249 réponses à ce sujet

[JackDresden]

Rishavs wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

Rishavs wrote...

@Taleroth: I was queen. It came in the dialog option. Alistair referred to me as queen. I was engaged to him. So yep, I was queen. goddamnit!

You weren't queen.  You weren't married yet.  When did the ceremony occur?  You were going to be queen.  But that was contingent upon the Alistair surviving to marry you.  You can't off the groom before the wedding and still expect to get married.

Being engaged doesn't make you Queen.  Especially considering that even that isn't formalized until after the Archdemon fight.

i slept around with him?  
to put it simply, I had to be queen as there was simply noone else that could take the crown. That was the whole logic for my plan anyway. Anora was in prison for treason against the last king. As the bethroted to the last king, I was of course the natural choice for it. heck, in the ceremony i was actualy expecting the dialog where i push her off the stairs and take the crown.

The problem with your plan was that it was lame, being engaged to the king gives you no claim at all on the throne in any feudal system I've ever heard of. Had Anora been dead even the major noble houses would have fallen to fighting and politics to gain the throne for themselves.

The big problem with you plan is it's based on the strange idea that being engaged (not married) to the king puts you in line for the thrown, it never has in the real world or in Dragon Age.

[JackDresden]

Pimpmyvanagon wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

If you're impression that your character would be able to claim the throne -- a Grey Warden who was briefly engaged to another Grey Warden who never became King -- simply because Anora is dead, then you aren't paying attention. The only reason Alistair is even considered is because he's a Theirin.

Certainly, killing Anora and Alistair leaves it open for you making a claim, but at that point you're playing an entirely different game and one that probably involves more civil war (as I'm not sure even Arl Eamon would be so grateful so as to overlook the fact that you're attempting to wrest control of a throne that doesn't even belong to you).

But maybe you were playing a different game. Sometimes I get that impression from people, here.

It's hard to critique your own work.

What's Anora's claim to the throne? She was married to a now-deceased Theirin for a brief time. It differs only in degree from the Warden's claim. Yet no one bats an eye at her being made queen, if you choose to back her.

I'd also say there's a serious lack of other contenders. Arl Eamon is already the regent but his claim is, if anything, weaker than the Warden's. Alistair, Anora and Loghain are all dead. Who does that leave? The bald noble who always votes for Loghain during the Landsmeet segment?

For me, the writing in an RPG has failed when there is something I feel my character needs to say or do, but there is no option to. Anora getting plot immunity at the conclusion of the Landsmeet was a glaring example of this.

I feel it's more a failure to understand the difference between being engaged and married on the part of some players. Anora was actually queen, did not renounce her claim to the throne. Your character is a Grey warden who was never queen though she would have been had Alistair lived and been offcially crowned & they had got married, then you would have a claim to the throne.

Honestly if you are going to marry a king so you can kill them and take power you should keep the following in mind;

1. Marry him before you kill him.
2. Make sure his offcially crowned before you kill him.
3. If you forget 1 & 2 and still want to go after the throne you need an army and the support of nobles, (not to stop the blight which is the only remit the pledged themselves under), but to help take the trown from a queen who had a legitamate claim she never renounced.

To me it was obvious you'd have no claim on the throne and that Anora had not renounced hers so if Alistair dies you get nothing. It's a failure on the players part to understand how the monarchy works, your plan would also have failed in the real world for similar reasons e.g. you have no legitamate claim on the throne and Anora does.

Modifié par JackDresden, 16 décembre 2009 - 10:30 .

[JackDresden]

Pimpmyvanagon wrote...

Allyahnah wrote...
The only thing accomplished at the Landsmeet was the outcome that Alistair would be a better King than Loghain. Alistair himself says loud and clear that if he doesn't return from battle, Anora will be Queen.

You don't think a ruthlessly pragmatic player character (or, you know, a sane one) might possibly want to say something to Alistair about his decision? Especially as Anora has amply demonstrated that she very much wants to be queen and has no qualms with resorting to dishonest or underhanded methods to achieve her ambition?

It's kind of crazy. Alistair demands that she renounce her claim to the throne, and then puts her second in the line of succession a minute later.  Talk about quickly reversing a decision. And your player character just stares on in slack-jawed bemusement.

Actually makes perfect sense, Alistair knows that if he falls in the battle as seems likley unless someone with a strong claim on the throne takes it an already war ravished kingdom will suffer a civil war for the throne, maybe allowing an invasion why the Fereldans fight each other, and worse he may fall without stopping the blight, either way he knows Anora is the lesser evil should that happen.

Of course an option could be added for you to suggest Alistair marries you and offcially takes the thrown before the battle if you want to argue for another solution he might be suspicious you just want the throne though.

Of course I'm all for a second game where you start a civil war to steal the throne. But realisticly the only people who might follow you are the elves\\werewolves.

Mages are unlikley to want to involve themselves in a civil war, dwarfs will want to return home to defend their own city from the darkspawn who remain underground. The Fereldan army will fragment to follow which ever claiment their lords general alligance is to or follow Anora if she lives because she has a strong claim.

So it's you and a couple of werewolves/elves against all the other claiments for the throne.

[JackDresden]

Pimpmyvanagon wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

It is even more amusing that they have the same cheerfully confident attitude when they explain to David Gaider that he got the history wrong in his own story.

I would point out here that it's quite possible for a writer to make mistakes with their own story. It's called 'discontinuity', and it happens quite frequently, especially in media where there is a large amount of canon (established facts about the setting) that the writer must keep track of.

As I can see it, there are two (valid) complaints that have been brought up in this thread:
1. Anora's status as a monarch in her own right following Cailan's death (e.g. why is she a queen and not a princess-consort?).
2. Railroading in the Landsmeet dialogue forces an unwanted resolution in a game where Alistair dies (e.g. why can't our character persuade Alistair to execute Anora, or at least strip her of her titles and place in the line of succession so that Eamon or someone else would take the throne when Alistair dies; why can't our character attempt take the throne even if it would require a violent putsch and result in an unpleasant ending for Ferelden; etc. etc.)

I doubt either issue will ever be fixed (or, given the replies we've been getting in this thread, even acknowledged as issues), but it's worth bringing them up anyway. If nothing else, something for the writers to keep in mind when they're working on Dragon Age 2.

Ok for the last time,

1. Anora was queen because she married the king, she was a noble because her father had been raised to the nobility though born a commoner by the previous king. So she had claim to the thrown after her husband died. Your character on the other hand was consort to the king (never had an offcial corination so technically still only king to be), he had anounced his intention to marry you but hadn't yet so your only claim on the thrown was to be a member of a noble house.

2. Maybe there should be a high cunning option to get anora executed, and make Alistair marry you and get offcially crowned before the last battle, I kind of agree this could be fine for cunning evil characters. Fact is there isn't so the OPs plan couldn't work.

[Xandurpein]

JackDresden wrote...

Pimpmyvanagon wrote...

Allyahnah wrote...
The only thing accomplished at the Landsmeet was the outcome that Alistair would be a better King than Loghain. Alistair himself says loud and clear that if he doesn't return from battle, Anora will be Queen.

You don't think a ruthlessly pragmatic player character (or, you know, a sane one) might possibly want to say something to Alistair about his decision? Especially as Anora has amply demonstrated that she very much wants to be queen and has no qualms with resorting to dishonest or underhanded methods to achieve her ambition?

It's kind of crazy. Alistair demands that she renounce her claim to the throne, and then puts her second in the line of succession a minute later.  Talk about quickly reversing a decision. And your player character just stares on in slack-jawed bemusement.

Actually makes perfect sense, Alistair knows that if he falls in the battle as seems likley unless someone with a strong claim on the throne takes it an already war ravished kingdom will suffer a civil war for the throne, maybe allowing an invasion why the Fereldans fight each other, and worse he may fall without stopping the blight, either way he knows Anora is the lesser evil should that happen.

Of course an option could be added for you to suggest Alistair marries you and offcially takes the thrown before the battle if you want to argue for another solution he might be suspicious you just want the throne though.

Of course I'm all for a second game where you start a civil war to steal the throne. But realisticly the only people who might follow you are the elves\\\\\\\\werewolves.

Mages are unlikley to want to involve themselves in a civil war, dwarfs will want to return home to defend their own city from the darkspawn who remain underground. The Fereldan army will fragment to follow which ever claiment their lords general alligance is to or follow Anora if she lives because she has a strong claim.

So it's you and a couple of werewolves/elves against all the other claiments for the throne.

Indeed. So many people seem unable to grasp the political realities of the feudal monarchies. It is lineage and family bonds, not political agenda, power or fame that determines the succession. Nobody really expects that when someone gives up their claim to the throne publically it'll last longer than the current Kings reign. There are lots of examples from European Medieval history of people being resleased from jail and crowned, when the former King/Queen dies, such as Queen Elizabeth I of England. I have tried to explain this before.

Alistairs decision is perfectly reasonable and in no way contradictionary if you understand how a feudal monarchy works. The King bases his power on lineage and blood. Anytime a King tries to mess with the succession after him, he undermines his own claim to the throne - his lineage, and his wishes tend to be disregarded when he is dead anyway. The important thing to avoid in a feudal system was civil war, because of rival claims. That's why that as soon as it's settled who has the throne, everybody else with a decent claim to the throne has to swear fealty and renounce their claims. Those who wouldn't do that would be locked up, or possibly killed - but only if they openly rebelled. Of course some Kings did execute rivals on flimsier grounds, but this was usually regarded as a very bad thing and made the King look like a tyrant.

Without the blood of the royal family or a marriage (not just betrothed) you have no more legitimate claim to the throne than anyone else, and will be viewed as a usurper. Please try and get some facts about feudal monarchies before making assumptions about what is normal and not.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 16 décembre 2009 - 12:02 .

[Xandurpein]

For those which do not know their history, here is a quick run down of Elizabeth I and her siblings.
When Henry VIII of England died in 1553, he had four children by different wives, one son and three daughters. There was also religious strife in the country, His son Edward and the middle sister (half-sister actually) Elizabeth was protestants, while the elder sister Mary and the youngest sister also named Mary (later Mary, Queen of Scots) where catholics.
Edward was sickly and ruled for less than a year. He didn't want his oldest sister to inherit the crown if he died (He was 16 then and had no heir) becuase she was a catholic, so he wanted to exclude her from the sucession, but when he dies this was deemed illegal and Mary did become Queen Mary I anyway.
Mary was apparently not very healthy either and she only ruled for 5 years. She had the next half- sister in line Elizabeth, locked up in a tower since she was protestant and Mary wanted to reintroduce catholicism. But when Mary I died, Elizabeth still became Queen.
Following her coronation as Elizabeth I, Elizabeth did the sisterly thing and locked her remaining half-sister Mary Queen of Scots, up in a tower too. After several years Elizabeth DID execute Mary, but only after evidence was produced that Mary was actively fermenting rebellion against Elizabeth (I believe the historians are still not agreed on whether the charges was true or not).
The point is that you did not mess with the succession, even if your successor had a different agenda than yours. That is the whole reason why it was so important for Kings to produce male heirs, so they could control succession.

/Edit. Even one of the Kings with a really bad reputation in English Medieval history, Richard III, who was a real villian if you believe Shakespear. did nothing but lock up his nephews in a tower to keep the throne for many years. When he finally had them killed it was sees as something very shocking that contributed to his eventual downfall.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 16 décembre 2009 - 12:06 .

[Apophis2412]

Tulicus wrote...

I dont care if my female noble has a right to claim the thron, i claim it. It was planed thad Alister becomes King and me Queen. If Alister dies i will become queen without him. Anora (to bad there is no dialogoption for killing her) has to stepp aside or i step over her dead body and the body everyone arls who stand betwen me an the thrown. My charakter is a evel Femal noble with the will to rule the land for the next 28 years. She does not care if she is better than Logain, but she would not sacrifice so many soldiers to kill a king, she would send Zevran to deal with everyone till she is first in line ...


In Case of Civil war:

The Chantry´s: no big Problem
The Player can use the drangonkultist (if he didnt kill the dragon) as a counter.
What should the Chantry do against the reborn Andraste, the only option is to follow her. Every Chantry not folloing will get huntet down and burned. Didnt the dragonkultist say something like: after the Blight we take over the world? They shure would help you if they can become the main-religion of Fereldon.
The templars need Lyrium or the have to go throu a Detoxification. Make a deal with Bhelen, so he only sells Lyrium to THE PLAYER and no more to the Chantry. There will be a large number of Templars supporting there new dealer.

The Golem Army:
Branka needs souls, she dont care where these souls come from and i am shure the player can make a deal with her: 3 souls, 2 golems for her, 1 for his Army. Send her City-Elfs, Warprisoners and Criminals. (City-Elfs = no dalish support but dalish dont like you because you have a werwolfarmy)

The Crows:
Do the Crow-Quets and they like the Player. Give them Money and they will work for the Player.

The Circel:
They need Lyrium, if Behlen helps my charakter to get controll over the Lyrium, the mages will help you or run out of Lyrium very fast.

The Dwarfs:
Maby Behlen has no troups to support my charakter in a civil war against the lanting, but he can help you get controll over the Lyrium-Trade and he can help you get Golems from Branka.

Human Soldiers on your side:
As Human nobel you could get troups from High Ever, after killing Arl Howe. Maby the People there are still lojal to you.
Bann Alfstanna offers you Archers, because you helped her Brother.
The People of Redcliff owe you there Lives, maby they are more gratfull to you than to Eamon and his demonposses zombisummoning child?
The People of Fereldan love you, you ar there Hero. An agry mob with Pitchforks can do a lot of damage.

So if it comes to a civil war/ revolution(change from feudalims/aristocraty/"whatever they have" to asolute monarchy) the player has a army and can fight against there oponents.


Sorry BioWare you did a wunderfull Game and i had a lot of fun playing it, but i suppose i played the game i wished to play and not the game you developt for me to play. So the End is yours but the Kingdom should be mine

Here we go again:

Chantry: You can't counter a worldwide church with a small cult. And if Bhelen stopped the Lyrium traide than that would only lead to the invasion of Orzammar by both  the Chantry and the Tevinter Imperium. I doubt Bhelen is foolish enough to do that.
Golems: Branka only cares about defeating the Darkspawn and rebuilding the ancient Dwarven Empire. She cares little for what you do or what happens to the surface. And sending city elves and POW's to the anvil would have some major PR consequences.
Crows:  The Crows are a business. They support whoever pays them.  They don't care about what the player did.
Circle: How is it exactly that mages need Lirium?  And since the Circle is a part of the Chantry you would just have the Chantry against you again.
Dwarves: Is there any particular reason Bhelen should support you? Stopping the Lyrium trade is to risky and he isn't powerful enough to request golems from Branka.

Human: Most troops that Fergus took with him are killed. And both Loghain's/Anora's and Redcliffe's troops only joined you to stop the Blight.
And a mob of pitchforks is completely useless.

[menasure]

a coup might work but it will without a doubt be a 'messy' option because of the whole chantry institution-belief. you are fighting openly against the biggest network and faith of the world so possibility against a whole population even if some of them see you as a hero ... such things are very difficult to resolve by conventional warfare because even if you beat everyone at first the resistance will continue underground. you might succeed eventually but it will come at an impressive price and it will require more devious tactics ... pretty much the whole loghain experience again.

[Curlain]

imported_beer wrote...

Okay, I personally think there is no way FEMPC could have become queen after Alistair's death given the way the story plays out.

However, I am confused about one thing. If you pick Alistair for King, he does appoint you regent. So when he dies, what purpose does that serve? Anora was deposed after all, so I was a little flummoxed by the events to come. The chosen King dies, leaving a regent. The dead King's deposed wife is still alive and she has a claim but by marriage. I'd have expected Civil War round 2.

Can anyone help me understand how regents work in this setting?  A regent is supposed to rule in the absence or incapacity of a King, even if they are not queen/King themselves, right? Or governing by proxy in someone's name. Or am I getting my royal titles all mixed up.

Well I assume regents work as they do in our world (or should I say, how they used to work in our world), in that they rule as you say in the absence, or incapacity of a said ruler.  I'm guessing Loghain is using argument that Anora has appointed him regent during the Blight to deal with the crisis, so I guess in the game a ruler could also appoint someone regent if they choose to abidicate authority for a period.  However I think the ruler needs to still be alive for someone to remain regent (since the regent has no legitimate claim to the throne in their own right) otherwise the throne will pass to the next in line (and the regent's regency will obviously end).

Oh and a note to Xauderpien's point above, Richard III may never have actually murdered his newphews at all, since there's no proof of it beyond later Tudor propoganda, who had an invested interest in discrediting him to justify the legitmacy of their line,and of course were the House that patronized Shakespeare.  Also in contrast to Shakespeare's play, he died in a fairly heroic charge on Henry Tudor's (the future Henry VII) forces, rather then trying to run from the battlefield, he is possibly the most falsely maligned English king in history

Modifié par Curlain, 16 décembre 2009 - 12:46 .

[Spell Singer]

HarlequinDream wrote...
Anora is nobility. Her father was promoted to nobility before her birth, if I understand the timeline correctly. As a "human noble," your line has been destroyed, your family called traitors and stripped of their titles. Yes, people recognize you as a Cousland. You are somewhat respected by that, but you are nothing. Unless the king or queen restores your family rights.

The Couslands are the Teryns of Highever and what that Traitor Logain did, not to mention the treasonous actions of the now dead (and I rather doubt missed by anyone) Arl Howe will never get the support of the Landsmeet.

On the other hand, at least my character had the support of a Bann for taking back by my Terynage and since Howe was apparently too stupid to keep the merchants happy in denirem I can only assume he treated Highever poorly so the banns there would support a Cousland claim.  And that is all that matters, if the Banns support you you are Teryn if not you are nobody.  Howe was only given the title, he would have had to keep it at the next Landsmeet otherwise the Banns of the Teryn of Highever would just tell him to take a hike and without their support he has no power (read troops).  You as a Cousland and at that time the only known surviving one.  You are actually in a position of a great deal of potential power baring the fact you are  grey warden and hence prevented from actually taking any of it...but even knowing that I was a grey warden that Bann (the female one that sets the conditions of the duel) still offers her archers in support of my retaking Highever. 

The PC is not just some hedge knight from the edges of the Kokari wilds.  Until Fegus (thankfully) shows up you outrank any of the NPCs in the game except Logain&Anora and you are equal to him and more so since Cousland is an old house and he is a jumped up commoner...his power is that he is the Hero of the River Dane, and in fact that is why my character didn't have him killed...Alistair storming out was an upsetting turn of events but he himself told me clearly he didn't want to be king and was glad my plan was to support Anora...so I give him his fondest wish and he throws a temper tantrum worthy of a three year old with a toothache...great kingly behavior to be sure.  Anora suggesting he be killed was equally annoying...I just spared your fathers life and put you on the throne at great personal cost you dizzy wench after you left me to dangle in the wind with Ser C and her merry band.  Neither one of them was really all that impressive I have to say.  I was hoping that when push came to shove they would agree to marry as that solved all the issues neatly.  Though Anora's point that Alistair resembled her husband was the best one...I could only go...yeah that I really understand.  Beyond that the urge to knock their heads together was pretty overwhelming.

You have to give credit to Bioware that they did actually make you "nobility" and no joke about it (in both the noble origins).

The only thing I have noticed is that not once in 3 origin stories did I actually choose to be a grey warden.  In the human noble you are coerced, in the mage and city elf origins you are conscripted.  This leads to a certain acquardness with regards to Alistair and his "Duncan worship" since well not a one of my three characters actually felt actively grateful...well my Elf did sorta...kinda...well in the "you do what you have to do and maybe the horse will talk" way would describe it best.

But I don't see how unless Alistair suvives to marry you that the PC can become queen without a civil war.  Oh well my mage will just hopefully have fond memories...assuming I don't fubar the Alistair romance like I did the Liliana romance.  I mean really did she figure my character was giving her the special gifts cause I wanted to be her friend???  Clueless thy name is Lelianna.  At least I got the "The hero always gets the girl." line to make my characters feelings clear if obviously too late.  

Come to think on it...making a mage the Queen...oh man would the chantry go up over that.  So its basically a non-starter anyway...fond memories are the best you can hope for.  Well outside the mistress route and even that is likely to get the chantry's robe in a knot.

Modifié par Spell Singer, 16 décembre 2009 - 01:25 .

[Xandurpein]

Curlain wrote...

Oh and a note to Xauderpien's point above, Richard III may never have actually murdered his newphews at all, since there's no proof of it beyond later Tudor propoganda, who had an invested interest in discrediting him to justify the legitmacy of their line,and of course were the House that patronized Shakespeare.  Also in contrast to Shakespeare's play, he died in a fairly heroic charge on Henry Tudor's (the future Henry VII) forces, rather then trying to run from the battlefield, he is possibly the most falsely maligned English king in history

I am well aware of the fact that there is scholars who thinks the Tudors have made Richard III as a much worse villian as he was, not to mention that this has influenced some authors to write even more fanciful defences of him. Personally I don't think he was either better or worse than anybody else in that time, which means he was probably not a spotless hero exactly. That is why I wrote "if you believe Shakespear" in the first place. Whatever the reason, Richard III's nephews were killed when he was King, and it is very unlikely it was not done by his supporters, even if I guess it is open for debate if he knew personally about it or not. You could probably even argue that Loghain has borrowed something from the image of Richard III.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 16 décembre 2009 - 02:09 .

[Curlain]

Xandurpein wrote...


I am well aware of the fact that there is scholars who thinks the Tudors have made Richard III as a much worse villian as he was, not to mention that this has influenced some authors to write even more fanciful defences of him. Personally I don't think he was either better or worse than anybody else in that time, which means he was probably not a spotless hero exactly. That is why I wrote "if you believe Shakespear" in the first place. Whatever the reason, Richard III's nephews were killed when he was King, and it is very unlikely it was not done by his supporters, even if I guess it is open for debate if he knew personally about it or not. You could probably even argue that Loghain has borrowed something from the image of Richard III.

They died while he was king, there is not certain evience from the time they were actualy murdered.  Is it likely, possibly, but then there others instrested in the prince's death (such as the remaining members of House Lancaster, which Henry Tudor belonged to), but it yes it oculd have been Richard or his supporters.  Truth is though we have no idea who killed them or even if they were killed (children did die then suddenly of natural causes, more so then in Western countries today, even royal ones, though the fact they both died is odd).  But Richard's record as the Duke of York is as a fair, respected and honourable noble, and he was a strong support of his brother the King, so murder might be out of character with such are man (or mabye not, even he thought it was neessary to defend the throne).  Was he spotless hardly, but his record as a ruler (where they still survive) show him to be much more fair the many other monarchs during the medieval period

[Tirigon]

Apophis2412 wrote...

Here we go again:

Chantry: You can't counter a worldwide church with a small cult. And if Bhelen stopped the Lyrium traide than that would only lead to the invasion of Orzammar by both  the Chantry and the Tevinter Imperium. I doubt Bhelen is foolish enough to do that.

NOONE in his right mind would invade Orzammar, even more as Orzammar would be allied to the mages and the elves. Honestly, the Fereldans would stand no chance against the dwarfs alone, and now they have mages and archers too. If they invade Orzammar, they can as well capitulate to save a few lifes before they are defeated.

Golems: Branka only cares about defeating the Darkspawn and rebuilding the ancient Dwarven Empire. She cares little for what you do or what happens to the surface. And sending city elves and POW's to the anvil would have some major PR consequences.[/qoute]
As Emperor, YOU control the news. So there wont be negative PR. Im against forcing people to become golems, but it would be possible, if you are unscrupulous enough.

Crows:  The Crows are a business. They support whoever pays them.  They don't care about what the player did.

WRONG! If you finish the quests for the crows, Ignacio says they wont accept any treaties on you anymore and look forward to work with you. He even invites you to come to Antiva and meet them.

Circle: How is it exactly that mages need Lirium?  And since the Circle is a part of the Chantry you would just have the Chantry against you again.

To know why mages need Lyrium, read the codexes in-game. But it´s wrong the circle is part of the chantry. They are controlled by the chantry against their will, and this is why they would help you to fight the chantry. And then there are apostates, bloodmages etc... who are enemies of the chantry.

Dwarves: Is there any particular reason Bhelen should support you? Stopping the Lyrium trade is to risky and he isn't powerful enough to request golems from Branka.

There is one. An alliance with you will not only be good for you, it will also give Bhelen the chance to gain more power. For example, you could give him access to the Anvil and the golems (you have already shown you can reach it in the dwarfen quests), you could promise him to lead your armies in the deep roads and drive back the darkspawn as soon as you are King, or you could just remove him and make someone else, who helps you, King of Orzammar. How? Well, he is only King because YOU decided it. You can as well decide that the dwarfs need another King, and they will follow you, because you have been given the power to crown their king by a Paragon. And as we all know (if we read the codexes at least) Paragon > King in the dwarfen society.

Human: Most troops that Fergus took with him are killed. And both Loghain's/Anora's and Redcliffe's troops only joined you to stop the Blight.
And a mob of pitchforks is completely useless.

A mob of pitchforks is VERY useful, because you have better means (mages, werewolfes, Golems....) for the killing. All you still need is a justification that you really fight for the people. The mob of pitchforks will give you that. And then, the Redcliff troops have reason to support you (you saved their town), but they DONT have reason to support Anora or another noble. The only reason to fight you is if they are racists who dont want to ally with dwarfs and elves. And, if this is the case, I dont want them anyways (except as food for the werewolfes maybe).

Modifié par Tirigon, 16 décembre 2009 - 04:29 .

[tmp7704]

Tirigon wrote...

NOONE in his right mind would invade Orzammar

You do realize in at least few of the game endings the Chantry considers forming another exalted march against Orzammar. We are talking huge and influential religious organization here, "in right mind" doesn't necessarily need to apply when fanatics are involved.

You can as well decide that the dwarfs need another King, and they will follow you, because you have been given the power to crown their king by a Paragon.

Sure. Got another crown from the Paragon to hand to that new king? Oh oops, nope. Well, there goes your "power to crown kings". Anyone can claim they spoke with Paragons, but "no one in right mind" will believe that without some sort of tangible proof.

Modifié par tmp7704, 16 décembre 2009 - 04:41 .

[Pimpmyvanagon]

Xandurpein wrote...

Alistairs decision is perfectly reasonable and in no way contradictionary if you understand how a feudal monarchy works. The King bases his power on lineage and blood. Anytime a King tries to mess with the succession after him, he undermines his own claim to the throne - his lineage, and his wishes tend to be disregarded when he is dead anyway.

Sure. That's why the Bannorn object when Anora messes with the succession after her by ordering Alistair's execution as her first act as queen. Right?

Xandurpein wrote...

Anora was queen because she married the king, she was a noble because her father had been raised to the nobility though born a commoner by the previous king. So she had claim to the thrown after her husband
died. Your character on the other hand was consort to the king (never had an offcial corination so technically still only king to be), he had anounced his intention to marry you but hadn't yet so your only claim on the thrown was to be a member of a noble house.

We know that Ferelden has a title (prince-consort/princess-consort) specifically to be given to a person who was marrying royalty but not of royal blood themselves, to prevent them from claiming the throne after the death of their spouse. We know this because the player character is made one upon marriage to Alistair or Anora.

Anora's situation upon marriage to Cailan is almost exactly the same in every particular as that of a female human noble Warden upon marriage to Alistair. It follows that princess-consort was also Anora's station, regardless of what she was called out of courtesy, as if she was actually queen the succession would not have been in doubt, and she would not have needed the Landsmeet to confirm her title.

The fact that she was (if your character chooses to back her) is able to trade on her marriage to Cailan and previous experience to get made queen in her own right, in spite of the fact that she has no place in the succession - even being chosen over Alistair, who does have a legitimate claim, if you desire - strongly implies to me that the Bannorn are realists and not terribly hung up on blood ties or succession order, and if the dialogue choices allowed an attempt, the player character could try to do the same thing Anora did, using their engagement with Alistair and his status as uncrowned king.

However, the dialogue does not allow such an attempt, so we'll never know.

Modifié par Pimpmyvanagon, 16 décembre 2009 - 06:48 .

[Pimpmyvanagon]

Whoops, douple post.

Modifié par Pimpmyvanagon, 16 décembre 2009 - 06:43 .

[Tirigon]

tmp7704 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

NOONE in his right mind would invade Orzammar

You do realize in at least few of the game endings the Chantry considers forming another exalted march against Orzammar. We are talking huge and influential religious organization here, "in right mind" doesn't necessarily need to apply when fanatics are involved.

You can as well decide that the dwarfs need another King, and they will follow you, because you have been given the power to crown their king by a Paragon.

Sure. Got another crown from the Paragon to hand to that new king? Oh oops, nope. Well, there goes your "power to crown kings". Anyone can claim they spoke with Paragons, but "no one in right mind" will believe that without some sort of tangible proof.

If the chantry considers an exalted march against Orzammar, you have an UNBEATABLE reason why Orzammar would ally with me against them. You don´t even need to remove Bhelen then.

[Dark83]

Evainelithe wrote...

Still no explanation I see why the PC is made princess-consort and not queen like Anora -AFTER- (note how I don't say before?) her marriage with Cailan or Rowan (yes she was Queen and not Princess-Consort either) after her marriage with Maric.

I mentioned this elsewhere:

When the Prince of Wales (Charles) marries the Duchess of Cornwall
(Camilla) she becomes the Princess of Wales. When the Prince of Wales
becomes king, she will become "Her Royal Highness The Princess
Consort", not "Her Majesty The Queen".

I believe it's not quite as clear cut as "I married him, I'm the queen", and that other parties come into play.

[GmanFresh]

haha you cant kill the king he was your ticket.. shoulda done the ritual

[blaidfiste]

Do the ritual

MARRY Al

Then make your move (in theory)

[tmp7704]

Tirigon wrote...

If the chantry considers an exalted march against Orzammar, you have an UNBEATABLE reason why Orzammar would ally with me against them. You don´t even need to remove Bhelen then.

It actually makes far more sense for the dwarf king to simply kick out the few mages who are the root of the problem. He's a pragmatist, and there's no reason for him to get entangled in this.

Don't confuse willingness of one side to go to war over something with this matter being somehow important enough for the both sides to actually fight over it.

[DMThaane]

It’s almost like watching Theon Greyjoy and Cercie Lannister from A Song of Ice and Fire.

Although I am now stuck with the mental image of Tirigon being lead to the gallows yelling “Why don’t you love me!” While Rishavs is lead to the gallows yelling “But he was king damn it! He was king!”



And then Cori May being led to the gallows screaming “Why won’t you have sex with me!”

[Xandurpein]

Pimpmyvanagon wrote...

Sure. That's why the Bannorn object when Anora messes with the succession after her by ordering Alistair's execution as her first act as queen. Right?

She will only call for his execution if Alistair has thrown his tantrum, which may or may not be construed as rebellion. If you kill Loghain and then make Anora sole Queen, she will only ask Alistair to renounce his claim to the throne.

Pimpmyvanagon wrote...

It follows that princess-consort was also Anora's station, regardless of what she was called out of courtesy, as if she was actually queen the succession would not have been in doubt, and she would not have needed the Landsmeet to confirm her title.

Anora does not need anyone to have her status as Queen confirmed by the Landsmeet. She IS the ruling Queen. What Arl Eamon proposes is in effect a coup to replace the Queen with Alistair. Even David Gaider has confirmed that Anora is conformed as Queen and ruler of Ferelden. She wants you to help defend her title, not grab it. I assume that the Landsmeet is a safeguard that can depose the legitimate ruler if he or she is too out of line, but that is not the same as saying they elect the King and lineage is not the norm.

Also please note that a player marrying Anora can ask her to be made King instead. Anora will refuse on grounds that she don't want to be dependant on another male. It makes no sense for her say so if the real reason is that it is illegal or against custom. I do agree that it follows that technically Alistair ought to have been able to make the PC Queen, not just consort, if he so wished. I will not venture to say why he doesn't to do it.