41 réponses à ce sujet

[tklivory]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Of course, if Cailan was saved, then things become tricky for Loghain because there's nothing to guarantee Cailan wouldn't pull more Idiot Hero stunts.

I blame the armor.  You wear huge, glossy, golden armor like that and your brain goes all gooey. 

Nah, he's a young king who grew up with a father that did the impossible, and always falls in the shadow of him and the Hero (Loghain) that helped him.  I actually understand Cailan's character and motivations quite well.  But, having said that, yup - cipher.

[DeathScepter]

The Landsmeet has a point. To unify under a Leader, the question of the Grey Wardens or Loghain.

Duel is more of a personal thing. To test the Grey Warden's mettle.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Nizaris1 wrote...

If Loghain win, then what? All arguments before fall because of that? The landsmeet is pointless, right or wrong determined by who win the duel.

Why not just straight to the duel and no need to debate at all?

I think plan A was that the winner of the debate gets to execute the loser, then the duel was set up because the loser doesn't want to get executed and decides to attack the winner. It then becomes clear that the debate didn't actually decide anything, so they decide to let the duel decide it.

[lyriumaddict104]

Isn't it treachery to betray a king you've sworn an oath of loyalty to? Cailan was expecting Loghain's men to lead the flanking charge, that was the agreement prior to battle. To back out on that deal/plan, however foolish Cailan was, Loghain had to go back on his word and throw away his loyalty to the King. What's the point of having a monarch, with perhaps absolute power, if one can decide if and when one actually obeys that monarch? Loyalty to your King shouldn't be that fluid...at least not on the surface and in a manner so obvious. If Loghain didn't want to do as Cailan planned he should have forced Cailan to drop his foolish desire for glory and follow Loghain's advice. Loghain should have found a way to keep Cailan out of the battle if he wanted Cailan to live through it. Loghain obviously didn't have a problem disobeying orders. And if he didn't have balls enough to challenge Cailan openly he shouldn't have been coward enough to turn his back on Cailan and then claim it was a wise decision. And why wait for the signal? If they're watching the battle aren't they smart enough to see it's not going so well and that there's no reason to wait for someone else to tell them it's time to charge? Loghain blamed the Wardens for Cailan's death because he knew his spin on why he refused to aid the king wouldn't look good to anyone who didn't believe everything he said just because he'd once been a hero. Funnily enough, the only reason I could actually be okay with Loghain's decision to bail on Cailan is if he was actually mad at or trying to stop Cailan from setting Anora aside. It may have been that Loghain didn't know Cailan wouldn't do it, as long as it was suggested he might, that might have been enough.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

lyriumaddict104 wrote...

Isn't it treachery to betray a king you've sworn an oath of loyalty to? Cailan was expecting Loghain's men to lead the flanking charge, that was the agreement prior to battle. To back out on that deal/plan, however foolish Cailan was, Loghain had to go back on his word and throw away his loyalty to the King. What's the point of having a monarch, with perhaps absolute power, if one can decide if and when one actually obeys that monarch?

Couple of notes concerning this:

1: It was Loghain's honest opinion that the army he was leading would be basically destroyed if he brought it down there, and he made the decision to not do so, on the grounds that the country needs an army rather more than it needs a king.
2: It is emphasized over and over that the monarch of Ferelden does not have absolute power. That is one of the main objections to Loghain's style of ruling.

Loyalty to your King shouldn't be that fluid...at least not on the surface and in a manner so obvious. If Loghain didn't want to do as Cailan planned he should have forced Cailan to drop his foolish desire for glory and follow Loghain's advice. Loghain should have found a way to keep Cailan out of the battle if he wanted Cailan to live through it. Loghain obviously didn't have a problem disobeying orders. And if he didn't have balls enough to challenge Cailan openly he shouldn't have been coward enough to turn his back on Cailan and then claim it was a wise decision.

1: You just argued that he should have obeyed the king, didn't you? As for openly forcing Cailan to stay out of the fight? He would never have gotten away with that. The king doesn't have absolute power, but he has enough to make what you are suggesting an impossibility.
2: It was a wise decision. And nobody who has ever had Loghain in the party can call him a coward. He has no fear of death, hell he signs up to have his soul destroyed unless you talk him down.

And why wait for the signal? If they're watching the battle aren't they smart enough to see it's not going so well and that there's no reason to wait for someone else to tell them it's time to charge? Loghain blamed the Wardens for Cailan's death because he knew his spin on why he refused to aid the king wouldn't look good to anyone who didn't believe everything he said just because he'd once been a hero.

Dramatic reasons on Bioware's part?

Besides, there's no reason to wait for the signal if you know before the battle starts you're going to withdraw, either.

Meanwhile, the whole point to the signal is that it is from someone who can see the whole battlefield. Loghain meant for them to tell him exactly when the right time to charge was. Then it comes, and even from his vantage point he can see that it was lit at the wrong time. (If there was a right time at all.)

As for Cailan's death, he blamed them because he saw them not trying to talk Cailan out of this, and interpreted it to mean that they were in favor of this ****** move. From there, he made the kind of logically tenous induction that they were the ones who came up with the idea, because this logic-suspending notion was more comfortable to deal with than Cailan being an absolute moron.

Not to mention that he had no real way of knowing that the darkspawn were in the Tower, and thus no way of knowing that the Wardens lit the Tower late for any reason other than malice. (Before anyone tries to argue that Loghain let them in on purpose, let me note that he had no way of controlling or even communicating with them, that his men would never have gone along with this, and that he wasn't so far away from the Tower that letting the enemy into it couldn't have backfired on him. And yes, I've seen people make that argument.)

Funnily enough, the only reason I could actually be okay with Loghain's decision to bail on Cailan is if he was actually mad at or trying to stop Cailan from setting Anora aside. It may have been that Loghain didn't know Cailan wouldn't do it, as long as it was suggested he might, that might have been enough.

According to Gaider, he would have done it.  And I fail to see how regicide for this reason (which really would have been treason) is more okay than making an accounting of the lives he was about to throw away and deciding an unspecified number of trained soldiers is more important than a king he doubted he could save anyway.

Edit: Hey, wait a minute, what's this thread doing back among the living?

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 25 août 2012 - 08:51 .

[lyriumaddict104]

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Couple of notes concerning this:
1: It was Loghain's honest opinion that the army he was leading would be basically destroyed if he brought it down there, and he made the decision to not do so, on the grounds that the country needs an army rather more than it needs a king.
2: It is emphasized over and over that the monarch of Ferelden does not have absolute power. That is one of the main objections to Loghain's style of ruling.[/quote][quote]
[/quote] In regards to the first point, my problem with Loghain's decision was that he made it during battle, to abandon Cailan. If Loghain didn't want to waste his army at all, which I can respect, there should have been some way to back out when they were planning strategy. For the second point, I wasn't sure how DA's monarchy works.

1: You just argued that he should have obeyed the king, didn't you? As for openly forcing Cailan to stay out of the fight? He would never have gotten away with that. The king doesn't have absolute power, but he has enough to make what you are suggesting an impossibility? That's the point I was trying to make. There was no honorable, or legal perhaps, way for Loghain to back out at all, so even though it was foolish to waste his army on Cailan's reach for glory, the only right thing for Loghain to do would have been to go on and fight well, trying to save as many of his own men as possible. You make good arguments for his' not entering the fray in the first place but I see Loghain's keeping his forces out as just as bad as trying to force Cailan to alter his plans prior to battle. I think Loghain was stuck either way, in doing what he didn't want to.
2: It was a wise decision. And nobody who has ever had Loghain in the party can call him a coward. He has no fear of death, hell he signs up to have his soul destroyed unless you talk him down. I think Cailan's jumping into battle without listening to Duncan's entreaties to wait, in the least, for Eamon's soldiers was foolish enough. And I can see where one would find it hard to say Loghain shouldn't have withdrawn his soldiers, seeing as how he was smart enough to realize they might be annihilated but going on what little information one has just from the cutscene, to start with, Loghain's withdrawal seems it has to be either maliciousness or cowardice. The player only gets to see the good side of Loghain if one takes a chance on him at the Landsmeet. I think it's subjective. I don't like Loghain, at least pre-Landsmeet, and therefore can't see any good in what he does at Ostagar. Maybe it's easier if you do like him? I can reconcile my differences with him after I start talking to him in the party. He seems to have come around to seeing he was wrong. That was off maybe just one playthrough however. I will probably try having him in the party again sometime. What I meant to say was I know he's not a coward after he's in the party. He is willing to sacrifice himself to kill the archdemon and I actually had respect for him when he accepted his defeat after the duel but I had a hard time liking him or accepting what he'd done prior to that.


Dramatic reasons on Bioware's part? That's probably all it is.

Besides, there's no reason to wait for the signal if you know before the battle starts you're going to withdraw, either. True.

As for Cailan's death, he blamed them because he saw them not trying to talk Cailan out of this, and interpreted it to mean that they were in favor of this ****** move. From there, he made the kind of logically tenous induction that they were the ones who came up with the idea, because this logic-suspending notion was more comfortable to deal with than Cailan being an absolute moron. Well, he was wrong then. He didn't see that conversation the player witnessed between Duncan and Cailan when Duncan was trying cautiously to persuade Cailan to wait for reinforcements.

Not to mention that he had no real way of knowing that the darkspawn were in the Tower, and thus no way of knowing that the Wardens lit the Tower late for any reason other than malice. I remember Alistair or someone saying the tower had been sealed before the player's arrival and that it wouldn't be opened until the battle. But seeing that big hole did make me wonder how anyone had missed a darkspawn tunnel there, of all places. So maybe it's being closed off was reason enough to miss it? And I don't like Loghain but I don't believe that even he could have pulled that off. And you did make a good point in that trying to use it to his advantage could have backfired on him just as well. I don't believe he would have anyway, seems he didn't plan on having anyone but his own men there anyway. I didn't say so before but I just wonder how much of the darkspawn in the tower was there for the player to have someting to kill since we wouldn't be taking part in the main battle anyway. So, darkspawn presence and it taking so long can't factor into the argument if it was just gameplay? But it's interesting to show how the Wardens' tardiness in lighting the signal could have been turned to malicious intent, in his mind. Makes sense. Since he was against the Wardens being there anyway.

[quote]Funnily enough, the only reason I could actually be okay with Loghain's decision to bail on Cailan is if he was actually mad at or trying to stop Cailan from setting Anora aside. It may have been that Loghain didn't know Cailan wouldn't do it, as long as it was suggested he might, that might have been enough.
[/quote]
According to Gaider, he would have done it.  And I fail to see how regicide for this reason (which really would have been treason) is more okay than making an accounting of the lives you're about to throw away and deciding an unspecified number of trained soldiers is more important than a king you doubt you can save anyway. People probably have committed regicide for similar reasons, or for even less. I don't mean to contradict myself on saying it's ok to kill Cailan now but I feel it's easier to understand a father's pain or anger at how his daughter was going to be just thrown away after being used and then deemed no longer useful to the man she married and was supposed to be able to count on. Especially since she was to be thrown away in favor of an Orlesian Empress. And, if Anora had been put aside for being barren, would she have ever had a chance or re-marrying? Wouldn't it have been too shameful for her to endure at least in public life? I'm not saying throwing men's lives away on a foolish manouver is okay or even better. I just can't see it the same as say Cailan's launching only one volley of arrows, wasting the mabari on a charge that barely took down any darkspawn and then his sending soldiers on a charge that took them out of a defensive position or well-defended location even though Loghain's charge might have been just as wasted. Loghain might have used his own men better than Cailan did. But what I believe I meant by that comment on his daughter was that his private reason for killing or wanting Cailan to die might have been more understandable than just letting Cailan die because he's a fool. I'm not saying that personal/political reasons are any less treasonous but I like there to be a good reason for Loghain to want Cailan dead. He has to hate Cailan to want him to die. Even though Cailan was a ******, his death caused civil unrest and not just because of the Wardens or Alistair being another contender for the throne. So, all the in-fighting afterwards should have been enough reason to risk soldiers' lives to save the ****** king. If Cailan had lived (wishful thinking) maybe he would have learned his lesson and not wasted any more of his men on hopeless battle?
Edit: Hey, wait a minute, what's this thread doing back among the living?
[/quote]
Now, I'm not sure why I posted on this thread when the last one before mine was 27 days old.

Modifié par lyriumaddict104, 25 août 2012 - 09:34 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

[quote]lyriumaddict104 wrote...

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Couple of notes concerning this:
1: It was Loghain's honest opinion that the army he was leading would be basically destroyed if he brought it down there, and he made the decision to not do so, on the grounds that the country needs an army rather more than it needs a king.
2: It is emphasized over and over that the monarch of Ferelden does not have absolute power. That is one of the main objections to Loghain's style of ruling.[/quote][quote]
[/quote] In regards to the first point, my problem with Loghain's decision was that he made it during battle, to abandon Cailan. If Loghain didn't want to waste his army at all, which I can respect, there should have been some way to back out when they were planning strategy. For the second point, I wasn't sure how DA's monarchy works.

1: You just argued that he should have obeyed the king, didn't you? As for openly forcing Cailan to stay out of the fight? He would never have gotten away with that. The king doesn't have absolute power, but he has enough to make what you are suggesting an impossibility? That's the point I was trying to make. There was no honorable, or legal perhaps, way for Loghain to back out at all, so even though it was foolish to waste his army on Cailan's reach for glory, the only right thing for Loghain to do would have been to go on and fight well, trying to save as many of his own men as possible. You make good arguments for his' not entering the fray in the first place but I see Loghain's keeping his forces out as just as bad as trying to force Cailan to alter his plans prior to battle. I think Loghain was stuck either way, in doing what he didn't want to. [/quote]

I didn't mean to put a question mark there. The point I was trying to make was that even if the country as a whole can tell off the king, Loghain can't. He doesn't have enough power to overrule the king without basically the entire country behind him. That, by the way, was why he poisoned Eamon: he got wind that the king was going to do something stupid after Ostagar (not precisely what), and incapacitated the noble he expected to be most helpful to Cailan. It's also why he didn't get the army out of that mess before the battle began: that, and because, according to Gaider, he didn't realize yet just how many spawn were out there.

[quote]
2: It was a wise decision. And nobody who has ever had Loghain in the party can call him a coward. He has no fear of death, hell he signs up to have his soul destroyed unless you talk him down. I think Cailan's jumping into battle without listening to Duncan's entreaties to wait, in the least, for Eamon's soldiers was foolish enough. And I can see where one would find it hard to say Loghain shouldn't have withdrawn his soldiers, seeing as how he was smart enough to realize they might be annihilated but going on what little information one has just from the cutscene, to start with, Loghain's withdrawal seems it has to be either maliciousness or cowardice. The player only gets to see the good side of Loghain if one takes a chance on him at the Landsmeet. I think it's subjective. I don't like Loghain, at least pre-Landsmeet, and therefore can't see any good in what he does at Ostagar. Maybe it's easier if you do like him? I can reconcile my differences with him after I start talking to him in the party. He seems to have come around to seeing he was wrong. That was off maybe just one playthrough however. I will probably try having him in the party again sometime. What I meant to say was I know he's not a coward after he's in the party. He is willing to sacrifice himself to kill the archdemon and I actually had respect for him when he accepted his defeat after the duel but I had a hard time liking him or accepting what he'd done prior to that.

[/quote]

The cutscene? Yeah, but you're forgetting that Alistair comes right out and states that the signal you're about to light is late.

And no matter how annoying what he does prior to the Landsmeet is, it still makes sense if you consider that you have just inadvertantly convinced him the Wardens are trying their damnedest to screw his country. (Unless Flemeth convinces you he did it on purpose with her "Men's hearts hold shadows" line. I get the feeling she just does not like Loghain.)

[quote]

As for Cailan's death, he blamed them because he saw them not trying to talk Cailan out of this, and interpreted it to mean that they were in favor of this ****** move. From there, he made the kind of logically tenous induction that they were the ones who came up with the idea, because this logic-suspending notion was more comfortable to deal with than Cailan being an absolute moron. Well, he was wrong then. He didn't see that conversation the player witnessed between Duncan and Cailan when Duncan was trying cautiously to persuade Cailan to wait for reinforcements.

[/quote]

Of course he didn't. Bioware couldn't screw the Warden over like that if he had.

[quote]
Not to mention that he had no real way of knowing that the darkspawn were in the Tower, and thus no way of knowing that the Wardens lit the Tower late for any reason other than malice. I remember Alistair or someone saying the tower had been sealed before the player's arrival and that it wouldn't be opened until the battle. But seeing that big hole did make me wonder how anyone had missed a darkspawn tunnel there, of all places. So maybe it's being closed off was reason enough to miss it? And I don't like Loghain but I don't believe that even he could have pulled that off. And you did make a good point in that trying to use it to his advantage could have backfired on him just as well. I don't believe he would have anyway, seems he didn't plan on having anyone but his own men there anyway. I didn't say so before but I just wonder how much of the darkspawn in the tower was there for the player to have someting to kill since we wouldn't be taking part in the main battle anyway. So, darkspawn presence and it taking so long can't factor into the argument if it was just gameplay? But it's interesting to show how the Wardens' tardiness in lighting the signal could have been turned to malicious intent, in his mind. Makes sense. Since he was against the Wardens being there anyway.

[/quote]

A guard at the Tower Entrance, I think. As to why they missed it, I think they only broke into the Tower shortly before the Warden arrives. They did a lot of damage in that short time, but hey, gameplay and story. And according the story, they are supposed to be more dangerous than the game makes them, which explains why they already run the Tower in such a short time.

[quote]Funnily enough, the only reason I could actually be okay with Loghain's decision to bail on Cailan is if he was actually mad at or trying to stop Cailan from setting Anora aside. It may have been that Loghain didn't know Cailan wouldn't do it, as long as it was suggested he might, that might have been enough.
[/quote]
According to Gaider, he would have done it.  And I fail to see how regicide for this reason (which really would have been treason) is more okay than making an accounting of the lives you're about to throw away and deciding an unspecified number of trained soldiers is more important than a king you doubt you can save anyway. People probably have committed regicide for similar reasons, or for even less. I don't mean to contradict myself on saying it's ok to kill Cailan now but I feel it's easier to understand a father's pain or anger at how his daughter was going to be just thrown away after being used and then deemed no longer useful to the man she married and was supposed to be able to count on. Especially since she was to be thrown away in favor of an Orlesian **at this point something weird happened and the rest of the text got deleted**
[/quote]

Well, yeah, I'll grant that morally acceptable and understandable are separate.

As for the rest of it, that works pretty well with the point I'm trying to make. Loghain decided to use his own men better than Cailan did. He didn't see any way he could have made a difference without charging down there, since by the time the darkspawn swarmed up to where Loghain's men could take advantage of the terrain somehow, Cailan and a bunch of soldiers would have been dead anyway. Actually, Cailan almost certainly would have been dead anyway even if Loghain had decided to sacrifice the men. The good that bringing someone back alive would do is logically irrelevant if they are not coming back alive no matter what you sacrifice, as Loghain believed the situation to be.

As for the in-fighting... Loghain could have gone about averting it better than he did. That said, if they weren't going to be reasonable to a more reasonable Loghain without Cailan's corpse (I'm pretty sure that's what he would have presented them), I find it hard to believe that retrieving it would have helped appreciably. If it had? He would still be down that army.

One final note: all of this is hypothetical. I don't always base my Wardens' decisions on it. I find it's more fun to play a variety of Wardens, with a variety of worldviews. My Dalish, for instance, was brought up in a small clan of people he worked closely with. I didn't expect someone who grew up in that environment would really bother thinking too hard on Loghain's betrayal.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 25 août 2012 - 10:23 .

[lyriumaddict104]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
I didn't mean to put a question mark there. The point I was trying to make was that even if the country as a whole can tell off the king, Loghain can't. He doesn't have enough power to overrule the king without basically the entire country behind him. That, by the way, was why he poisoned Eamon: he got wind that the king was going to do something stupid after Ostagar (not precisely what), and incapacitated the noble he expected to be most helpful to Cailan. It's also why he didn't get the army out of that mess before the battle began: that, and because, according to Gaider, he didn't realize yet just how many spawn were out there.

That is something I"ve forgotten. No one really knew how many spawn were out there. Cailan himself doubts whether it's a true Blight at the beginning, right? I read a lot but I don't read outside sources for games very much, so I'm not really caught up on all that Gaider has said about the game or any of the characters. That Loghain suspected Cailan was up to something, planning something outside of Ostagar makes a difference. I know even without an absolute monarchy no one can really openly challenge the king like that, I just wish Loghain hadn't betrayed us, even though that's not really possible either. If nothing else, it's likely a plot device? or mechanics. There wouldn't have been any conflict in the game aside from preparing to fight the Archdemon and if the army hadn't been decimated we wouldn't have needed the allies as desperately, possibly.

The cutscene? Yeah, but you're forgetting that Alistair comes right out and states that the signal you're about to light is late.
And no matter how annoying what he does prior to the Landsmeet is, it still makes sense if you consider that you have just inadvertantly convinced him the Wardens are trying their damnedest to screw his country. (Unless Flemeth convinces you he did it on purpose with her "Men's hearts hold shadows" line. I get the feeling she just does not like Loghain.)

That may be the case. From what we can see as the Wardens, we know we're not deliberately screwing over his country. He might have had cause to suspect Orlais, even if the Wardens claim to be neutral but even without Flemeth's comment, if you play the HN origin it could seem like it was a plan of Loghain's from the beginning, to practically undermine every institution/group in Ferelden. He was in communication with Uldred and Jowan later, and he must have allowed Howe to take over Highever or he really wasn't keeping up with his lackey as he should have been. I don't mean to drag this out because it can be done but I can accept that the withdrawal wasn't related to other events the player witnesses through different origins if it's not meant to be connected. Even though to me it looks like events prior to Ostagar are connected and all of it was planned by Howe or Loghain and the betrayal at Ostagar seals the deal, regardless of strategy. I just have a hard time shaking that notion. Again, I haven't read anything outside the game so I'm not sure of what Gaider has confirmed or not.

A guard at the Tower Entrance, I think. As to why they missed it, I think they only broke into the Tower shortly before the Warden arrives. They did a lot of damage in that short time, but hey, gameplay and story. And according the story, they are supposed to be more dangerous than the game makes them, which explains why they already run the Tower in such a short time.

I guess if gameplay did match up to story then we wouldnt have likely ever made it in time to light the beacon. We were just newly joined to the Wardens and hardly skilled at all.

Modifié par lyriumaddict104, 29 août 2012 - 08:05 .

[TEWR]

lyriumaddict104 wrote...

Isn't it treachery to betray a king you've sworn an oath of loyalty to? Cailan was expecting Loghain's men to lead the flanking charge, that was the agreement prior to battle. To back out on that deal/plan, however foolish Cailan was, Loghain had to go back on his word and throw away his loyalty to the King. What's the point of having a monarch, with perhaps absolute power, if one can decide if and when one actually obeys that monarch?

A few things to note:

1) The army would've been destroyed entirely had Loghain charged. The Darkspawn were far too numerous for the plan to have actually worked.

2) Cailan ruined the plan by having his men charge out of the valley and into the Darkspawn as opposed to staying in position and defending the area by way of a phalanx-like formation. In addition, he wasted the Mabari hounds -- using them as fodder that took down one or two Darkspawn each -- and only ordered one volley of arrows to be fired. As a result of all of this, flanking was impossible and not suitable.

3) Loghain once promised Maric -- Cailan's father and the former King of Ferelden -- that no one person would be more important then the entire kingdom.

4) Loghain didn't leave Cailan to die easily. He did care for Cailan, the foolish, idealistic, spoiled, and pampered brat that Cailan was.

5) The monarchs of Ferelden don't have absolute power. It's told to us that the monarchs of Ferelden only ascend to the throne with the backing of the Bannorn and they have to work really hard just to maintain the support of the Bannorn.

Loyalty to your King shouldn't be that fluid...at least not on the surface and in a manner so obvious. If Loghain didn't want to do as Cailan planned he should have forced Cailan to drop his foolish desire for glory and follow Loghain's advice. Loghain should have found a way to keep Cailan out of the battle if he wanted Cailan to live through it. .

I think this would probably fall into a Romantic type of mindset. Loghain was loyal to his king, but more so to his country. He was prioritizing Ferelden's safety over charging into the valley,  which would result in the loss of the army and thus endanger Ferelden as the Banns wouldn't be united. Had he charged, all it would've done would've been to preserve his honor and loyalty to the King in the eyes of the people, but Ferelden would've been lost.

While he didn't explain himself during the Landsmeet very well -- which ended up leading to the civil war -- and did make some bad decisions going forward, his intentions were always to protect Ferelden, even if it meant he had to be branded a traitor to do so.

It brings to mind General Duessel the Obsidian of Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones or even General Tauroneo of Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance and Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn.

Both characters are esteemed knights sworn to serve their liege the Emperor/King of the Grado Empire/Kingdom of Daein -- respectively towards each character. Both end up possibly betraying their monarchs, but it's to protect the kingdoms they live in. And they gladly accept being branded traitors if that's what it takes to keep their country safe.

You will live, Duessel. As a traitor... in disgrace. I know that for a man such as you this is more agonizing then death. But you will live nonetheless. You will live for something more important. -- Prince Ephraim of Renais.

Tauroneo then goes on in Radiant Dawn to see his beloved country freed from an unjust occupation and placing the rightful king on the throne, as they were told who the heir of the former king was by someone else and were protecting him.

Loghain obviously didn't have a problem disobeying orders. And if he didn't have balls enough to challenge Cailan openly he shouldn't have been coward enough to turn his back on Cailan and then claim it was a wise decision

It was a wise decision. Had he charged, the Darkspawn horde -- which stretched as far back as the Korcari Wilds can be visibly seen -- would've destroyed the army.

 

And why wait for the signal? If they're watching the battle aren't they smart enough to see it's not going so well and that there's no reason to wait for someone else to tell them it's time to charge?

There was only so much of the battle that Loghain could see, but it was enough to deduce that the battle was not only going horribly, but wasn't winnable. And that's when the beacon was lit, which showed him that it truly was too late. Darkspawn kept pouring out with no end in sight and the army under Cailan was breaking down quickly -- due in large part to Cailan's idiotic orders during the actual battle. 

Though Loghain, being the general of Ferelden for 20 years and being a man who wanted to know where his borders ended and how best to defend them, should've studied Ostagar in any of the years he was Teyrn of Gwaren and General of Ferelden.

Loghain blamed the Wardens for Cailan's death because he knew his spin on why he refused to aid the king wouldn't look good to anyone who didn't believe everything he said just because he'd once been a hero.

No, that's not why. It's because the Wardens have a history of aiding Orlais further its expansionistic/imperialistic tendencies during and after the Blights. They don't do so now -- well, they claim as much, but Loghain found it hard to believe such things -- , but they did. So he probably thought that the delayed beacon was an Orlesian/Warden ploy to destablilize Ferelden -- especially if he had charged -- and give the Orlesians a weakened nation to "help" after the Blight was over, as they had done in the past.

And that the beacon was lit too late and he didn't know Darkspawn entered the Tower, delaying the beacon

And that because of the Wardens' prior history, Loghain was afraid that Orlais would reconquer Ferelden using the Blight as a pretense for it -- as they did to the Free Marches, Nevarra, and somewhere else IIRC. Oh and let's not forget the events of the Calling, which only further made Loghain wary of the Wardens.

He could've easily explained why he left Cailan to die and the nobility probably would've believed him. But in his mind, the Wardens deliberately sabotaged the battle of Ostagar and he was forced to make the hard choice.

All this said, he could've sent a squad of soldiers to at least attempt to rescue Cailan. That much I won't deny. But he shouldn't have charged in.

I remember Alistair or someone saying the tower had been sealed before the player's arrival and that it wouldn't be opened until the battle.

That was never said. What was said was that the lower chambers were discovered and were being explored. They were never sealed, and Return to Ostagar doesn't give any indication that they ever were.

 Since he was against the Wardens being there anyway.

You have to also remember that the Wardens failed to inform Loghain and Cailan -- the General of the Army and the King of Ferelden -- of just why they're needed against the Darkspawn and how they know it's a Blight.

Like, specifically, as opposed to vague comments on the subject. As a result, he really didn't know why they were needed and largely thought they were unnecessary. Had he known, he would've had a different outlook on the Order's necessity.

This is a matter that I've brought up before, but really find more blame to rest on the shoulders of the army then the Wardens. It's 60% the fault of the army -- Loghain and Cailan included -- and 40% the fault of the Wardens, in my mind.

Both sides are to blame. How much so depends on the person.

He was in communication with Uldred and Jowan later, and he must have allowed Howe to take over Highever or he really wasn't keeping up with his lackey as he should have been

He didn't allow Howe to take over Highever. What Howe did was of Howe's own volition and due to Howe's own selfish ambitions.

After Ostagar, Loghain felt the need to rely on Howe's supposed political mind -- personally, I don't think Howe had much of one, but meh -- and at this point Howe was the Arl of Amaranthine and Denerim and the Teyrn of Highever.

That's the majority of the Coastlands area. So Loghain felt it necessary to temporarily excuse Howe's actions until the Blight and Civil War were dealt with. Had he tried to fight against Howe, that would've led to a war on three fronts: the Darkspawn, the Bannorn at war with Loghain, and Howe's forces.

Ferelden would've been doomed.

He never allowed it. He never approved of it. As Loghain makes clear through his actions and words, he's had to do some morally reprehensible things because they were necessary. What is necessary isn't always morally acceptable.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 27 août 2012 - 07:34 .

[TEWR]

As for Cailan's death, he blamed them because he saw them not trying to talk Cailan out of this, and interpreted it to mean that they were in favor of this ****** move. From there, he made the kind of logically tenous induction that they were the ones who came up with the idea, because this logic-suspending notion was more comfortable to deal with than Cailan being an absolute moron.

Well, he did acknowledge that Cailan was an absolute moron, in dialogue with Anora during the "Meanwhile, in Denerim" cutscenes and at the Landsmeet when the Warden brings up Ostagar.

[Jedimaster88]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



He never allowed it. He never approved of it. As Loghain makes clear through his actions and words, he's had to do some morally reprehensible things because they were necessary. What is necessary isn't always morally acceptable.

And thats a dangerous path to walk. We all have different opinions about what is necessary and what isnt.

I think some people use those words too eagerly and rather use them as an excuse for their actions.

As my warden says to Avernus; "some things you just dont do"

I personally think that about all of Loghain´s actions were UNNECESSARY. Ostagar Im not sure of but pretty much everything else could have been avoided had he just thought more carefully and done the right things.

Couldnt he just execute Howe as soon as he shows his treacherous face without his troops? Kill howe, put his troops against the darkspawn and instead rely on Anora´s political mind. People are only happy when Howe is dead and Anora is supposed to be well loved and respected and skilled so she could propably unite the nobility better than Loghain.

I realize that unpleasant things have to be made sometimes but I think like Anderson says in ME, that those unpleasant things should only be made if there is absolutely no other way. In loghains situation I believe there were plenty of other ways available.

Im also a bit curious about him blaming the wardens for the ostagar massacre. When he makes his claims, I always think; "where is his evidence of this?". He may be suspicious about the wardens etc, but suspicions alone arent reason enough. When someone makes such an accusation, I always expect there to be some solid evidence, not just suspicions and words that anyone can say.

Modifié par Jedimaster88, 27 août 2012 - 03:59 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Jedimaster88 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



He never allowed it. He never approved of it. As Loghain makes clear through his actions and words, he's had to do some morally reprehensible things because they were necessary. What is necessary isn't always morally acceptable.

And thats a dangerous path to walk. We all have different opinions about what is necessary and what isnt.

That's probably the best summary of Loghain I've ever heard.

I think some people use those words too eagerly and rather use them as an excuse for their actions.

As my warden says to Avernus; "some things you just dont do"

I personally think that about all of Loghain´s actions were UNNECESSARY. Ostagar Im not sure of but pretty much everything else could have been avoided had he just thought more carefully and done the right things.

Couldnt he just execute Howe as soon as he shows his treacherous face without his troops? Kill howe, put his troops against the darkspawn and instead rely on Anora´s political mind. People are only happy when Howe is dead and Anora is supposed to be well loved and respected and skilled so she could propably unite the nobility better than Loghain.

In a time of civil war? I'm sure he was tempted, but he really didn't need to create a third side. Some of Howe's men would have agreed to join Loghain after Howe died, maybe even most if Loghain co-opted Thomas.  Or maybe most of them would have turned on Loghain, given how rational some of Howe's sub-nobles are about burying the hatchet and working with the Warden after Howe's death. At any rate, those Loghain didn't take control of would have started making his life hell. Between his reasonable but ultimately unwarranted fear of Orlais, and the very real threat of the Bannorn and the spawn, he didn't think he could afford to make enemies.

I realize that unpleasant things have to be made sometimes but I think like Anderson says in ME, that those unpleasant things should only be made if there is absolutely no other way. In loghains situation I believe there were plenty of other ways available.

Could you be more specific for some of them? I can't think of anything that would have gotten Loghain the money for his armies apart from raising taxes, which is unpopular even when it's outright neccesary. And since the Warden probably ends up using those armies (in addition to the allies he/she gathers) slavery might have saved Ferelden after all. (I've never defended the slavery thing at all except as a devil's advocate kind of thing, now that I realize it might have been the deciding factor I'm kind of distressed. It's no fun to win a war that way. <_<)

Not that I'm not denying Loghain could have gone about averting the Civil War better. He dropped the ball trying to intimidate the Bannorn rather than reasoning with them. (Not that I'm sure that would have worked either.)

Im also a bit curious about him blaming the wardens for the ostagar massacre. When he makes his claims, I always think; "where is his evidence of this?". He may be suspicious about the wardens etc, but suspicions alone arent reason enough. When someone makes such an accusation, I always expect there to be some solid evidence, not just suspicions and words that anyone can say.

Well, that's rather what it looked like from his point of view.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 28 août 2012 - 03:51 .

[Jedimaster88]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Could you be more specific for some of them? I can't think of anything that would have gotten Loghain the money for his armies apart from raising taxes, which is unpopular even when it's outright neccesary. And since the Warden probably ends up using those armies (in addition to the allies he/she gathers) slavery might have saved Ferelden after all. (I've never defended the slavery thing at all except as a devil's advocate kind of thing, now that I realize it might have been the deciding factor I'm kind of distressed. It's no fun to win a war that way. <_<)

Not that I'm not denying Loghain could have gone about averting the Civil War better. He dropped the ball trying to intimidate the Bannorn rather than reasoning with them. (Not that I'm sure that would have worked either.)

.

I dont know if Loghain had been able to reason with the bannorn. Somehow I doubt it, but Anora on the other hand is a different story. As the game tells us, she is very loved and respected among the nobility and the common people. I believe she could have reasoned with the bannorn and the other nobility. I dont remember hearing that anyone among the nobility had anything bad to say about her. She might have been able to prevent the civil war or at least helped to minimize the damage that came later.

Instead of slaughtering and selling the elves into slavery, make use of them. Loghain already lead elves during the war against Orlais so what is stopping him from doing so again. I imagine many of the elves would be willing to defend their homes if given the chance. Instead they are treated as the casteless in Orzamar, which is just stupid and wrong.

As for the money business.. well thats a tough one and I have to admit I dont have any straight answers because Im no expert in economics. One thing that comes to my mind is to keep Howe away from the treasury. I dont know if its correct but I have heard some people saying that Howe took a quite amount of money for himself from the treasury. If its correct then thats just one more reason to kill him and get rid of him. Other things that come to my mind is what the warden does in Amaranthine. Protecting merchants and increasing trade through it. Maybe the nobility would give donations if reasoned ( Anora might have succeeded in this).

Nothing really comes to mind about the money business and this is all just guessing from my part. I just simply believe there could have been some other way than slavery. As Sten says; "There is always another way".

[BevH]

Jedimaster88 wrote...
As for the money business.. well thats a tough one and I have to admit I dont have any straight answers because Im no expert in economics. One thing that comes to my mind is to keep Howe away from the treasury. I dont know if its correct but I have heard some people saying that Howe took a quite amount of money for himself from the treasury. If its correct then thats just one more reason to kill him and get rid of him. Other things that come to my mind is what the warden does in Amaranthine. Protecting merchants and increasing trade through it. Maybe the nobility would give donations if reasoned ( Anora might have succeeded in this).

Nothing really comes to mind about the money business and this is all just guessing from my part. I just simply believe there could have been some other way than slavery. As Sten says; "There is always another way".

I've played the HN origin many times and I don't remember anything about Howe taking money from that treasury. As for the treasury of Ferelden as a whole, I don't see how he could've done that either. I mean the whole revolt thing at the Arl of Denerim's estate is because Howe isn't paying the workmen. The only way I could see that funds could've been raised without the slavery or an increase in taxes would be to increase trade among the other nations, a move that Loghain would've been against. At the end. Loghain was purely isolationist thinking Ferelden needed absolutely no outside help.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Oh, he was (probably) stealing from the country. Slim Couldry mentions that Howe was funneling money in the form of silver bars to his estate in Highever.* Problem is, we don't know just how much of the truth Slim tells us. (Apart from the stuff being there in the first place, but even that he doesn't always manage.)

* Yes, I'm reasonably sure it's that estate in Highever. The HN should at least be allowed the option to say "It's not his," but Bioware didn't provide one.)

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 28 août 2012 - 06:06 .