129 réponses à ce sujet

[ZaroktheImmortal]

I’ve been hearing of this discussion of Harrowmont and Bhelen. Bhelen is more of the villain character but in the end will encourage progress for the dwarven society. While Harrowmont is a nicer character but will leave things as they are.

This reminded me of something I read in the Devil’s Notebook by Anton LaVey . The section of this book On the Importance of being Evil reminded comes to mind when I think of this discussion. In this Anton LaVey writes

"Volumes have charted the history of man's cruelty and tyranny. How many have considered the essential role of villainy in human development? An impartial survey would no doubt qualify the villain as unsung hero. While fusty religionists still cast Satanists in the old, convenient mold, the readily obtainable literature of contemporary Satanism has inspired change in religious thought. Can we expect such an admission by modern theologians? Of course not. It is always a villain, however, who becomes the catalyst for change. Consider these still fresh examples: If Aleister Crowley had not been "the world's wickedst man," the like of Gerald Gardner and Margaret Murray could not have stepped onstage for purposes of "enlightenment," and Dennis Wheatley might be a starving hack. They owe their identities to Crowley's outrages. If the Hell's Angels had not caused such a furor, and had not been ritualized in motion pictures like The Wild One and Scorpio Rising, a "clean, wholesome" interest in motorcycling (and its billions in profits) would not have evolved. The glamour of evil, not fun in the sun, secretly spawned the present bike movement. Pollution reduction, economical transportation -- all other rationales for motorcycling are piety devices.


A villain is said to be bad, but an apathetic drone is far worse. A villain must be stigmatized so that his opponents can be considered heroic. These heroes are simply reactors who implement a change in affairs sometimes mistaken for "progress." What sets human reaction in motion? A force which is either intrinsically or contrivedly considered "evil."

In order for evil to serve an admirable purpose, it must have method. The lowest level would-be Satanist who thinks he is justifying his existence by committing "evil" acts is the most deluded of all. As has been amply proven, Deep South renegades like Huey Long and George Wallace -- certainly considered evil by many -- nevertheless exerted reaction on a large scale."

So all that considered is Bhelen the Satanist choice? I’m sure if Anton LaVey had been a gamer he would approve.

Modifié par ZaroktheImmortal, 29 décembre 2009 - 04:56 .

[Bullets McDeath]

Definitely. I think Satan would love this game, actually.

[Rainen89]

Why the hell does everyone think Bhelen is the "evil" one. Bhelen is probably the only fair ruler there is, the only dick move he ever does that the PC would notice is if you play a dwarven noble and even then you got beat, in that culture it's commonplace your own father did the same freakin' thing. Harrowmont + anvil at the end = really short supervillain.

[Serogon]

Uh, Rainen? I'm guessing it has to do with the whole killing Harrowmont for no reason thing, and if I'm remembering right, the ending talks about him basically making himself a dictator.

[Rainen89]

He kills harrowmont so that there's no rebellions later on in the future you'd be hard pressed to find a case of civil war where the winning side just let the loser's leader live. He wanted the problem over and done with. It's not evil, if it is then so was everyone else. The end he changes orzammar so that the lower castes have more freedom and rights, how in the world is that evil? I'm sure the nobles who don't have to do a damn thing and get anything they want because they were born into a certain house were pissed. (And why they tried to kill HIM.) he didn't just randomly start punching babies in the street because he thought it was fun. Harrowmont goes to the surface doing raids taking innocents and forcing them to be golems, Bhelen tries to have it destroyed at the end because of Branka. I'm not seeing the evil part.

[Serogon]

I never said he wasn't a better leader, just that that's why he's seen as evil. But I didn't know about what happens with the anvil, since I haven't tried a playthrough where I don't destroy it yet. That actually changes my view of Harrowmont a lot.

[Bullets McDeath]

He also forges the Documents he gave you to frame Harrowmont with in the beginning of The Prince's Favor quest. Bhelen is a fuggin dink, no question. Arguably, though, he's not evil by dwarven standards or based on what was expected of him. He was just a little too good at it, actually.



But Satanism is not really about evil, it's about belief in yourself above all other things and the good of the individual over the good of the masses and that definitely describes Bhelen's personal motivations to a tee... interesting that it's more beneficial to the dwarven people in the long run, too. Which is kind of the point the OP was making about villians being necesarry for progress and change.

[Rainen89]

Harrowmont puts on a lovely front, has the face and persona of a nice ole grampa, but he is truly evil. Bhelen honestly is a good leader who does make tough decisions, but he's made for politics. Also as far as the reform thing goes making Orzammar have solitary leadership rather than democratic. I personally feel that it wouldn't have happened had the nobles opposing him tried to kill him again and again, he removed people from power that tried to kill him, dictatorship by itself does not make a government bad. Just to what extent they become corrupt and oppress others within their jurisdiction.

To Oracle, is it self serving though? I can't see why a self serving ruler would give rights to the casteless, or why he'd even bother trying to give them a second chance when it benefited him not at all and really just gave him enemies, nor did he care what people thought of him when he worked to push Orzammar forwards with trade and surface dwarves which also earned him enemies, giving him personally no direct benefit, just his nation. Granted yes he does do things for himself but so does everyone else. Not evil, nor do I beleive it makes him completely self serving.

Lastly as stated yes, this is dwarven society not our own and evil is a very subjective term, by dwarven standards he is not evil, if it is the PC dwarf noble is as is your father when he did the same thing Bhelen did. Document forging I cannot say I think he did, but have no concrete proof to dispute either claim.

Modifié par Rainen89, 29 décembre 2009 - 05:29 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

No, he isn''t.
He would be if Bhelen's tyranny made people rise up against him and change. But that's not the case. Bhelen is the one who is making the change, not his opponents.

He is in no way a "villain" (a word used most of the time to describe the few individuals who stand over the rest). He plays the dwarven game masterfully. He was the smart one, that's all. And as we see in the Dwarven noble origin, Bhelen doesn't even have to kill his older brother, the middle son can be the one who killed him and Bhelen simply outwitted him.

Bhelen is a politician. A master. If he is a "villain", then every single other political leader and visionary was also a villain.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 29 décembre 2009 - 05:31 .

[Original182]

If it wasn't for the world wars, countries under Britain's rule would not have achieved independence. Therefore, we should now glamorize wars, because eventhough they are labelled as evil, they brought about good change?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this what the OP is getting at? I find it a bit disturbing that we want to honor villains now.

[fantasypisces]

I always got the impression that Harrowmont poisoned King Endrin, that could just be me though...

And yes Bhelen kills harrowmont, as Anora wants to kill Alistair, as Arl Eamon tells Alistair he should kill Anora... I'm sure there are many real life instances of it as well, it isn't that uncommon in regards to royalty to have your rival executed.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Original182 wrote...

If it wasn't for the world wars, countries under Britain's rule would not have achieved independence. Therefore, we should now glamorize wars, because eventhough they are labelled as evil, they brought about good change?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this what the OP is getting at? I find it a bit disturbing that we want to honor villains now.

Many of those who were colonised, exploited and humiliated for decades would have been very cheerful for the devastation that France and Britain suffered, yes. Can you blame them?

[Rainen89]

Original182 wrote...

If it wasn't for the world wars, countries under Britain's rule would not have achieved independence. Therefore, we should now glamorize wars, because eventhough they are labelled as evil, they brought about good change?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this what the OP is getting at? I find it a bit disturbing that we want to honor villains now.

 One man's villain is another man's hero. It's all subjective. You wouldn't know something was bad unless you knew what was good, or had something that you didn't consider to be good happen to you.

[Namirsolo]

Actually the ending says that Bhelen makes a great king and even starts to break down the caste system. He is by far the "better" choice if what you want is to help the situation of the dwarves.

[wwwwowwww]

Serogon wrote...

Uh, Rainen? I'm guessing it has to do with the whole killing Harrowmont for no reason thing, and if I'm remembering right, the ending talks about him basically making himself a dictator.

Kings word = Law
Dictators word = Law

King = Dictator or vice versa

[Iller54]

Actually i find Bhelen one of the greater leaders within the game.

Zathrian almost sacrificed his people out of revenge and only relents if u beat him or persuade him.

Enough has been said about Loghain and I dislike Anora because honestly she is much the same as him and would rather things stay the way they are with as little fuss as possible, that and desiring her father to live despite the fact he has committed high treason.

Arl Eamon Im sure there is a relationship between Harrowmont and him some where in their policies...both seem traditionalists added to the fact he is slightly sexist.

Bhelen knows what he is and makes no apologies, he does what is good for his people even if they do not realise it themselves....remember his people are slowly dying because of their isolation. He does what is necessary, as all good leaders should.

[Orogun01]

To the OP statement I can only say that evil; despite being necessary it is not automatically constructive. While the examples provided could be or not relevant (since the string of causes and consequences cannot be proven or disproved) all of those men acted out of selfish reasons without regard for consequences and hence I would not attribute virtue to the chance that they caused a good. When Qin unified the warring states to form China through a bloody campaign; that's a necessary evil for an ultimate good.

Blehen is selfish and greedy, those are the attributes that allow him to become successful. Just like the business world is filled with betrayals and backstabbing so are the dwarven politics; although in their case the backstabs are literal, so is Blehen using those means without measure to achieve the ultimate power and is not going to lose it to mad Branka or restrict the economy because of tradition. In the end he does all the rights for the wrong reasons.

[Serogon]

wwwwowwww wrote...

Serogon wrote...

Uh, Rainen? I'm guessing it has to do with the whole killing Harrowmont for no reason thing, and if I'm remembering right, the ending talks about him basically making himself a dictator.

Kings word = Law
Dictators word = Law

King = Dictator or vice versa

The dwarves have a king, yes, but from the presence of their deshyrs, which seem to act as a sort of Congress or Parliament or whatever you'd like to compare them to, it doesn't seem like the king has absolute power. Bhelen removed that. While a king in the traditional sense is basically a dictator, this isn't in the traditional sense.

[Dagorgil]

Rainen89 wrote...

Original182 wrote...

If it wasn't for the world wars, countries under Britain's rule would not have achieved independence. Therefore, we should now glamorize wars, because eventhough they are labelled as evil, they brought about good change?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this what the OP is getting at? I find it a bit disturbing that we want to honor villains now.

 One man's villain is another man's hero. It's all subjective. You wouldn't know something was bad unless you knew what was good, or had something that you didn't consider to be good happen to you.

Bhelen killed his older brother, pinned it on his younger brother (effectively sentencing him to death), poisoned his father to get to the throne, and when he wasn't immediately elected, set out to politically assassinate Harrowmont....  I don't care how progressive someone is, if they go to those extreme lengths to gain power, they deserve nothing more than a knife in the back.

[Rainen89]

He didn't kill his father, he did betray his brother. Yes he sought power and did it the old fashioned dwarven way, in their society that is not evil. It's not even progressive, that's normal. What happened next was simply civil war. It happened because Harrowmont effectively planned a coup. He wanted power just like Bhelen, you can't say he's any better. I agree that yes I felt it was bad. However, it was normal in that culture so it doesn't make him evil. What Harrowmont does if he is elected does make him evil. Besides, throughout history (and even now.) You'd be surprised how typical it is. But, yes, he did commit fratricide, whether indirectly or directly is up the PC.

Modifié par Rainen89, 29 décembre 2009 - 06:15 .

[amrose2]

I was suprised the ending with Harrowmont ended up in turmoil for the dwarves. Then I thought about how their society is supposed to be and it makes sense. They respond to harshness and coldness. Anything else just opens the door for civil war. In this culture, Bhelen makes the most sense.



It doesn't help that he's an ****, though. Sometimes when I'm working for him I want to say... "and the crown goes to.... Harrowmont! Surprise ****!"



oh well

[Rainen89]

< Still thinks dwarven nobles should be allowed to proclaim themselves as king/queen after dealing with Branka

[Riot Inducer]

amrose2 wrote...

I was suprised the ending with Harrowmont ended up in turmoil for the dwarves. Then I thought about how their society is supposed to be and it makes sense. They respond to harshness and coldness. Anything else just opens the door for civil war. In this culture, Bhelen makes the most sense.

It doesn't help that he's an ****, though. Sometimes when I'm working for him I want to say... "and the crown goes to.... Harrowmont! Surprise ****!"

oh well

Yeah, that's my main problem with Bhelen honestly, he gives you no good reason to work for him. His underlings insult you and threaten you like a carta thug if you so much as hint that you want to weigh the options. Hell when you first meet him I remember him saying something along the lines of, "I know you don't like me..." at that point I was like, "yeah, I really don't, why the **** am I helping you out again?" 

Unless you're a dwarf commoner you've got no good reason to support Bhelen, hell, his views on the casteless aren't even brushed upon unless you're a commoner. 

[Stuffy38]

I dunno it seems a pretty long bow to draw the conclusion that being evil has inspired an interest in motorcycles via the Hells Angels. I think that is just a poor example though.
Hitler would be a better example - think of the things that we have now that have evolved from the research and development during the second world war.

But I don't see Bhelen as evil. **** yes, evil no.

They censored d*ckhead, I thought that'd be alright...

Modifié par Stuffy38, 29 décembre 2009 - 07:37 .