673 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Monica21 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

How would that have worked, and would it have saved Cailan?

I dunno.  Use Mages?  Signal arrows?  Pick a totally different plan that doesn't require the coordination of two forces that can't communicate with each other?  Launch a diversionary attack on the Darkspawn flank?  He's the supposedly brilliant General, he should be able to come up with something.

As to whether it would save Cailan, that's difficult to really know.  Probably depends if he'd have the sense to fall back soon enough.  But it at least

Loghain's force was the flanking attack and you were in the war council so you heard, "We'll have none of your spells, mage" from the Mother. There's a post upthread that Ethereal Writer copied from KnightofPhoenix's blog about the battle itself.

You mean the post that completely ignores the fact that the plan was essentially Hammer and Anvil?  The post that states that, despite Cailan doing exactly what he was supposed to do, draw the darkspawn into the valley, Cailan messed it up?  Yeah, think I'll pass on rereading that wall of text.  You see, the strategy worked.  The Darkspawn were committed; and Loghain withdrew.  It did exactly what the plan called for, but Loghain didn't follow up.  The whole idea was to get the scenario they got, and Loghain pulled out.  We can play "But Loghain was a hero, he can't do any wrong" if you like, but let's not pretend that that's not what we're doing.  Note that you do not have to lie to anyone at the Landsmeet to convince them of this.  What Loghain chooses to believe, with his obssession with keeping Orlais out of Ferelden, since he did blockade them from entering, doesn't mean it's true.  He knew what he was going to do, this is why he locked the tower before the attack.  He had no idea that the darkspawn would find a way in, but he had his handpicked men manning the beacon, and frankly, it's likely he intended that it never be lit.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

You missed the part where he couldn't reach the darkspawn flank. That part of the plan failed.

Also, Gaider said he abandoned the plan where he was going to not light the beacon. Possibly this was because of conscience, or maybe he just realized that there were two soldiers sent to the Tower who weren't under his command.

[Maria Caliban]

Mary Kirby wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

How many people does Alistair try to guilt me into killing? How many people do I kill out of self-preservation? Nobody's saying the Warden is a pacifist, but there is a distinct difference between killing people because they are trying to kill you, and killing a man who's on his knees and has just surrendered.

Did you spare Caladrius, then?

Indeed.

I love BioWare games, but I dislike having to be a mass murderer. I almost always let someone live if I get the option.

[robertthebard]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

You missed the part where he couldn't reach the darkspawn flank. That part of the plan failed.

Also, Gaider said he abandoned the plan where he was going to not light the beacon. Possibly this was because of conscience, or maybe he just realized that there were two soldiers sent to the Tower who weren't under his command.

Which means he abandoned the not light the beacon part, but not the "I'm not going to charge no matter what" part.  So what you're saying is, knowing where Cailan is going to pull the Darkspawn to, he put his army where they couldn't get there, but it was an accident?  He had no intention of pulling off his end of the plan.  The fact that he changed his mind about not lighting the beacon doesn't change the fact that he had no intention of charging in when it was lit.

[TEWR]

You mean the post that completely ignores the fact that the plan was essentially Hammer and Anvil?

You mean that same post that acknowledged that was the plan?

TEWR wrote...

During the battle, he ruins the plan Loghain put forth -- the Hammer&Anvil strategy -- during the session.

I'd recommend actually reading something before saying what it does and doesn't say, for future reference.

The post that states that, despite Cailan doing exactly what he was supposed to do, draw the darkspawn into the valley, Cailan messed it up?

Because charging out with Darkspawn surrounding your left flank, right flank, and your front is totally going to help as opposed to using the walls of Ostagar to protect your left and right flanks!

Because launching only one volley of arrows is really helpful in battle, as opposed to having a few rows of archers in the back devoted to launching arrows into the Darkspawn's ranks!

Because sending your Mabari out to be little more then fodder that take down 1 or 2 Darkspawn before being killed also helps!

Fact: The valley consists of everything below the bridge, which includes the area with the walls that would protect the side flanks. 

We can play "But Loghain was a hero, he can't do any wrong" if you like, but let's not pretend that that's not what we're doing

I'm not. The only thing I hold him accountable for is the slavery thing, which was indeed wrong -- and probably not as necessary as some might think.

I do, however, try and argue the slavery issue from how Loghain saw it, despite how much I detest it. 

Xanthos Aeducan cannot fault Loghain for making a sound military move by retreating, as during the battle -- and even before -- he was facepalming like crazy.

Loghain knows nothing about the fortress, despite being a man who wants to know how best to defend his borders, studies history, and wants to know where his borders end? Facepalm -- primarily mine, as it's Bioware's inconsistent characterization.

The Tower's lower levels are being explored on the eve of battle instead of immediately sealed up? Facepalm, both for my Warden and me.

Cailan dooms the strategy Loghain put forth? Facepalm.

Darkspawn overrun the Tower? At this point Xanthos just said "****ing Goddammit!!"

He knew what he was going to do, this is why he locked the tower before the attack. He had no idea that the darkspawn would find a way in, but he had his handpicked men manning the beacon, and frankly, it's likely he intended that it never be lit.

David Gaider's said that his men -- and Uldred, whom he was allied with -- would've surveyed the battlefield and if it was actually looking hopeless, they wouldn't have lit it.

That does not mean it would never be lit. That only means that Loghain trusted these men to know whether it should be lit or not.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 27 octobre 2012 - 11:57 .

[Monica21]

robertthebard wrote...
You mean the post that completely ignores the fact that the plan was essentially Hammer and Anvil?  The post that states that, despite Cailan doing exactly what he was supposed to do, draw the darkspawn into the valley, Cailan messed it up?  Yeah, think I'll pass on rereading that wall of text.  You see, the strategy worked.  The Darkspawn were committed; and Loghain withdrew.  It did exactly what the plan called for, but Loghain didn't follow up.

Yes, the post that very clearly explains that Loghain could not flank the darkspawn because they were still marching which directly relates to Mary Kirby previously stating that the horde was much larger than expected. You can't flank if you're going to get sandwiched or surrounded, because then both armies are lost.

The whole idea was to get the scenario they got, and Loghain pulled out.  We can play "But Loghain was a hero, he can't do any wrong" if you like, but let's not pretend that that's not what we're doing.  Note that you do not have to lie to anyone at the Landsmeet to convince them of this.

When did I say he didn't do anything wrong? Loghain did a lot wrong. He framed the Wardens. He allied himself with Howe. He's a terrible politician. Blame him for what he actually did wrong, but the losses at Ostagar are not his.

What Loghain chooses to believe, with his obssession with keeping Orlais out of Ferelden, since he did blockade them from entering, doesn't mean it's true.

Considering what happened the last time Orlesians were in Ferelden I'd say he had a healthy fear of their presence.

He knew what he was going to do, this is why he locked the tower before the attack.  He had no idea that the darkspawn would find a way in, but he had his handpicked men manning the beacon, and frankly, it's likely he intended that it never be lit.

Completely unable to be proven, and not even a very good theory. If he knows that you and Alistair and going in and not his men, he knows he has no control over whether it's lit.

Modifié par Monica21, 28 octobre 2012 - 12:01 .

[The Elder King]

Fiacre wrote...



I was assuming that since the Epilogue slides were referenced, the Golden Age argument was founded on metagaming, inwhich case it makes no sense to put a Warden with a low likelyhood to get along with anora on the throne to get that ending. From a purely IC perspective, sure, what you said is true. I'd say though that the Warden's personaility can make one outcome far more likely than the other -- a Warden who wants more power than Anora is willing to give would have trouble with her, true, while a Warden who is willing to take what Anora gives is very likely to not have any.

To use my canon warden as an example again -- sure, he would have liked to be King, and he has no desire to stand around and play the pretty face. But he's also immensely loyal to her and perfectly content to act as an advisor rather than being given formal power (and the slide for Anora with a Warden Chancellor shows she's perfectly willing to have the Warden as her advisor). Anora would be foolish to try and kill him for... pretty much no reason at all, since he's no threat but instead a rather useful asset. And Anora isn't a fool. A Warden who wants to take her power though... Will probabl have to look out.

There's also the fact that the little bit of interaction and the consoort epilogue in awakening suggests that Anora is at least somewhat fond of the Warden, but since that is regardless of how you play your Warden it's not necessarily indicative of her relationship with all Warden consorts. (I would argue, though that it can be indicative of her relationship with a consort that she gets along with.)

And while I certainly see your reasoning for not making either of them the sole ruler, I've a preference to solve that problem via a prince-consort or a Chancellor. I'm not too fond of the Alistair and Anora match, but I'll admit, my dislike for alistair probably has to do with that. And the majority of my Wardens don't want Alistair anywhere near the throne, so they never get to test of AnoraxAlistair works.

The golden age thing was stated by a user, and I argued back that the option of them killing each other was possible in the epilogue slides. The options for a Cousland and Anora not getting along weren't mine (though I try to metagame the less possible, and I made a Warden-Anora playthrough one, but it wasn't based by the options of my previous post), but options that other players might have chosen when they played that path, to point that it's not necessary to play that path by having the Warden getting along with Anora.
For your canon, I don't think the "killing each other" option will happen. But neither I think it'll happen in the playthrough I made. My point was that there is no security of a golden age for Ferelden if Anora and the Warden rule together. It depends on the Warden's personality.
About Awakening, in my post I said that Anora doesn't have feelings for the Warden in DAO. Awakening happened six months later, so it's  highly possible that they have romanting feeling for each other. I was saying that it wasn't possible (at least for Anora, since we can RP the Warden in havign feelings for her) in DAO.
About the last part, as I said, it's only my opinion. I don't see anything wrong in you (or anyone) having problems with Alistair on the throne (or with disliking Alistair in general). It's normal that people have different opinions about characters in game.

[State_Of_Danile]

Doesn't it say that when Alistair becomes King, his people loved him?

Personally this was one one of the, if not the hardest choice for my character. My Warden and Alistair had become Blight Bro's by the end of the game. So for me at the end I was torn.

On one hand, Alistair was a great friend and a great person, but is he a person fit to rule? He's constantly complaing about how bad a leader he is. And then there is Anora, who may have the experience buuuut she's kind of a ***, plus Alistair's got that noble blood.

In the end I ended up allowing Alistair to sacrifice himself to save him from having to make that choice and I knew his love of being a warden drove him to want that end. I have been wanting to redo that decision though.

[TEWR]

Doesn't it say that when Alistair becomes King, his people loved him?

It does, though in DAII it also says that if he rules alone, or alongside a Human Noble Female Queen, that some nobles believe he isn't a true Theirin and is just an impostor that was meant to depose Anora.

But if Anora and Alistair rule together, Ferelden prospers under their reign as DAII tells us.

He's constantly complaing about how bad a leader he is. And then there is Anora, who may have the experience buuuut she's kind of a ***, plus Alistair's got that noble blood.

Alistair and Anora balance each other out, especially if the former is hardened where he begins to study governing. Anora knows how to deal with the nobles, while Alistair knows how to deal with the common man.

Aside from a Human Noble marrying Anora with a long-term plan in mind for Ferelden to truly prosper, Alistair and Anora are the best fit for Ferelden.

[The Elder King]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Alistair and Anora balance each other out, especially if the former is hardened where he begins to study governing. Anora knows how to deal with the nobles, while Alistair knows how to deal with the common man.

Aside from a Human Noble marrying Anora with a long-term plan in mind for Ferelden to truly prosper, Alistair and Anora are the best fit for Ferelden.

About the bolded part, it's sad for Ferelden that the Warden went missing.
About the post, I completely agree with you.

[robertthebard]

Monica21 wrote...

Completely unable to be proven, and not even a very good theory. If he knows that you and Alistair and going in and not his men, he knows he has no control over whether it's lit.

The only reason that fell through was because Cailan insisted the Wardens light the beacon.  His men were already there.  Run through an Origin, get to Ostagar, and try to go in, or, as I have a save or two at that point, it's likely you may as well, load it up and try to gain access to the tower before the battle.  Loghain has it locked up.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

robertthebard wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

You missed the part where he couldn't reach the darkspawn flank. That part of the plan failed.

Also, Gaider said he abandoned the plan where he was going to not light the beacon. Possibly this was because of conscience, or maybe he just realized that there were two soldiers sent to the Tower who weren't under his command.

Which means he abandoned the not light the beacon part, but not the "I'm not going to charge no matter what" part.  So what you're saying is, knowing where Cailan is going to pull the Darkspawn to, he put his army where they couldn't get there, but it was an accident?  He had no intention of pulling off his end of the plan.  The fact that he changed his mind about not lighting the beacon doesn't change the fact that he had no intention of charging in when it was lit.

No, the idea wasn't that he flat-out wasn't going to charge. It was that if something went wrong, he could order the beacon not lit as an excuse if he didn't.

[Fiacre]

hhh89 wrote...

The golden age thing was stated by a user, and I argued back that the option of them killing each other was possible in the epilogue slides. The options for a Cousland and Anora not getting along weren't mine (though I try to metagame the less possible, and I made a Warden-Anora playthrough one, but it wasn't based by the options of my previous post), but options that other players might have chosen when they played that path, to point that it's not necessary to play that path by having the Warden getting along with Anora.
For your canon, I don't think the "killing each other" option will happen. But neither I think it'll happen in the playthrough I made. My point was that there is no security of a golden age for Ferelden if Anora and the Warden rule together. It depends on the Warden's personality.
About Awakening, in my post I said that Anora doesn't have feelings for the Warden in DAO. Awakening happened six months later, so it's  highly possible that they have romanting feeling for each other. I was saying that it wasn't possible (at least for Anora, since we can RP the Warden in havign feelings for her) in DAO.
About the last part, as I said, it's only my opinion. I don't see anything wrong in you (or anyone) having problems with Alistair on the throne (or with disliking Alistair in general). It's normal that people have different opinions about characters in game.

Eh, we're pretty much in agreement -- the only reason why I brought up metagaming is because that poster used the exact words from the slide and the Warden can't ICly know that Ferelden might have a Golden Age under his and Anora's rule. (Well, I suppose if he has a pretty giant ego...)

I hope I didn't come across as argumentative or anything -- I'm badat keeping things short and I feel relatively strongly about this decision, since Warden consort is my favourite Landsmeet outcome and I've seen people argue that it can never work out.

[Scott Sion]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

You missed the part where he couldn't reach the darkspawn flank. That part of the plan failed.

Also, Gaider said he abandoned the plan where he was going to not light the beacon. Possibly this was because of conscience, or maybe he just realized that there were two soldiers sent to the Tower who weren't under his command.

Which means he abandoned the not light the beacon part, but not the "I'm not going to charge no matter what" part.  So what you're saying is, knowing where Cailan is going to pull the Darkspawn to, he put his army where they couldn't get there, but it was an accident?  He had no intention of pulling off his end of the plan.  The fact that he changed his mind about not lighting the beacon doesn't change the fact that he had no intention of charging in when it was lit.

No, the idea wasn't that he flat-out wasn't going to charge. It was that if something went wrong, he could order the beacon not lit as an excuse if he didn't.

I thought the same thing until I saw David Gaider's post. If you ask me it wasn't clarified well enough in game if Gaider had to confirm what his intention really were on BSN. In the end I still view what Logain did as a betrayal.

[cJohnOne]

From a story point of view King Calin must have destroyed enough Dark Spawn to make the dark spawn regroup otherwise the story doesn't make any sense because you wouldn't have the time to gather forces to fight the dark spawn.

[Gibb_Shepard]

David Gaider wrote...

Monica21 wrote...
That completely changes your point. If your original assumption is that you are making all these decisions with no input from anyone with any knowledge, then you can't disregard that Riordan is that knowledge. Therefore, your decision is not selfish, regardless of how you feel about Alistair. Your decision is based on what a senior Warden is telling you is the best course of action.

And you picked him over the man you said you loved, and who trusted you. And that doesn't constitute a betrayal on your part whatsoever. Yes, got it.

Every one of your posts reaks of arrogance and snide sarcasm. I haven't yet  found one without a passive aggressive jab at those who do not share your opinion. 

Arguments where one of the participants constantly  eminates an aura of hostility often end badly.

Just some observations, no need to reply with your notorious word stabbing.

[Icesong]

Emzamination wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

The events of the Dragon Age novels and comics are "part of Dragon Age canon", meaning they contribute to the overall lore. They do not, however, override your game choices. Those events hay have happened very differently in your particular game continuuity... meaning that, if Alistair was dead, then the events of the Silent Grove simply never occurred. If Alistair isnn't king, the Silent Grove could have still happened... but would have occurred somewhat differently.

Does this mean the comics and novels could be referenced in your game? Possibly, but only if the context is correct... and, even then, we'd need to introduce characters and events on the assumption that you've never read the material. The Architect was introduced in Awakening assuming that the player never read the Calling, and needed to work as a new character. If you read the Calling, then great-- you would have more insight into the game. It's not designed to do more than that.

If someone really wants to assert that ancillary media cannot exist if it contradicts their personal playthrough in any fashion, then so be it. You're not required to read it. You can play Dragon Age without ever picking up the novels or comics or whatever else. It will, however, still exist. If the knowledge that there is story material out there which explores aspects of the story you didn't choose in your game (all of which are equally valid) bothers you, then you'll simply have to take a breath and either pick it up or live with it.

And please stop with the crude language. You can dislike Alistair or Anora just fine without coming across as an inbred chimp. They are characters with very human flaws, and one can imagine many reasons to dislike them both... but your many feels do not make the rules of these forums irrelevant. Thanks.

Finally a direct acknowledgement, instead of vague perhaps and maybe.

Edit: Links fixed

I'm not sure you're reading that the way it's intended. He's not saying that they're canon, he's saying that they're "canon", i.e. everything he said after the part you bolded.

[TEWR]

cJohnOne wrote...

From a story point of view King Calin must have destroyed enough Dark Spawn to make the dark spawn regroup otherwise the story doesn't make any sense because you wouldn't have the time to gather forces to fight the dark spawn.

As you complete each main quest, the Blight spreads -- which you can see on the map when it begins to blacken.

[Doozerpindan]

Wow, so much Alistair hate going on right here... I, personally, think Alistair is awesome, but that's just my opinion, and I'd love the option to stab Anora in the throat (she's just so petty and childish).

I like to think that the reason Alistair goes from desperately trying to get away from his heritage to finally embracing it is that he finally decides to man up and accept that, like it or not, Fereldan NEEDS a ruler, and that Anora is simply not fit for leadership. She happily throws the Warden to the wolves after the Warden rescues her, then betrays the Warden at the landsmeet, how can such a manipulitive self-serving cow be allowed to retain power that, whether she likes it or not, she is NOT - and never was - entitled to.

There's a line she comes out with during the convo where the Warden chooses between Alistair and Anora in regards to who is gonna lead fereldan, she says it after Alistair still says he doesn't want to be the king, and Anora instantly jumps in with this line (can't remember her words exactly, but it made me wanna headbutt her), showing just how petty childish and self-serving she really is, and it just makes me hate her so much more that I've never let her rule.

You've gotta remember that Alistair has been treated as unwanted and unwelcome most of his life, because Ysolde is just as retarded and self-serving as Anora (I mean, she gets about half of Redcliffe wiped out through her own selfishness and arrogance), and all Alistair has ever wanted is to be recognised as equal to everyone else. He's never known his real father, or his real mother, and because of that he's unbearably lonely, and hides it all behind a cleverly crafted mask of foolishness and constant jokes. At least, that's how I see it.

[TEWR]

She happily throws the Warden to the wolves after the Warden rescues her

Only if you sell her out first.

how can such a manipulitive self-serving cow be allowed to retain power that, whether she likes it or not, she is NOT - and never was - entitled to.

And yet all of Ferelden, commoner and noble alike, know that Cailan was not the monarch ruling Ferelden. Anora was, from in the shadows. She was the one dealing with the art of governing, while Cailan was... well... sleeping around and having fun.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 28 octobre 2012 - 12:55 .

[Emzamination]

Icesong wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

The events of the Dragon Age novels and comics are "part of Dragon Age canon", meaning they contribute to the overall lore. They do not, however, override your game choices. Those events hay have happened very differently in your particular game continuuity... meaning that, if Alistair was dead, then the events of the Silent Grove simply never occurred. If Alistair isnn't king, the Silent Grove could have still happened... but would have occurred somewhat differently.

Does this mean the comics and novels could be referenced in your game? Possibly, but only if the context is correct... and, even then, we'd need to introduce characters and events on the assumption that you've never read the material. The Architect was introduced in Awakening assuming that the player never read the Calling, and needed to work as a new character. If you read the Calling, then great-- you would have more insight into the game. It's not designed to do more than that.

If someone really wants to assert that ancillary media cannot exist if it contradicts their personal playthrough in any fashion, then so be it. You're not required to read it. You can play Dragon Age without ever picking up the novels or comics or whatever else. It will, however, still exist. If the knowledge that there is story material out there which explores aspects of the story you didn't choose in your game (all of which are equally valid) bothers you, then you'll simply have to take a breath and either pick it up or live with it.

And please stop with the crude language. You can dislike Alistair or Anora just fine without coming across as an inbred chimp. They are characters with very human flaws, and one can imagine many reasons to dislike them both... but your many feels do not make the rules of these forums irrelevant. Thanks.

Finally a direct acknowledgement, instead of vague perhaps and maybe.

Edit: Links fixed

I'm not sure you're reading that the way it's intended. He's not saying that they're canon, he's saying that they're "canon", i.e. everything he said after the part you bolded.

Hmm?

[FINE HERE]

I don't understand all this Loghain love. 'To each their own' and all, but I just can't see it.

He sent thousands of people to his death because he thought Cailan was a bad ruler and was going to hand Fereldon to Orlais. And it looked like he planned it from the start.

He openly tells you about his 'dislike' of Cailan and his tactics. He complains they don't need any outside help, but flees from the 'hopeless battle' anyway. He was one of the main strategists for the army, yet he didn't stay near the front lines to shout orders or asist with the main force, he stood on the sidelines with his own personal army(they have to be if they kept quiet about his betrayl). Then he waits, and waits, and had every opportunity to jump in and save those soldiers fight for their lives and assist them, but instead, he abandoned them. The men and women screaming in agony and fighting darkspawn not more 100-500 yards away. The people he apparently knew and who all looked up to him as a hero: he left them behind to die because he was afraid of a possible, but highly improbable threat. He says later in a banter or somewhere that he knew every one of those soldiers' names and faces but he still abandoned them.

I understand it looked like a hopeless battle, but battles can change in heartbeats. If he wanted more time to prepare, he should have joined the Wardens/Duncan's side and tried to together convince Cailan they needed more time, but instead, his pride wouldn't let him join Duncan and he hated him.

I could never forgive him in each of my playthroughs.

[SeptimusMagistos]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Alistair and Anora balance each other out, especially if the former is hardened where he begins to study governing. Anora knows how to deal with the nobles, while Alistair knows how to deal with the common man.

Aside from a Human Noble marrying Anora with a long-term plan in mind for Ferelden to truly prosper, Alistair and Anora are the best fit for Ferelden.

Ah, but can you trust Anora not to immediately sell out Alistair and pretty much everyone else if it becomes personally convenient for her?

I can't.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Emzamination wrote...

Icesong wrote...

Emzamination wrote...


Finally a direct acknowledgement, instead of vague perhaps and maybe.

Edit: Links fixed

I'm not sure you're reading that the way it's intended. He's not saying that they're canon, he's saying that they're "canon", i.e. everything he said after the part you bolded.

Hmm?

Basically what he's saying is "This is what happens in your game-verse if all the decisions you make are consistent with it." He's not trying to outright state "This is what happens, your game-verse is wrong."

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 28 octobre 2012 - 12:58 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Quote button instead of the edit button again. Damn it.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 28 octobre 2012 - 12:59 .