673 réponses à ce sujet

[SeptimusMagistos]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Okay, then who? Cailan's a moron who refused to listen when Loghain tried to give him advice that would have saved his life. Duncan doesn't seem to be making any decisions for fear of offending the people in charge. A PC might have seen it going to hell but nobody's listening to them yet!

Don't know who, but not Loghain. When Loghain needed money he sold elves into slavery. When Loghain needed allies he went for Howe and Uldred. When Loghain needed to deal with his political competition he jumped directly to blood magic and poison. The guy kind of tends to jump the gun on 'necessary evil,' with disastrous consequences. Isn't it possible that he misjudged Ostragar the same way he misjudged everything else in the game?

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Which will not answer the question.

Loghain seemed to think it would. He wants to duel somebody and I'm a big fan of symbolism.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

And leaving out the part where what you suggest Loghain had a duty to do would get him killed to save a man who was probably going to die anyway, what about all the useful soldiers that Loghain would have had to take with him when he went to die?

Again, I'm not convinced he made the right call. Maybe he did and withdrawing the troops saved them from a hopeless battle. Maybe charging at the signal would have let him break the rest of the army out the encirclement and they could retreat together. Maybe they could have killed more Darkspawn at Ostragar than they ultimately did elsewhere. What I do know is that people tend to let him off too easy.

Plus I tend to roleplay this choice to some extend and my Warden remembers that he didn't cut and run when he found out he would be facing dozens of Darkspawn instead of zero. Plus he's still kind of upset about the time his circle nearly got eaten by demons and Loghain's tangential involvement in the affair. And most importantly, he remembers all the decisions he got to make as a Grey Warden and then looks at Loghain's decision-making pattern so far and is determined to do whatever it takes to keep Loghain from that kind of power.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Agreed. And Flemeth didn't need to say "Men's hearts hold shadows darker than any tainted creature."

Yeah, but Flemeth is being creepy on purpose. If Loghain is supposed to be a tragic antihero who's retreating to save the people under his command then he could stand to not look like his evil plan just went off perfectly. I could never take his excuses seriously after I saw that scene.

[tmp7704]

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

Ah, no. Loghain didn't want them to fight at ostagar at all. Cailan was the one who wanted to fight the darkspawn horde for the sake of "glory". And, yeah, Cailan did offer to hold off.... for the sake of some orlesian boot licking not because it was the right thing to do.

Whether Cailan wanted to lick anyone's boots is quite meaningless. There was many things Cailan might've wanted that in the end Loghain didn't do. Like say, charging at Ostagar.

And that beacon plan was to send a signal and Loghain didn't ask the Wardens to do it. (..)

All of this ignores what i said -- that the whole beacon/charge plan was Loghain's in the first place. In other words, his pining the blame on the Wardens for baiting Cailan in extremely dangerous position is plain denial. It wasn't the Wardens who said "hey guys, we will fight on the forefront putting ourself in mortal peril, and then you can come swooping from the hills to save the day".

[Zeleen]

remember this is only my opinion....
I think Alistair is perfect as King of Fereldon..  he is the heir to the throne afterall.
**don't forget he was raised in the Chantry.. and only out in the world a few short months during DA:O. For him to be uncomfortable and somewhat unsure of himself in any worldly endeavor seems perfectly natural to me...
in time he does get more "worldly" ...  and starts to "man-up" - I guess you would call it...  but, it doesn't happen overnight..  so his decisions seem "wishy-washy" as he's still finding his place in the world.  sheese give the guy a break!

Modifié par Zeleen, 28 octobre 2012 - 05:42 .

[DarkKnightHolmes]

tmp7704 wrote...

All of this ignores what i said -- that the whole beacon/charge plan was Loghain's in the first place. In other words, his pining the blame on the Wardens for baiting Cailan in extremely dangerous position is plain denial. It wasn't the Wardens who said "hey guys, we will fight on the forefront putting ourself in mortal peril, and then you can come swooping from the hills to save the day".

But it was the Warden who took their sweet time up in the tower, who didn't light the beacon at the right time and who decided that being covered all in mystery is somehow going to make them trustworthy. If the Wardens had either told Loghain that the tower was overrun, light the beacon at the right time and even show once that they can be trusted, then Loghain could be blamed for not trusting them. Any smart person wouldn't trust a bunch of foreigners to solve their problems without asking for something in return.

Modifié par DarkKnightHolmes, 28 octobre 2012 - 05:37 .

[Loki_344]

nightscrawl wrote...
"War criminal" is a bit extreme, and seems a bit too modern for the setting, but I think what Anders did is a little more severe than what Sten did or what Sebastian wants to do (do note that he only threatens this in the game, we don't even have an epilogue to tell us what happened with that -- a good result to show us with a DA3 import, eh Bioware?!)

With Anders specifically, it's not the handful of people that may have been in the Chantry building, but what the act leads to: the potential deaths of hundreds of people, maybe more. Anders himself knows what his act will lead to, he freely admits it, but he feels the end justifies the means. A rival Anders even says that he would see the death of every person in Kirkwall if it got mages their freedom.

It was hyperbole. I also realize that the Anders situation is a very special case in relation to this discussion, which I don't blame anyone for their reaction to as it was obviously designed to get an emotional response out of the player.

I agree with you there, but with a few exceptions, most games cater to every whim of the PC. Is it really so hard to believe that players might not react well when that pattern of behavior is changed, and changed in a big way, as was the case with Alistair and the Landsmeet?

I feel that this expectation of the player's can be reduced by offering more such situations, and not just at a pivotal moment near the end. By the time the Landsmeet rolls around, you've played a good 40+ hours of DAO. That is a significant time investment, and most of that was spent with your set of followers and other various NPCs nodding their heads and going along with whatever you want, despite the occasional disapproval points.

To digress slightly, this is one reason I would like more followers that are NOT able to be romanced, like Aveline. More specifically, you attempt to start one and they just aren't interested, nor will they ever be.

No, it's not hard to believe. I know that most games like this are basically designed to be ego trips. It also makes perfect sense that some players would lash out when the illusion of control is taken away. My own view point is that I've always wanted to have a lot less control of my surroundings in RPG's and would prefer to see my role as the center of the universe greatly diminished. I've always found stories about a single person who may in fact even be exceptional in some way taking on the world and failing because the odds just weren't in there favor to a more compelling story. Even happy ending tales are made better when the main character is shown to have gone through a little adversity and hardship on their path to victory.

I don't know if anyone here has played Metal Gear Solid 3, but the main character in that game is constantly challenged in the games narrative to the point that at the end of the second act he is captured by the antagonist and severly beaten with his eye later being forcefully removed. These are extreme examples of adversity I know, but for me the fact that the character in MGS3 who was basically playing the part of an 80's action movie hero went through all of this to reach his goal made the story a much more enjoyable and unique an experience. If events like that ever occured in a Bioware game I doubt the fanbase here would be able to handle it. Seeing their PC like that in a position of weakness and vulnerability would be a little bit too much reality for a lot of the people here and that's fine. I agree with you that it would be nice to see Bioware incorporate more indepent companion actions throughout the entire game instead of just at a few crucial points if for nothing else than to get the fanbase more accustomed to the idea.

Modifié par Loki_344, 28 octobre 2012 - 05:45 .

[Monica21]

tmp7704 wrote...
Whether Cailan wanted to lick anyone's boots is quite meaningless. There was many things Cailan might've wanted that in the end Loghain didn't do. Like say, charging at Ostagar.

Cailan did not want to wait for Eamon's troops. He was willing to wait for Orlesian troops. Cailan wanted Orlesians in Ferelden because of his deal with Celene. The fight at Ostagar didn't have much to do with the darkspawn.

All of this ignores what i said -- that the whole beacon/charge plan was Loghain's in the first place. In other words, his pinning the blame on the Wardens for baiting Cailan in extremely dangerous position is plain denial. It wasn't the Wardens who said "hey guys, we will fight on the forefront putting ourself in mortal peril, and then you can come swooping from the hills to save the day".

You can really only do so much with the ground you're given. And it was Cailan who put the Wardens on the front lines, despite Loghain saying he was trusting them too much.

[tmp7704]

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

But it was the Warden who took their sweet time up in the tower, who didn't light the beacon at the right time (..)

The very point of the beacon was to supposedly tell Loghain that was "the right time" for the charge. It's also what makes the entire plan, withdrawal and subsequent blaming such questionable cluster**** -- if Loghain could somehow tell that the beacon "wasn't lit at the right time" and that's supposed to justify his withdrawal, it means he must've been somehow able to tell when it is "the right time" on his own, and that there's no need to rely on any beacon in the first place.

[tmp7704]

Monica21 wrote...

Cailan did not want to wait for Eamon's troops. He was willing to wait for Orlesian troops.

Precisely. The battle did not have to take place at Ostagar, if Loghain was willing to take the excuse he was provided.

You can really only do so much with the ground you're given. And it was Cailan who put the Wardens on the front lines, despite Loghain saying he was trusting them too much.

Only a poor general doesn't make his ground -- i don't think it'd be all that hard to play into Cailan's fantasies of glory and tell him that the Wardens (along with him) are needed to ensure the ultimate victory, and had them as part of the glorious final charge instead. If Loghain objections to Cailan's wishes never went beyond token warnings then imo that had more to do with the fact he wasn't very heartbroken about the prospect of them all actually perishing in that fight (given his low opinion on both)

[Monica21]

tmp7704 wrote...

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

But it was the Warden who took their sweet time up in the tower, who didn't light the beacon at the right time (..)

The very point of the beacon was to supposedly tell Loghain that was "the right time" for the charge. It's also what makes the entire plan, withdrawal and subsequent blaming such questionable cluster**** -- if Loghain could somehow tell that the beacon "wasn't lit at the right time" and that's supposed to justify his withdrawal, it means he must've been somehow able to tell when it is "the right time" on his own, and that there's no need to rely on any beacon in the first place.

The point of the beacon, from what I've gathered, is that Loghain's position hindered him from seeing the field of battle, so there was no way for him to see on his own. Alistair was supposed to look for an initial signal before lighting the beacon, but he has no idea what's happening in the valley because there are no windows in the Tower. Whatever signal he was supposed to look for, if it was outside, he couldn't have seen it. (Which makes his subsequent comment to Flemeth about how the king was winning the battle just really strange and un-informed.)

[tmp7704]

Monica21 wrote...

The point of the beacon, from what I've gathered, is that Loghain's position hindered him from seeing the field of battle, so there was no way for him to see on his own.

Yes, that's my understanding of it as well. The thing is, if Loghain can't see the battlefield then it knocks the wind out of "he withdrawn because he knew it's too late" justification -- either Loghain can tell what the situation is (and doesn't need the beacon) or he needs the beacon because he can't tell what the situation is like. Can't have it both ways (the beacons and the situation awareness) as some of the apologists would apparently want it.

edit: regarding Alistair being able to see the field, if i remember right it should be possible to see the field of battle from the top of the tower, i.e. where Alistair and rest of the party is when they actually light the beacon. There must be either windows or just plain open terrace there, if just to make the beacon visible from the outside.

Modifié par tmp7704, 28 octobre 2012 - 06:09 .

[Monica21]

tmp7704 wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

Cailan did not want to wait for Eamon's troops. He was willing to wait for Orlesian troops.

Precisely. The battle did not have to take place at Ostagar, if Loghain was willing to take the excuse he was provided.

You mean if Loghain waited for the Orlesians?

Only a poor general doesn't make his ground -- i don't think it'd be all that hard to play into Cailan's fantasies of glory and tell him that the Wardens (along with him) are needed to ensure the ultimate victory, and had them as part of the glorious final charge instead. If Loghain objections to Cailan's wishes never went beyond token warnings then imo that had more to do with the fact he wasn't very heartbroken about the prospect of them all actually perishing in that fight (given his low opinion on both)

First, Loghain was on higher ground. He was on a ridge above the valley. Given the scouting numbers that they had, his plan would have worked if it weren't for the fact that the horde was larger than anticipated. It's kind of hard to get an accurate number when darkspawn are bursting through the ground.

Yes, Loghain had a low opinion of Cailan and by the time of Ostagar, was already suspicious of his relationship with Orlais. RtO proves that his suspicions were justified. If Cailan cared about Ferelden then he would have taken Eamon's offer for troops instead of waiting for Orlais. Redcliffe is, after all, quite a bit closer than the Orlesian border.

[Zeleen]

wow! looks like topic went from "King Alistair" to "who's the real "villain" at the Battle at Ostagar"

[Monica21]

tmp7704 wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

The point of the beacon, from what I've gathered, is that Loghain's position hindered him from seeing the field of battle, so there was no way for him to see on his own.

Yes, that's my understanding of it as well. The thing is, if Loghain can't see the battlefield then it knocks the wind out of "he withdrawn because he knew it's too late" justification -- either Loghain can tell what the situation is (and doesn't need the beacon) or he needs the beacon because he can't tell what the situation is like. Can't have it both ways (the beacons and the situation awareness) as some of the apologists would apparently want it.

He needs the beacon because he can't tell what the situation is. The part you're not talking about is that Loghain knows what Cailan's troop strength is. I presume Loghain can still see darkspawn entering the valley because they were entering from high ground too, but south of Loghain's position. If there's no signal and darkspawn are still coming, then Cailan's troops are cracking and something has gone very wrong with either getting the signal to the tower or lighting the signal at the tower. Since we don't know what Alistair was supposed to wait for, we don't know if it was one or both. If Cailan's troops are cracking and the darkspawn are still coming, then he can't come around and attack as his initial plan described.

[Zjarcal]

Zeleen wrote...

wow! looks like topic went from "King Alistair" to "who's the real "villain" at the Battle at Ostagar"

There was once a rule in the DAO forums about how all threads derailed into Loghain's role at Ostagar.... seems that rule applies here too. 

[Monica21]

tmp7704 wrote...
edit: regarding Alistair being able to see the field, if i remember right it should be possible to see the field of battle from the top of the tower, i.e. where Alistair and rest of the party is when they actually light the beacon. There must be either windows or just plain open terrace there, if just to make the beacon visible from the outside.

Except there aren't. You're in a round room and you light a fireplace, which is nothing like the flames shown bursting from the top of the tower. Probably just a game design issue. And if there are windows and a terrace, Alistair doesn't look. He says, "We've surely missed the signal by now."

[tmp7704]

Monica21 wrote...

You mean if Loghain waited for the Orlesians?

I mean if Loghain said "Fine, let's wait then". Saying he'd wait for the Orlesians doesn't necessarily mean he would've actually waited for the Orlesians -- like mentioned earlier he also said he'd charge at Ostagar but ultimately didn't -- but it'd effectively allow him to delay the battle.

First, Loghain was on higher ground. He was on a ridge above the valley. Given the scouting numbers that they had, his plan would have worked if it weren't for the fact that the horde was larger than anticipated. It's kind of hard to get an accurate number when darkspawn are bursting through the ground.

I meant making the ground figuratively here rather than literally   That is, in the sense that Loghain couldn't object to Cailan wanting to put Wardens on the frontline etc and had to work with what he was given ... that'd be what a poor general does. While a shrewd one forms the plan in the way that'd cause the vain king to want to place himself and the troops where the general needs/wants them, instead.

Of course, it doesn't exclude the possibility that Loghain actually was shrewd, and the frontlines actually were where he wanted the Wardens and the king (and hence only the token objections etc) But that's what'd make his subsequent blaming of the Wardens such silly denial.

[Monica21]

Zeleen wrote...

wow! looks like topic went from "King Alistair" to "who's the real "villain" at the Battle at Ostagar"

And another reason why Loghain, love him or hate him, is an interesting character and why I'm boggled at the attempts in DA2 to shove him into "one-note villain" status.

Edited to add: the real villain at Ostagar are the darkspawn. Duh.

Modifié par Monica21, 28 octobre 2012 - 06:20 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Okay, then who? Cailan's a moron who refused to listen when Loghain tried to give him advice that would have saved his life. Duncan doesn't seem to be making any decisions for fear of offending the people in charge. A PC might have seen it going to hell but nobody's listening to them yet!

Don't know who, but not Loghain. When Loghain needed money he sold elves into slavery. When Loghain needed allies he went for Howe and Uldred. When Loghain needed to deal with his political competition he jumped directly to blood magic and poison. The guy kind of tends to jump the gun on 'necessary evil,' with disastrous consequences. Isn't it possible that he misjudged Ostragar the same way he misjudged everything else in the game?

According to Word Of Gaider, its what he believed. And as I said, there's nobody there more competent to decide. And besides, the plan was to flank them. There were still spawn pouring into the valley when the beacon went up. Not all of the darkspawn were committed. (I rewatched the scene on Youtube to be sure.)

My original point however was that there's nobody else better suited. You can't get a perfect anyone in Dragon Age. A lot of the point of Dragon Age is doing the best you can with what you have. There's no karma meter, there's no black and white morality, and in some cases it's not even clear what the right move is. So go ahead, weigh what you have, and make a personal judgement call on Loghain to the best of your abilities. My point is that Loghain did the same, and I think he did right.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Which will not answer the question.

Loghain seemed to think it would. He wants to duel somebody and I'm a big fan of symbolism.

That wasn't his plan A, if you recall.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

And leaving out the part where what you suggest Loghain had a duty to do would get him killed to save a man who was probably going to die anyway, what about all the useful soldiers that Loghain would have had to take with him when he went to die?

Again, I'm not convinced he made the right call. Maybe he did and withdrawing the troops saved them from a hopeless battle. Maybe charging at the signal would have let him break the rest of the army out the encirclement and they could retreat together. Maybe they could have killed more Darkspawn at Ostragar than they ultimately did elsewhere. What I do know is that people tend to let him off too easy.

Word of Gaider, and the good glimpse of the spawn still swarming in. I honestly don't see Loghain saving enough soldiers to get a return on the lives he's investing, even disregarding the writer opinion.

Plus I tend to roleplay this choice to some extend and my Warden remembers that he didn't cut and run when he found out he would be facing dozens of Darkspawn instead of zero. Plus he's still kind of upset about the time his circle nearly got eaten by demons and Loghain's tangential involvement in the affair. And most importantly, he remembers all the decisions he got to make as a Grey Warden and then looks at Loghain's decision-making pattern so far and is determined to do whatever it takes to keep Loghain from that kind of power.

Roleplaying is entirely different. One can decide that a Warden would kill him for cultural reasons, (my DE warrior, for instance), because he's a massive ****** (my EM), or because the Warden doesn't know any of this. That's not the same as Loghain not being justified.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Agreed. And Flemeth didn't need to say "Men's hearts hold shadows darker than any tainted creature."

Yeah, but Flemeth is being creepy on purpose. If Loghain is supposed to be a tragic antihero who's retreating to save the people under his command then he could stand to not look like his evil plan just went off perfectly. I could never take his excuses seriously after I saw that scene.

Yeah, but I actually remembered Alistair's "We've surely missed the signal" line, then promptly forgot it thanks to that manipulative hag.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 28 octobre 2012 - 06:30 .

[Monica21]

tmp7704 wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

You mean if Loghain waited for the Orlesians?

I mean if Loghain said "Fine, let's wait then". Saying he'd wait for the Orlesians doesn't necessarily mean he would've actually waited for the Orlesians -- like mentioned earlier he also said he'd charge at Ostagar but ultimately didn't -- but it'd effectively allow him to delay the battle.

First, Loghain was on higher ground. He was on a ridge above the valley. Given the scouting numbers that they had, his plan would have worked if it weren't for the fact that the horde was larger than anticipated. It's kind of hard to get an accurate number when darkspawn are bursting through the ground.

I meant making the ground figuratively here rather than literally   That is, in the sense that Loghain couldn't object to Cailan wanting to put Wardens on the frontline etc and had to work with what he was given ... that'd be what a poor general does. While a shrewd one forms the plan in the way that'd cause the vain king to want to place himself and the troops where the general needs/wants them, instead.

Of course, it doesn't exclude the possibility that Loghain actually was shrewd, and the frontlines actually were where he wanted the Wardens and the king (and hence only the token objections etc) But that's what'd make his subsequent blaming of the Wardens such silly denial.

From what I can tell on entering Ostagar Cailan and Loghain have been arguing about this for some time. Remember, Cailan gets bored by strategy. Cailan wants to fight on the  front lines because that's where his father fought. If I kept hearing "Our arguments with the Orlesians are a thing of the past and you will remember who is king" at some point I'd shrug my shoulders and agree that sure, Cailan can be anywhere he wants to be if he insists on putting himself in harm's way.

[tmp7704]

Monica21 wrote...

He needs the beacon because he can't tell what the situation is. The part you're not talking about is that Loghain knows what Cailan's troop strength is. I presume Loghain can still see darkspawn entering the valley because they were entering from high ground too, but south of Loghain's position. If there's no signal and darkspawn are still coming, then Cailan's troops are cracking and something has gone very wrong with either getting the signal to the tower or lighting the signal at the tower. Since we don't know what Alistair was supposed to wait for, we don't know if it was one or both. If Cailan's troops are cracking and the darkspawn are still coming, then he can't come around and attack as his initial plan described.

We actually know what Alistair was supposed to wait for -- it's explicitly stated in the war council cinematics. Cailan simply had to bait the darkspawn into attacking his positions, and that (the darkspawn attack) was supposed to be trigger for lighting the beacon. Loghain was supposed to flank the darkspawn at that point. That means attacking from the side, so it's perfectly doable no matter if he can see darkspawn 'still coming in' from the south or not, he isn't supposed to be behind the darkspawn.

Incidentally, if Loghain could actually see the darkspawn coming into the valley then that also renders the beacon obsolete -- because he doesn't need the beacon to tell him there's the darkspawn now in the valley for his forces to flank.

[TheButterflyEffect]

What can I say? I love a smart, cunning woman who knows how to survive.

[bleetman]

tmp7704 wrote...

Yes, that's my understanding of it as well. The thing is, if Loghain can't see the battlefield then it knocks the wind out of "he withdrawn because he knew it's too late" justification -- either Loghain can tell what the situation is (and doesn't need the beacon) or he needs the beacon because he can't tell what the situation is like. Can't have it both ways (the beacons and the situation awareness) as some of the apologists would apparently want it.

It seems pretty reasonable to assume that he might not be able to see the valley where Cailan's forces were fighting (and thus required a signal telling him the darkspawn were charging them), but can still easily see the constant trail of Darkspawn pouring out of the wilds, over a ridge.



It's not exactly hard to see.

Modifié par bleetman, 28 octobre 2012 - 06:38 .

[Zeleen]

Monica21 wrote...

Zeleen wrote...

wow! looks like topic went from "King Alistair" to "who's the real "villain" at the Battle at Ostagar"

And another reason why Loghain, love him or hate him, is an interesting character and why I'm boggled at the attempts in DA2 to shove him into "one-note villain" status.

Edited to add: the real villain at Ostagar are the darkspawn. Duh.

OK - so is it "who betrayed whom at Osragar"  or "whether Loghain was indeed the traitor"  now ?
sooo... I still think --  "on topic" Alistair is right choice as King --  for the reasons I stated above..

[SeptimusMagistos]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

According to Word Of Gaider, no. And besides, the plan was to flank them. There were still spawn pouring into the valley when the beacon went up. Not all of the darkspawn were committed. (I rewatched the scene on Youtube to be sure.)

Really? I don't remember Gaider saying anything about what would have happened if Loghain charged, only about his reasons for not charging.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
My original point however was that there's nobody else better suited. You can't get a perfect anyone in Dragon Age. A lot of the point of Dragon Age is doing the best you can with what you have. There's no karma meter, there's no black and white morality, and in some cases it's not even clear what the right move is. So go ahead, weigh what you have, and make a personal judgement call on Loghain to the best of your abilities. My point is that Loghain did the same, and I think he did right.

I would rather have any of the others doing it. Loghain's judment throughout the game has just been horrible.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

That wasn't his plan A, if you recall.

Well, his plan A involved a horde of demons, abominations, and undead pouring out of Redcliffe and Circle Tower while Denerim fell because it had no support from the dwarves or the elves and no Grey Wardens. There comes a point at which a man has to admit he's failed and step down. Loghain was well past that point.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Roleplaying is entirely different. One can decide that a Warden would kill him for cultural reasons, (my DE warrior, for instance), because he's a massive ****** (my EM), or because the Warden doesn't know any of this. That's not the same as Loghain not being justified.

While I'm not sure if he was justified or not, I'd still kill him for any one of the things he did after Ostragar.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Yeah, but I actually remembered Alistair's "We've surely missed the signal" line, then promptly forgot it thanks to that manipulative hag.

Be that as it may, it doesn't change Loghain's apparently villainous appearence in his scene.