673 réponses à ce sujet

[TheButterflyEffect]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Lots of people in this thread need to play Crusader Kings 2 (or you know, read about how monarchies actually worked, but the former idea is more fun).

Alienating your nobles is a good way to encourage civil war and regicide. They are the reason you rule.

Some people like Henry VIII just cut their heads off. That put them in line.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Lots of people in this thread need to play Crusader Kings 2 (or you know, read about how monarchies actually worked, but the former idea is more fun).

Alienating your nobles is a good way to encourage civil war and regicide. They are the reason you rule.

Some people like Henry VIII just cut their heads off. That put them in line.

Unless enough people decide it's worth risking death. If every single noble wants the king dead, the king is dead.

[MisterJB]

David Gaider wrote...
I just simply will never respect the person who doesn't own up to the fact that there was an element of selfishness on their own part in betraying Alistair as well.

I must disagree, Mr.Gaider.
First and foremost, allow me to say that, while I might disagree with Alistair's decision at the Landsmeet should Loghain be spared, it doesn't lessen him in my eyes. To be human is to be flawed.
However, I don't see how, depending on his or her mindset, the Warden can be accused of selfishness.
Allow me to use a particular mindset. This is a Warden who became close friends with Alistair, who respected Duncan and owed him his life and who is a proud Fereldan and saw Loghain tear it apart through betrayal, civil war, slavery, apostates, etc. By all accounts, this is a Warden who despises Loghain.
So, when he spared him at the Landsmeet, could this Warden truly be acused of placing his own feelings over Alistair's or simply of placing the needs of the entirety of Thedas over both his and Alistair's wishes? And, in doing so, spared a man he wished to kill and lost the friend who had been with him since the beggining.
It is selfishness or true selflessness?

[TheButterflyEffect]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Lots of people in this thread need to play Crusader Kings 2 (or you know, read about how monarchies actually worked, but the former idea is more fun).

Alienating your nobles is a good way to encourage civil war and regicide. They are the reason you rule.

Some people like Henry VIII just cut their heads off. That put them in line.

Unless enough people decide it's worth risking death. If every single noble wants the king dead, the king is dead.

Which hasn't really happened in history - even very unpopular kings still had a good arm of support. Heck, even Caligula still had supporters in spite of his incrediblty bad rule; the people who were still loyal to him retaliated against his murderers very violently...

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Lots of people in this thread need to play Crusader Kings 2 (or you know, read about how monarchies actually worked, but the former idea is more fun).

Alienating your nobles is a good way to encourage civil war and regicide. They are the reason you rule.

Some people like Henry VIII just cut their heads off. That put them in line.

Unless enough people decide it's worth risking death. If every single noble wants the king dead enough to risk their own death, the king is dead. Especially in Ferelden, where the king is supposed to be subject to the will of the nobles. And the decision you suggest would probably do just that, minus Eamon and Teagan who can't possibly make up the difference. (Alistair would be in the right, but that makes little difference.)


Edit: Damn it. I meant to hit edit.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 27 octobre 2012 - 06:47 .

[upsettingshorts]

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Lots of people in this thread need to play Crusader Kings 2 (or you know, read about how monarchies actually worked, but the former idea is more fun).

Alienating your nobles is a good way to encourage civil war and regicide. They are the reason you rule.

Some people like Henry VIII just cut their heads off. That put them in line.

And some people like King John were just forced to sign the Magna Carta.

Not all relationships between monarch and nobility are equal, and considering how much power the Landsmeet seems to have collectively, and the fact the Theirin line is incredibly weak, it's a safe assumption to make that a future King Alistair doesn't have that kind of authority.

Ancien regime Ferelden is not.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 27 octobre 2012 - 06:46 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Lots of people in this thread need to play Crusader Kings 2 (or you know, read about how monarchies actually worked, but the former idea is more fun).

Alienating your nobles is a good way to encourage civil war and regicide. They are the reason you rule.

Some people like Henry VIII just cut their heads off. That put them in line.

Unless enough people decide it's worth risking death. If every single noble wants the king dead, the king is dead.

Which hasn't really happened in history - even very unpopular kings still had a good arm of support. Heck, even Caligula still had supporters in spite of his incrediblty bad rule; the people who were still loyal to him retaliated against his murderers very violently...

That doesn't do anything to weaken my main point, seeing as Caligula still died.

[LobselVith8]

Masha Potato wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

That is, however, simply my opinion. Regardless of what I intended when I wrote him, people will add their own interpretations to it, and more power to them. I just simply will never respect the person who doesn't own up to the fact that there was an element of selfishness on their own part in betraying Alistair as well.

Is it  selfish to believe that at that point of time Ferelden needs every Warden they can find and to try to make the most of the situation by maybe swallowing your not-so-fond feelings towards Loghain to make him join the order? What if the player doesn't think of Alistair at all and instead thinks of what would be the wisest course of action in their rather ****ty situation? 

I really fail to see how in a situation when you and Alistair just disagree on the preferable course of action doing what you think is right  and logical is a selfish betrayal. 

I agree. I don't see what's selfish about conscripting Loghain into the Wardens, when it's repeatedly mentioned that only Wardens can stop the Archdemon.

[upsettingshorts]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

That doesn't do anything to weaken my main point, seeing as Caligula still died.

Indeed, not to mention the Roman Empire and feudal systems of the Middle Ages are more different than they are alike.  

The Romans had a concept of the state, and rule of law, and had things like standing armies, and the Praetorian Guard.

[TheButterflyEffect]

Still, the point is, no ruling man in history didn't have a bajillion mistresses....

Modifié par TheButterflyEffect, 27 octobre 2012 - 07:00 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

That still doesn't mean, no ruling man in history didn't have a bajillion mistresses....

Which Alistair is willing to do, and my impression is that he gets away with it.

[Massakkolia]

David Gaider wrote...

Fair enough. Opinions are precious butterflies, to be certain. My opinion is that, from Alistair's perspective, it's his "beloved" who betrays him at the Landsmeet. The woman he loved, who he thought understood him and knew that Loghain's murder of all his comrades (as well as his mentor) deserved justice, has decided that Loghain should instead be given a place in an order which, to him, represents all good things. That Loghain will be given a chance at redemption rather than the ignoble execution he deserves.

There is a point where players expect to be able to influence their companions, but I argue there should also be a point at which those companions should not bend to your every whim no matter how much they like you. They expect that you like them too, and that this means you should be as willing to do what they want as much as they're willing to do what you want. To not do so turns the character into a sock-puppet for your will, which while very gratifying to the ego wouldn't make for a very human characterization of Alistair.

Is it maddening that he disagrees with you, after having been willing to follow your lead up until that point? Absolutely. I seldom see people actually analyze the situation, however, to determine the level of their betrayal of Alistair as much as his betrayal of them. In my mind, the only thing Alistair does which is unequivocably wrong is when he up and leaves the Wardens once the decision is made. Surely the fate of the world is more important than that? Being human, however, he simply doesn't want to be in the same order that accepts Loghain... and, far more importantly, doesn't want to be near you.

Does finding Alistair drunk in Kirkwall mean he pines for power he never even wanted? Not at all. If that's what you think, I'd venture you're not reading the dialogue. He despairs at what happened, and regrets his decision to leave. He despairs the man he has become compared to what he was, or could have been. Which is pathetic, since he walked away from it, but such is the way of drunks (and forum posters) that self-awareness isn't high on their list of concerns when they're complaining about something.

That is, however, simply my opinion. Regardless of what I intended when I wrote him, people will add their own interpretations to it, and more power to them. I just simply will never respect the person who doesn't own up to the fact that there was an element of selfishness on their own part in betraying Alistair as well.

The bolded part is why that particular Landsmeet scene is one of my favorite gaming moments. To me Alistair's reaction made perfect sense. Though Zevran is my preferred romance in DA:O, I usually romance Alistair simply for the political and emotional complexity of the whole situation.

The way I roleplay the scene, my PC isn't angry at Alistair. Logically she thinks sparing Loghain makes sense but she knows she has betrayed Alistair and feels guilty about it. In addition to sparing Loghain, my character also tried to pressure Alistair into becoming a king and agreeing to a political marriage with Anora. All this from the woman you love is probably a lot to take. 

I love when NPCs rebel against the almighty opinion of the PC. I don't want to dictate the way other people think. I like that the protagonist has some influence over the NPCs worldviews but a game feels much more engaging when it involves misunderstandings, quarrels and even betrayals.

[TheButterflyEffect]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

That still doesn't mean, no ruling man in history didn't have a bajillion mistresses....

Which Alistair is willing to do, and my impression is that he gets away with it.

...Only if he's "hardened" and even then you have to persuade him pretty fiercely.

[Nashimura]

David Gaider wrote...

TheButterflyEffect wrote...Sorry. Then I'll just say... it was "dumb". That's all.

That is, however, simply my opinion. Regardless of what I intended when I wrote him, people will add their own interpretations to it, and more power to them. I just simply will never respect the person who doesn't own up to the fact that there was an element of selfishness on their own part in betraying Alistair as well.

I'm not sure if it is selfishness, willing to accept someone like Loghain who has greatly harmed you and your friends up to this point with the reason that you will end the blight no matter the cost - Loghain is sold as very capable, Ferelden and the Wardens need capable men. The Wardens have a long history of bringing in people with imperfect morality, including the Warden himself.

I think its fair to say Alistair's view of the order is not really inline with the actual truth of it. I offered Loghain a place without the knowledge that Alistair would go so strongly against it (I like that he did though, i respected him more for it) I had not decided who i would put on the throne prior to the landsmeet (couldn't decide, Anora seemed better but i liked Alistair) and when someone says either do this or i leave it tends to make up my mind easier. 

Alistair had to go, which was sad because up to that point i felt like my warden was the Loghain to Alistair's Maric in a way. I spared him though, it wasn't personal really...drunk Alistair in DA2 was funny and sad at the same time for me. 

That's my take on that situation, i played through the game a few times and did it differently after but that was my first and true play through taking the choices as they come and thinking them through. So my take on this differs from the guy who wrote it....great, ill be quiet now 

Modifié par Nashimura, 27 octobre 2012 - 07:05 .

[LobselVith8]

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Still, the point is, no ruling man in history didn't have a bajillion mistresses....

I know it upset a lot of people who romanced Alistair as a non-noble Warden. Which, considering the racism of Thedas, surprises me that Hawke romancing an elf is only a scandal in the codex, rather than the narrative. Especially with Merrill, a Dalish elf who believes in the Creators.

[upsettingshorts]

Nashimura wrote...

I think its fair to say Alistair's view of the order is not really inline with the actual truth of it.

Ding ding ding.

But Alistair still idolizes the Wardens and what he thinks they're about.  Loghain is not compatible with that idea.  So not only is the guy who killed all his friends joining the Grey Wardens, but his entire idea of what the Wardens are about is in that moment finally sharply contrasted with reality.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 27 octobre 2012 - 07:08 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

That still doesn't mean, no ruling man in history didn't have a bajillion mistresses....

Which Alistair is willing to do, and my impression is that he gets away with it.

...Only if he's "hardened" and even then you have to persuade him pretty fiercely.

He's templar raised.

[Twisted Path]

ImperatorMortis wrote...

FINE HERE wrote...
Touché.

King Alistair for DA3! Discuss!

NO MORE CAMEOS! They're awful. 

I compleatly agree with this! Please please please don't have any cameos in Dragon Age 3. Let beloved/hated characters retire or die in peace.

The game is going to take place in a different nation from the past two games, there's no reason you can't create an interesting, large and new cast of characters. There's no reason for Zevran or whoever to show up in a shoehorned-in side quest. Also please don't bring ancillary characters from previous games in as party members like Anders, Merril and Isabella. Anders was a compleat disaster, what with his personality transplant between games.

[Monica21]

David Gaider wrote...

TheButterflyEffect wrote...
Sorry. Then I'll just say... it was "dumb". That's all.

Fair enough. Opinions are precious butterflies, to be certain. My opinion is that, from Alistair's perspective, it's his "beloved" who betrays him at the Landsmeet. The woman he loved, who he thought understood him and knew that Loghain's murder of all his comrades (as well as his mentor) deserved justice, has decided that Loghain should instead be given a place in an order which, to him, represents all good things. That Loghain will be given a chance at redemption rather than the ignoble execution he deserves.

There is a point where players expect to be able to influence their companions, but I argue there should also be a point at which those companions should not bend to your every whim no matter how much they like you. They expect that you like them too, and that this means you should be as willing to do what they want as much as they're willing to do what you want. To not do so turns the character into a sock-puppet for your will, which while very gratifying to the ego wouldn't make for a very human characterization of Alistair.

Is it maddening that he disagrees with you, after having been willing to follow your lead up until that point? Absolutely. I seldom see people actually analyze the situation, however, to determine the level of their betrayal of Alistair as much as his betrayal of them. In my mind, the only thing Alistair does which is unequivocably wrong is when he up and leaves the Wardens once the decision is made. Surely the fate of the world is more important than that? Being human, however, he simply doesn't want to be in the same order that accepts Loghain... and, far more importantly, doesn't want to be near you.

Does finding Alistair drunk in Kirkwall mean he pines for power he never even wanted? Not at all. If that's what you think, I'd venture you're not reading the dialogue. He despairs at what happened, and regrets his decision to leave. He despairs the man he has become compared to what he was, or could have been. Which is pathetic, since he walked away from it, but such is the way of drunks (and forum posters) that self-awareness isn't high on their list of concerns when they're complaining about something.

That is, however, simply my opinion. Regardless of what I intended when I wrote him, people will add their own interpretations to it, and more power to them. I just simply will never respect the person who doesn't own up to the fact that there was an element of selfishness on their own part in betraying Alistair as well.

Well, your first paragraph was about Alistair's perspective of Loghain (which is fine and one that I and nearly every character I RP disagree with) and your last presumes selfishness on the part of the Warden and player. Selfish how? Is Alistair more selfish for refusing to sacrifice everything he said he was willing to work for and what Duncan spent his entire life fighting against? I could not disagre more that the Warden displays selfishness when recruiting Loghain. If my canon Warden was selfish she would have run away from Duncan on the way to Ostagar instead of doing her duty as a Cousland, which was exactly what her father asked of her. In a country with three Wardens it makes sense to add another. Riordan implies that there are reasons to have another Warden, and given how little you and Alistair know, it certainly makes sense to pay some attention to Riordan.

I'm not at all sure if this is an intentional retcon of Loghain and his actions, given how much discussion he got (and still gets) on the Origins forum and the entirely reasonable defense offered by Mary Kirby, but I was certainly disappointed by his treatment in DA2. There was the opening sequence describing him as a betrayer and then the codex entry for his armor. Neither represent the Loghain that was presented in two books and in Origins.

[Dhiro]

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

That still doesn't mean, no ruling man in history didn't have a bajillion mistresses....

Which Alistair is willing to do, and my impression is that he gets away with it.

...Only if he's "hardened" and even then you have to persuade him pretty fiercely.

Maybe unhardened Alistair thinks that your Warden deserves better than being a mistress and watch him get it on with his wife. Maybe he truly wants to be a good husband for his future wife, and believes that having a mistress would be cheating on her. Maybe he just want the Warden to go find her own happiness, without needing to become "the other".

Unhardened Alistair lacks any kind of backbone and often puts others above him - the Loghain situation being an exception for obvious reasons.

[SeptimusMagistos]

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Lots of people in this thread need to play Crusader Kings 2 (or you know, read about how monarchies actually worked, but the former idea is more fun).

Alienating your nobles is a good way to encourage civil war and regicide. They are the reason you rule.

Some people like Henry VIII just cut their heads off. That put them in line.

Theoretically, yeah. In practice, Ferelden's sort of in the middle of something right now. Something important. It was the whole reason you had to go to the Landsmeet instead of storming Loghain's front door.

It's the Blight. It's why Alistair can't affort making any nobles angry at the moment.

[TheButterflyEffect]

And why can't things be patched up once the whole demon drama is over?

[Monica21]

TheButterflyEffect wrote...

And why can't things be patched up once the whole demon drama is over?

That's why God created fanfic.

[David Gaider]

Monica21 wrote...
Well, your first paragraph was about Alistair's perspective of Loghain (which is fine and one that I and nearly every character I RP disagree with) and your last presumes selfishness on the part of the Warden and player. Selfish how?

Selfish in that you believe your opinion is more important than Alistair's. You may believe what you're doing is for the greater good, but from Alistair's perspective you're allowing Loghain a chance at redemption which Alistair doesn't think he deserves. Alistair believes that sacrificing your life to save Ferelden is a noble deed, and that the Wardens don't need Loghain-- the very man who killed all the other Wardens and put you in this position--to do that.

So, you disagree. Alistair refuses to let it end with that, and you override him-- it's going to be what you think and his feelings are irrelevant. Is his response selfish? Even childish? That can be argued, sure, but if you believe your own actions aren't also selfish then I think you're deluding yourself. You made that determination all on your own-- you. Ignoring the wishes of the only other Grey Warden in the room, a man who is supposedly not only your friend and equal but also a man who loves you and trusts you... and assumed you trusted him. Who assumed you felt as he did, and that you agreed with him back when he said "Loghain has to die for what he's done". You may still believe you were right-- the story is written to allow you to think that, and has no clear-cut way out where everybody is made happy-- but believing you were the only arbiter to decide that is indeed selfish of you.

Don't like the word 'selfish'? How about 'arrogant'? How about 'self-righteous'? These are not mutually exclusive of people who are heroes or who might also have noble goals. If anything, Loghain is a prime example of someone who can go to their grave thinking they did the right thing even though others readily disagree. Someone can respond to that and go "nope, nope, my Warden was in the right and Alistair was a jerk to disagree with me!" ...and okay! Good for you. I'll still write in my journal about how Alistair clearly wasn't the only jerk in the room.

Modifié par David Gaider, 27 octobre 2012 - 07:58 .