell you... then your character would have a clue. Instead Bhelen proceeds in such a way as to make entirely inconspicuous his pro-casteless leanings, presumably in order to keep the noble and warrior caste from turning on him in the Assembly and having him removed themselves.

And of course this is a completely differerent question than which one is a better choice or which one actually is good for Orzammar.

Good for Orzammar? One could argue either, or neither, though I lean towards Bhelen. Good for everyone else? Bhelen uses the wealth from his trading to drive the darkspawn back. Dead spawn is good for both Orzammar and the surface.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 29 mai 2012 - 09:30 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Faerunner wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

The alternative is that surface trade is cut off entirely. I don't see how that's better, or even just as good. For that matter, I don't know where it says that only the casteless who sign up to very probably die get the new rights.

I don't see how it's too terrible. They've survived this long without it. On the casteless, the epilogue says that "the casteless are permitted to take arms against the darkspawn in exchange for new freedoms." So if they don't take up more arms or risk their lives, do they still get more freedoms? That it the question.

They could have been clearer on that point, huh?

Tradition and self-sufficient? Good on paper, no denying that. The problem is that they don't work in Orzammar. Their traditions include the caste system, and the casteless system. As for slightly more rights to the casteless and merchants being better than nothing, doesn't that imply that Bhelen is the slightly better candidate? Not to mention that it doesn't mention Harrowmont taking back any more thaigs. Forget Orzammar: darkspawn dying is good for everybody.

It's worked for over 900 years and counting. I'm not going to say that Bhelen is "the slightly better candidate" because I don't think he is. I think it's all a matter of perception. I think he is a slightly better candidate depending on who you find more tolerable and whose policies you think screws Orzammar less painfully, but screw they both do and I don't think there is no objectively "better" or "best" one. I think they're two sides to the same awful coin.

It is all a matter of perception and guesswork, until you get to the epliogue slides. How do you argue with dead darkspawn? Better question, how does a Warden argue with dead darkspawn?

And as for it working for 900 years... arguably, yes. There are only two dwarven cities. They're constantly under attack by the darkspawn, and Orzammar itself was saved only because up-till-then Warrior-Caste Paragon Aeducan ignored the Assembly and held off the darkspawn rather than wait for orders from the squabbling deshyrs. Reactions to the possibilty of a Fifth Blight among the dwarven military range from "At least this means they'll move on the Surface too, instead of just us" to "Smarter darkspawn? This could be the end." (I paraphrased, but that's the idea of both.)

In my case, I think that Bhelen is (ugh) slightly better for what many of my characters value in governing policies, but that doesn't mean I assume he's the better candidate in other fields or that he's the better candidate for most other players. I don't assume that just because I may prefer a course of action when playing automatically means that everyone else does too.

He's not as much better as one might want (otherwise, would he survive in Orzammar?) but he's noticeably more egalitarian, and arguably smarter. Not to mention that if the Anvil does survive, Harrowmont shows his true colors by allowing Branka to enslave elves and humans with it to protect the dwarves. I don't know if there's people arguing that he's a better man morally, but if there still are, how does that work?

He allows her to enslave humans and dwarves? Where does it say that? I read that she started raiding the surface after he refused her more volunteers and that the surface retaliated. That might show a little ineptness on his part to keep her under control, but I don't see where it says that he actively encouraged or even allowed her.

Epilogue slide, reread it just to make sure. And there's no way he didn't know, except that he didn't pay attention. (Which could only have lasted so long: the surface, probably meaning either Ferelden or Orlais, started a war over it. He could be blind and deaf, and he'd notice at that point.) So, she couldn't have done it around him. Really, though, she wouldn't have bothered. She's past controlling, and Harrowmont wouldn't have tried. If she declares for Bhelen, he just gives up.

And what of Bhelen's method of working actively and eagerly with Branka to provide subjects--willing or not--to the Anvil (and considering how ruthless he is, I'm sure he had no shortage of people to donate) until after she decided she no longer wanted to make golems only for the king? He was perfectly fine with her enslaving hordes of people until it no longer benefitted him personally, then suddenly the Anvil needed to be banned and locked away. What a guy.

My arguement that Bhelen is somewhat less slimy than Harrowmont is mostly because of the caste system, nor is it my main point: the fact that he's actually trying to solve Orzammar's darkspawn problem is my main point. At any rate, Harrowmont enslaves people with the Anvil too, he just ensures they aren't dwarves. (Apparently, even the casteless are better than surfacers, never mind the 2/3 chance he owes his crown to a non-dwarf. Or maybe he just killed all (or more likely most) of the brands when they rebelled... though really, that's what kings do. It's immoral, but it happens. He certainly wouldn't allow brands to go extinct, even for the sake of making golems. The caste system has a set of jobs that nobody with a caste can do, and a lot of Legionaires are casteless.)

Notice that Branka runs out of dwarven volunteers and has to resort to theft of people on the surface, but this never happens under Bhelen. She's just as greedy for bodies to put to the hammer either way, but it's under Harrowmont that she finds a shortage whereas Bhelen provides her as many as she needs until she wants to make them for someone besides him.

A lot of Orzammar's stagnation  and trouble with the darkspawn is because the power system is decentralized: every single deshyr, the king, and occasionally a Paragon. A lot of Bhelen's reforms and immoral actions are trying to give himself more power. I'm not arguing his reasons for this are unselfish. I'm arguing that he uses this power to do good things for his people, if not for good reasons. (The nobles object because they see only that the he has to step on tradition to do it. If they had any sense, they'd be on his side. I'd again like to point out that he gets results against the darkspawn by his own methods.)

Granted, I've never preserved the Anvil, so I've only gotten this information off the Dragon Age Wiki. Caridin says under no uncertain terms that those in power can and do abuse the Anvil, so I've never given them a chance to do it. No offense, but if you have preserved the Anvil, I find it a little ironic that one who preserves an item they know can be used to enslave people that those in power deem less worthy of life and freedom also praises the "more egalitarian" methods of Bhelen.

That was my evil playthrough. (I picked Harrowmont for that one, less because it was obvious he was evil {except in retrospect, or to a DC who investigates him} than because I wanted to make as screwed up a Thedas as possible, and was willing to metagame to do it. I knew Orzammar would turn to the surface for bodies, so I picked that.) Then later I made a playthrough where I gave Bhelen the Anvil, just because I'd never done that before. It's a video game: morality can effect what a character would do, but we the players aren't bound by it. I'm only arguing on this to show off how much attention I pay, and because I needed something to do. Thanks guys, this is fun.

Either way, whether I act morally has nothing to do with whether I know what the moral choice is, in real life or in video games.

And the point where Bhelen having a civil war is better than Harrowmont's (really Branka's) war with the surface? Morally, I don't see either as noticably more or less evil, but a war with the Surface causes damage to both Orzammar and the Surface. If nothing else, the damage Branka causes under Bhelen is limited to Orzammar.

By the way, does anyone else think Bioware was trying to provoke thought like this, maybe get a few internet debates going?

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 31 mai 2012 - 08:31 .

[ejoslin]

Hmmm, here is what the Shaperate says about the casteless:

Warden: What about the casteless?
Shaperate: The casteless descend from criminals and those repudiated by their own families. (with distaste)
Shaperate: Or who chose to go to the surface and live by human laws. They have no ancestors to guide them and no families to claim them. (with distaste)
Shaperate: They should not have been born. Their parents defied their shame and brought cursed children into the world. It's better they die young. (flat)

The conversation can then branch in a few different directions. All of them ending with the shaper basically saying the the casteless are not recorded so do not exist.

--

Orzammar is dying. It's mentioned more than once that their population is dwindling. Traditions just aren't going to keep it alive any more. And if Orzammar falls, Ferelden is in deep crap.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

ejoslin wrote...

Hmmm, here is what the Shaperate says about the casteless:

Warden: What about the casteless?
Shaperate: The casteless descend from criminals and those repudiated by their own families. (with distaste)
Shaperate: Or who chose to go to the surface and live by human laws. They have no ancestors to guide them and no families to claim them. (with distaste)
Shaperate: They should not have been born. Their parents defied their shame and brought cursed children into the world. It's better they die young. (flat)

The conversation can then branch in a few different directions. All of them ending with the shaper basically saying the the casteless are not recorded so do not exist.

--

Orzammar is dying. It's mentioned more than once that their population is dwindling. Traditions just aren't going to keep it alive any more. And if Orzammar falls, Ferelden is in deep crap.

Okay, not the "drowned at birth" line? Eh, I was close enough.