84 réponses à ce sujet

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Jedimaster88 wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Since I view Anora as (mainly) unselfish in motivation, I view her as a reasonable countermeasure against the Kirkwall nobles. Also, the original point "You haven't played Dragon Age II if you don't think corruption has a place in politics" was mainly a joke.

Doesnt Loghain himself warn that Anora´s TRUE loyalty is to herself and that she is willing to sacrifice anything for HER goals?

I kind of see her as a person who´s own goals come first and that she hides those goals behind noble intentions.

Okay, maybe. But whether or not her main goal is to keep power, the best way to do that is to make Ferelden more capable of standing on it's own. Screwing Ferelden over isn't really in her best interests, in addition to the fact that she actually seems care about the country as a whole.

[TEWR]

Remember the Dwarf Noble Origin? The reason you and your eldest brother get framed and killed is because your middle brother played the political game better than you, bribing and blackmailing others against you long before lying and framing you for the murder of your eldest brother.

Minor nitpick: Bhelen isn't the middle brother. He's the youngest. The DN is the middle sibling.

And Bhelen's a hack compared to Xanthos Aeducan =P.

[Jedimaster88]

Faerunner wrote...



Said noble intentions being part of her goals. If she becomes queen, she becomes a very competent and popular monarch. She strives to open a university (creating education and opportunities for more than just the clergy and nobility), opens trade routes to foreign countries (bringing in much-needed revenue and foreign relations), and becomes a skilled governor in matters of court and law. 

Yes that is true and even though Im not exactly a big fan of hers for certain reasons, these are good reasons to give her the throne.

I last played with a city elf who made her a sole ruler. Almost all the things the epilogue said about her were good EXCEPT the things about city elves. After hearing about Shianni´s fate and everything, I wasnt very happy since I happen to care about the elves fate and feel that they have gotten too much sh***y treatment already.

Because of this I usually have hardened Alistair marry Anora. For me that ending is much better. You get the good from both of them.

Modifié par Jedimaster88, 10 novembre 2012 - 07:07 .

[sylvanaerie]

Jedimaster88 wrote...

Faerunner wrote...



Said noble intentions being part of her goals. If she becomes queen, she becomes a very competent and popular monarch. She strives to open a university (creating education and opportunities for more than just the clergy and nobility), opens trade routes to foreign countries (bringing in much-needed revenue and foreign relations), and becomes a skilled governor in matters of court and law. 

Yes that is true and even though Im not exactly a big fan of hers for certain reasons, these are good reasons to give her the throne.

I last played with a city elf who made her a sole ruler. Almost all the things the epilogue said about her were good EXCEPT the things about city elves. After hearing about Shianni´s fate and everything, I wasnt very happy since I happen to care about the elves fate and feel that they have gotten too much sh***y treatment already.

Because of this I usually have hardened Alistair marry Anora. For me that ending is much better. You get the good from both of them.

For Ferelden it's the best solution I've seen, Queen/King Cousland married to either of them is more of a personal triumph for the player, but Alistair/Anora mesh well in ruling.  She's got the chops to be ruthless when she needs to be, he learns governance from her and surprises her with how well he does, and tempers her less than stellar moments (there is no elven riot card in this scenario, so I'm assuming Alistair helps prevent this).  And together they rule wisely/well.

On a personal level it sucks though.  They really don't like each other, and it's more along the lines of a business arrangement. I've only done it a couple times and now just prefer to leave one or the other on the throne, alone.  Nor will I ever marry him to her unhardened.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

sylvanaerie wrote...

They really don't like each other, and it's more along the lines of a business arrangement.

My impression is that medieval marriages tended to be like that, though with the "They don't even like each other" part optional rather than required.

For that matter, my headcanon for my Cousland who married Anora is that it started out like this too, (my impression is that you're allowed to roleplay this in Awakenings, though for now headcanon is all it is) though from Anora's tone I think business was the main reason rather than the only one.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 11 novembre 2012 - 05:43 .

[sylvanaerie]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

sylvanaerie wrote...

They really don't like each other, and it's more along the lines of a business arrangement.

My impression is that medieval marriages tended to be like that, though with the "They don't even like each other" part optional rather than required.

For that matter, my headcanon for my Cousland who married Anora is that it started out like this too, (my impression is that you're allowed to roleplay this in Awakenings, though for now headcanon is all it is) though from Anora's tone I think business was the main reason rather than the only one.

I was actually referring to an Anora/Alistair scenario with that.  Nothing is out and out said, but when I had my King Cousland run, Anora had a completly different 'feel' to her.  Her lines felt more 'playful' not so much a flirtation as a 'testing the waters' so to speak.  By reputation alone, let alone actual deeds, the Warden can be a bit intimidating, even to a strong, capable ruler like her, and I get the feeling she sees some of her father's qualities in the Warden. 

The epilogue card of Awakenings said Anora welcomed the Hero back to Denerim with a smile, in addition to a lot of pomp and circumstance.  While I don't think she'd warm up to Alistair, I think she would to a Cousland once she sees it isn't going to be like it was with Cailan.  I think all she'd ever see is Cailan looking at Alistair and he's going to have a hard time seeing her beyond his dislike of Loghain.

[SeptimusMagistos]

Faerunner wrote...

She wants him to be deposed because she recognizes he's a terrible ruler, and I'm sure she's all right with him paying for his crimes a la prison time or joining the Wardens, but it doesn't mean she wants him executed. If you do not bring him up and do not insist he has to die, she will continue to support your bid to depose him.

Well, we never exactly get the option to suggest Loghain just be thrown into prison, otherwise I'd probably go for that. If she knows of any alternatives to the death pentalty, this would be the time to bring them up. Otherwise it sounds like she's insisting we just let Loghain get off without punishment.

Faerunner wrote...

She offers her support in the Landsmeet in exchange for your support in her bid for the throne. She explains very eloquently and diplomatically how she has Fereldan's best interest at heart and why she believes she is the best candidate for the throne. If you refuse to support her, you shouldn't be surprised when she doesn't support you.

I equally calmly explain that I disagree and feel like she would be a bad ruler. This causes her to throw her support with Loghain. Anyone throwing their support to Loghain is not all right in my book.

Faerunner wrote...

And yet every royal and noble in every nation does it, and every noble in every nation has to do it in order to survive the political atmosphere. It's like some warped Darwinian survival of the fittest. You have to lie and cheat others in order not to be lied and cheated by others.

Right. And this system ultimately screws over the people and the politicians themselves. So what I do is apply the opposite selection pressure. You have to be honest and loyal and caring about your people or else I will prevent you from getting any power.

Faerunner wrote...
Remember the Dwarf Noble Origin? The reason you and your eldest brother get framed and killed is because your middle brother played the political game better than you, bribing and blackmailing others against you long before lying and framing you for the murder of your eldest brother. Dwarven politics have been cutthroat for centuries and it's outright stated that every deysher has to learn to be ruthless in order not to be assassinated or backstabbed out of everything they own by other nobles. Same with "The Game" in Orlais. Same with the Antivan Crows in Antiva. Same with the Tevinter Magisters in the Imperium. Same with the Bannorn in Fereldan, who are constantly fighting each other over land and titles.

And you're suggesting that the best way to solve this problem is by putting forward candidates who will contribute to it?

Faerunner wrote...
Coming back to Anora, her background clearly shows she had to get tough in order to stay afloat in Fereldan's political atmosphere. Her father was made a teyrn and she was married to the next king, sure, but most of the Bannorn protested because he was of common blood. She knows she has two strikes against her as a woman and a commoner (by blood), so she has to work twice as hard to gain and maintain power as anyone else.

Ironically if she were less desperate to keep her power I would be more willing to give it to her. I think she has the right qualifications to be the ruler. I think she has exactly the wrong attitude.

Faerunner wrote...
Like I said, all the nobles do it. The Bannorn Codex shows they're constantly squabbling over land and resources, and Politics of Fereldan shows that freeholders, banns, arls and even teyrns are constantly flitting through their allegiances based on whoever can give them the best deal at any given time. (Do you think all the free-holders and nobles today inhereted their stuff from their ancestors being complete saints all the way down the line?) Heck, your reign as the Arl of Amaranthine in Awakening basically consists of settling petty disputes between banns and freeholders, deciding which polical intrigue is legit and which one isn't, who owes who what, etc. Anora is not the only one, but she has to be twice as tough to come out on top.

As the Arl of Amaranthine I did what I felt was in the interest of my people, ignoring the political ramifications of these decisions and my personal advantage. I feel like I can trust Alistair to do the same. I don't feel I can trust Anora to do so.

Faerunner wrote...

It doesn't matter if you don't like the rules. You have to play the game in order not to lose outright. 

The game has changed. And I don't like cheaters.

[Persephone]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

As the Arl of Amaranthine I did what I felt was in the interest of my people, ignoring the political ramifications of these decisions and my personal advantage. I feel like I can trust Alistair to do the same. I don't feel I can trust Anora to do so.

Rulers doing just that has caused pitless amounts of misery to those under the care of these rulers. Mary I. of England. Mary Stuart of Scotland. Henry VIII used the very same EXCUSES. Yes, Henry VIII, think of that! Some of the most evil monsters have claimed such lofty ideals.....

Rulers who ignore political ramifications should NEVER BE IN POWER.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

[quote]SeptimusMagistos wrote...

[quote]Faerunner wrote...

She wants him to be deposed because she recognizes he's a terrible ruler, and I'm sure she's all right with him paying for his crimes a la prison time or joining the Wardens, but it doesn't mean she wants him executed. If you do not bring him up and do not insist he has to die, she will continue to support your bid to depose him.[/quote]

Well, we never exactly get the option to suggest Loghain just be thrown into prison, otherwise I'd probably go for that. If she knows of any alternatives to the death pentalty, this would be the time to bring them up. Otherwise it sounds like she's insisting we just let Loghain get off without punishment. [/quote]

It'd be nice if imprisonment was an option, wouldn't it? That, plus Master Coercion, would make satisfying Alistair's morals and a non-capital-punishment-supporting player's morals easier.

But he's not going unpunished. He's lost utterly, and he's about to be directly responsible to you. Bonus points if you personally beat him into submission, as I do a lot of the time. This argument isn't the one you want to give against conscripting Loghain: if you want to give one, give the "Can we trust him?" argument Riordan deflects with a mixture of the ad hominem tu quoque and red herring fallacies. (He can, in fact, be trusted, but the Warden PC doesn't know this yet.)

Also, this isn't entirely a neccesary course of discussion. I've managed to kill Loghain and still work with Anora. Heck, Loghain died in my King Cousland playthrough.

[quote]
[quote]Faerunner wrote...

She offers her support in the Landsmeet in exchange for your support in her bid for the throne. She explains very eloquently and diplomatically how she has Fereldan's best interest at heart and why she believes she is the best candidate for the throne. If you refuse to support her, you shouldn't be surprised when she doesn't support you.[/quote]

I equally calmly explain that I disagree and feel like she would be a bad ruler. This causes her to throw her support with Loghain. Anyone throwing their support to Loghain is not all right in my book. [/quote]

Loghain isn't her first choice. You are. But she believes it to be in Ferelden's best interests that someone who actually knows something about politics get the throne. She's also willing to compromise if you want a politically possible Warden or Alistair to rule beside her. If you don't accept any of this, why should she support you over Loghain? What he's done is horrible, but she thinks she can do enough good to offset it once she gets her throne back, if you don't depose her first. And the one cast-iron reason this wouldn't work is the Archdemon immortailty thing, which literally three people in Ferelden know about.

[quote]
[quote]Faerunner wrote...

And yet every royal and noble in every nation does it, and every noble in every nation has to do it in order to survive the political atmosphere. It's like some warped Darwinian survival of the fittest. You have to lie and cheat others in order not to be lied and cheated by others. [/quote]

Right. And this system ultimately screws over the people and the politicians themselves. So what I do is apply the opposite selection pressure. You have to be honest and loyal and caring about your people or else I will prevent you from getting any power. [/quote]

Honest? Not neccessarily. But we've already discussed this. What I want to know is where do you get the impression Anora doesn't care about her people?

[quote]
[quote]Faerunner wrote...
Remember the Dwarf Noble Origin? The reason you and your eldest brother get framed and killed is because your middle brother played the political game better than you, bribing and blackmailing others against you long before lying and framing you for the murder of your eldest brother. Dwarven politics have been cutthroat for centuries and it's outright stated that every deysher has to learn to be ruthless in order not to be assassinated or backstabbed out of everything they own by other nobles. Same with "The Game" in Orlais. Same with the Antivan Crows in Antiva. Same with the Tevinter Magisters in the Imperium. Same with the Bannorn in Fereldan, who are constantly fighting each other over land and titles.[/quote]

And you're suggesting that the best way to solve this problem is by putting forward candidates who will contribute to it? [/quote]

No, the best way to solve this problem is to be given a game option that changes the very nature of Thedas. Failing that, I can't see any way to change it. You can change it in Orzammar, of course, but that only tangentially effects Ferelden. The people Ferelden deals with the most are still corrupt to the core. You need a politician to deal with them.

[quote]
[quote]Faerunner wrote...
Coming back to Anora, her background clearly shows she had to get tough in order to stay afloat in Fereldan's political atmosphere. Her father was made a teyrn and she was married to the next king, sure, but most of the Bannorn protested because he was of common blood. She knows she has two strikes against her as a woman and a commoner (by blood), so she has to work twice as hard to gain and maintain power as anyone else. [/quote]

Ironically if she were less desperate to keep her power I would be more willing to give it to her. I think she has the right qualifications to be the ruler. I think she has exactly the wrong attitude. [/quote]

It's a strike against her, yes. But refusing her the throne solely based on this is just a little short-sighted.

[quote]
[quote]Faerunner wrote...
Like I said, all the nobles do it. The Bannorn Codex shows they're constantly squabbling over land and resources, and Politics of Fereldan shows that freeholders, banns, arls and even teyrns are constantly flitting through their allegiances based on whoever can give them the best deal at any given time. (Do you think all the free-holders and nobles today inhereted their stuff from their ancestors being complete saints all the way down the line?) Heck, your reign as the Arl of Amaranthine in Awakening basically consists of settling petty disputes between banns and freeholders, deciding which polical intrigue is legit and which one isn't, who owes who what, etc. Anora is not the only one, but she has to be twice as tough to come out on top. [/quote]

As the Arl of Amaranthine I did what I felt was in the interest of my people, ignoring the political ramifications of these decisions and my personal advantage. I feel like I can trust Alistair to do the same. I don't feel I can trust Anora to do so. [/quote]

If you completely refuse to play politics, you get attacked. Remember? Not to mention that if you just leave it to advisors, you get Varel making the decisions. (From what I understand from the walkthrough, this isn't pretty.) Maybe Anora's afraid that will happen under Alistair and Eamon? (This is less true if you harden him, but Anora is unable to know you had that influence.)

[quote]
[quote]Faerunner wrote...

It doesn't matter if you don't like the rules. You have to play the game in order not to lose outright. 
[/quote]

The game has changed. And I don't like cheaters.
[/quote]

Bioware never gives you the power to change the rules Thedas-wide; that will probably come in the final game if at all. You can change the game in Ferelden, and then Ferelden, according to the rules the rest of Thedas follows, gets it.

Final Note: Of course, Bioware might come out with something that proves both me and Faerunner wrong in our analysis, but what I'm saying is that according to the rules as previously given, you need to have a backstabber protecting your interests. There are honest lawyers irl, and dishonest lawyers irl. I'll even admit that except in a really messed up situation with a really dirty case, it's better to have an honest one. But if all you can find is a dishonest lawyer, would you find a man off the street whose only qualification is that he is the illegitimate son of a lawyer instead?

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 15 novembre 2012 - 12:01 .

[SeptimusMagistos]

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

It'd be nice if imprisonment was an option, wouldn't it? That, plus Master Coercion, would make satisfying Alistair's morals and a non-capital-punishment-supporting player's morals easier.

But he's not going unpunished. He's lost utterly, and he's about to be directly responsible to you. Bonus points if you personally beat him into submission, as I do a lot of the time. This argument isn't the one you want to give against conscripting Loghain: if you want to give one, give the "Can we trust him?" argument Riordan deflects with a mixture of the ad hominem tu quoque and red herring fallacies. (He can, in fact, be trusted, but the Warden PC doesn't know this yet.)[/quote]

Well, my Warden doesn't actually know the recruitment is even an option at the time of that dialogue, so that doesn't matter unless I metagame. And if I do, then I'm not losing Alistair just to gain Loghain, so she still loses.

[quote]Also, this isn't entirely a neccesary course of discussion. I've managed to kill Loghain and still work with Anora. Heck, Loghain died in my King Cousland playthrough.[/quote]

Forgive me if I was trying to hammer out all the conditions for her support prior to the event. How was I supposed to know she wouldn't speak up if she found something unacceptable?

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Loghain isn't her first choice. You are. But she believes it to be in Ferelden's best interests that someone who actually knows something about politics get the throne. She's also willing to compromise if you want a politically possible Warden or Alistair to rule beside her. If you don't accept any of this, why should she support you over Loghain? What he's done is horrible, but she thinks she can do enough good to offset it once she gets her throne back, if you don't depose her first. And the one cast-iron reason this wouldn't work is the Archdemon immortailty thing, which literally three people in Ferelden know about.[/quote]

Maybe after dealing with her father I'm getting a bit sick of people who think they're the only ones who can rule the country and that any means is acceptable if it gets them the power they need.

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Honest? Not neccessarily. But we've already discussed this. What I want to know is where do you get the impression Anora doesn't care about her people?[/quote]

She specifically might. I'm just listing the kinds of politicians I'm keeping away from power. If you think that the idea that politicians have to be good people for me to support them is unacceptable, then so be it. But those are the guns I'm sticking to.

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

No, the best way to solve this problem is to be given a game option that changes the very nature of Thedas. Failing that, I can't see any way to change it. You can change it in Orzammar, of course, but that only tangentially effects Ferelden. The people Ferelden deals with the most are still corrupt to the core. You need a politician to deal with them.[/quote]

No you don't. I'm changing it one political principality at a time. In the long run it will work out much better for those nations which now have a responsible government than for those governed by liars and backstabbers.

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

It's a strike against her, yes. But refusing her the throne solely based on this is just a little short-sighted.[/quote]

When she did her whole routine for the first time, my first thought was 'what if she does this on a bigger scale?' Who might Anora be willing to betray in order to protect what she considers Ferelden's best interests? Or her own? I could see a looming disaster, and I knew I could never allow her to be queen. Again, far too many simularities to Loghain's approach for me to feel comfortable with.


[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
If you completely refuse to play politics, you get attacked. Remember?[/quote]

When the corrupt elements of my court attacked me, I knew I was doing something right.

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Not to mention that if you just leave it to advisors, you get Varel making the decisions. (From what I understand from the walkthrough, this isn't pretty.) Maybe Anora's afraid that will happen under Alistair and Eamon? (This is less true if you harden him, but Anora is unable to know you had that influence.)[/quote]

Honestly, Eamon seems like a nice enough guy too. I trust him to be the brains behind Alistair's heart.

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Bioware never gives you the power to change the rules Thedas-wide; that will probably come in the final game if at all. You can change the game in Ferelden, and then Ferelden, according to the rules the rest of Thedas follows, gets it.[/quote]

Pretty sure that's not how the rules work.

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Final Note: Of course, Bioware might come out with something that proves both me and Faerunner wrong in our analysis, but what I'm saying is that according to the rules as previously given, you need to have a backstabber protecting your interests. [/quote]

I'd rather have my interests protected by a knight in shining armor, thank you very much. Backstabbers get themselves and those who rely on them killed.

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
There are honest lawyers irl, and dishonest lawyers irl. I'll even admit that except in a really messed up situation with a really dirty case, it's better to have an honest one. But if all you can find is a dishonest lawyer, would you find a man off the street whose only qualification is that he is the illegitimate son of a lawyer instead?[/quote]

Probably. How can I trust that my dishonest lawyer isn't being paid under the table to torpedo my case?

Modifié par SeptimusMagistos, 15 novembre 2012 - 01:18 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

[quote]SeptimusMagistos wrote...

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

It'd be nice if imprisonment was an option, wouldn't it? That, plus Master Coercion, would make satisfying Alistair's morals and a non-capital-punishment-supporting player's morals easier.

But he's not going unpunished. He's lost utterly, and he's about to be directly responsible to you. Bonus points if you personally beat him into submission, as I do a lot of the time. This argument isn't the one you want to give against conscripting Loghain: if you want to give one, give the "Can we trust him?" argument Riordan deflects with a mixture of the ad hominem tu quoque and red herring fallacies. (He can, in fact, be trusted, but the Warden PC doesn't know this yet.)[/quote]

Well, my Warden doesn't actually know the recruitment is even an option at the time of that dialogue, so that doesn't matter unless I metagame. And if I do, then I'm not losing Alistair just to gain Loghain, so she still loses. [/quote]

Why do you assume it hasn't occurred to him? It's driven home in every Origin, so far as I recall, that it's universally an option. (At least on paper, but the only way this can't be sold to the Landsmeet is if you failed the vote.)

There's also the possibility of actually playing this game, if you want Loghain to die, by either lying to her or, if you're trying to play a non-liar, just not bringing it up. Or, if what's important is Alistair on the throne instead of in the party, just harden him and put them both on the throne.

[quote]
[quote]Also, this isn't entirely a neccesary course of discussion. I've managed to kill Loghain and still work with Anora. Heck, Loghain died in my King Cousland playthrough.[/quote]

Forgive me if I was trying to hammer out all the conditions for her support prior to the event. How was I supposed to know she wouldn't speak up if she found something unacceptable? [/quote]

That's a trickier issue, but then Eamon does warn you to be careful with her.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Loghain isn't her first choice. You are. But she believes it to be in Ferelden's best interests that someone who actually knows something about politics get the throne. She's also willing to compromise if you want a politically possible Warden or Alistair to rule beside her. If you don't accept any of this, why should she support you over Loghain? What he's done is horrible, but she thinks she can do enough good to offset it once she gets her throne back, if you don't depose her first. And the one cast-iron reason this wouldn't work is the Archdemon immortailty thing, which literally three people in Ferelden know about.[/quote]

Maybe after dealing with her father I'm getting a bit sick of people who think they're the only ones who can rule the country and that any means is acceptable if it gets them the power they need. [/quote]

Maybe considering Alistair's lack of training, she has a point.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Honest? Not neccessarily. But we've already discussed this. What I want to know is where do you get the impression Anora doesn't care about her people?[/quote]

She specifically might. I'm just listing the kinds of politicians I'm keeping away from power. If you think that the idea that politicians have to be good people for me to support them is unacceptable, then so be it. But those are the guns I'm sticking to. [/quote]

According to the rules Thedosian politics seems to follow, that's the wrong move. I'd like to restate that Gaider may or may not follow those rules in future works, but leaving aside such speculation you can pretty well detect a pattern from the sheer number of people who seem to get away with graft and backstabbing all over the continent from the tone of the Codex.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

No, the best way to solve this problem is to be given a game option that changes the very nature of Thedas. Failing that, I can't see any way to change it. You can change it in Orzammar, of course, but that only tangentially effects Ferelden. The people Ferelden deals with the most are still corrupt to the core. You need a politician to deal with them.[/quote]

No you don't. I'm changing it one political principality at a time. In the long run it will work out much better for those nations which now have a responsible government than for those governed by liars and backstabbers. [/quote]

That assumes Bioware gives you the option. They may not. If my understanding is correct, you change Kirkwall basically not at all, minus some aid to the Ferelden refugees and putting a corrupt guard captain out of the way in favor of a captain who probably abdicates to follow you out of the city.

(Either way, this argument hinges on metagaming, which you said above you weren't doing.)

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

It's a strike against her, yes. But refusing her the throne solely based on this is just a little short-sighted.[/quote]

When she did her whole routine for the first time, my first thought was 'what if she does this on a bigger scale?' Who might Anora be willing to betray in order to protect what she considers Ferelden's best interests? Or her own? I could see a looming disaster, and I knew I could never allow her to be queen. Again, far too many simularities to Loghain's approach for me to feel comfortable with. [/quote]

"What if she does this on a bigger scale?" You mean the thing where you throw inconvenient allies under the bus, rather like what The United States did when Britain attacked France shortly after the Revolution? Or like what they did to the Filipino resistance they brutally put down shortly after the Spanish-American war? I'd say nothing major.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
If you completely refuse to play politics, you get attacked. Remember?[/quote]

When the corrupt elements of my court attacked me, I knew I was doing something right. [/quote]

If I understand the sequence of events properly, it gets a subordinate killed. This man was supposed to be under your protection, along with the entire rest of Amaranthine. Not to mention that you could have done much better by playing the game. Either investigate their meetings and off the dissidents, or simply "invite" a member of each noble family to come live with you, either keeps you and him safe.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Not to mention that if you just leave it to advisors, you get Varel making the decisions. (From what I understand from the walkthrough, this isn't pretty.) Maybe Anora's afraid that will happen under Alistair and Eamon? (This is less true if you harden him, but Anora is unable to know you had that influence.)[/quote]

Honestly, Eamon seems like a nice enough guy too. I trust him to be the brains behind Alistair's heart. [/quote]

In theory, yes. But consider the reason he wants Anora out of power. It's not because he thinks her ill-suited. In terms of all competence he thinks her a good fit, it's just that the Theirin bloodline ought to be on the throne maugre all else. Whether or not that's true to the way medieval poltics worked irl, I find it disturbingly myopic. Not to mention that there's some suspicion that he's partially putting Alistair the untrained on the throne because that essentially puts Eamon on the throne.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Bioware never gives you the power to change the rules Thedas-wide; that will probably come in the final game if at all. You can change the game in Ferelden, and then Ferelden, according to the rules the rest of Thedas follows, gets it.[/quote]

Pretty sure that's not how the rules work. [/quote]

It seems to be most of the time, in most of Thedas. Judging by the tone of some of the Codex entries, plus Leiliana's description of Orlesian nobility, most of the people who don't get away with political backstabbing tend to be a PC's work, and even then it's usually merely optional. (An exception should be made for those who get it at the hands of someone who isn't you if the person who takes them down deserves punishment as much or more, since that doesn't really help your case.)

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Final Note: Of course, Bioware might come out with something that proves both me and Faerunner wrong in our analysis, but what I'm saying is that according to the rules as previously given, you need to have a backstabber protecting your interests. [/quote]

I'd rather have my interests protected by a knight in shining armor, thank you very much. Backstabbers get themselves and those who rely on them killed. [/quote]

There's also a fatal problem with not having one. Not to mention that despite Anora having apparently been de facto in charge for Cailan's reign, this hasn't happened yet, as I previously mentioned. (Though this is why I like to have a hardened Alistair around to act as her conscience.)

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
There are honest lawyers irl, and dishonest lawyers irl. I'll even admit that except in a really messed up situation with a really dirty case, it's better to have an honest one. But if all you can find is a dishonest lawyer, would you find a man off the street whose only qualification is that he is the illegitimate son of a lawyer instead?[/quote]

Probably. How can I trust that my dishonest lawyer isn't being paid under the table to torpedo my case?
[/quote]

I don't think you're giving the problems the proper weight here. Even the very worst scum among lawyers typically don't cross that line, largely because they can be punished big for this. (Anora can be too, theoretically, if she really screws up big.) On the other hand, an untrained lawyer can be worse than not having one, if it's even allowed. (It won't be, but this analogy doesn't work unless it somehow is.)

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 15 novembre 2012 - 02:24 .

[SeptimusMagistos]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Why do you assume it hasn't occurred to him? It's driven home in every Origin, so far as I recall, that it's universally an option. (At least on paper, but the only way this can't be sold to the Landsmeet is if you failed the vote.)

Mainly because being chosen to be a Warden was a huge honor. He got to leave the tower, thumb his nose at Templars, walk out into the world and really show everyone how much good a mage could do. He wouldn't think of using it as a punishment any more than Alistair would.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
There's also the possibility of actually playing this game, if you want Loghain to die, by either lying to her or, if you're trying to play a non-liar, just not bringing it up. Or, if what's important is Alistair on the throne instead of in the party, just harden him and put them both on the throne.

Did this once on my first playthrough after originally being betrayed by Anora and coming up slightly short. Not really a fan of this approach, but I do consider it okay to use antagonists' tactics against them.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

That's a trickier issue, but then Eamon does warn you to be careful with her.

She messed up what was supposed to be a simple negotiation. Should I trust Ferelden's trading policy to her?

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Maybe considering Alistair's lack of training, she has a point.

Eh, he'll do fine. He's got Eamon to help him.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
According to the rules Thedosian politics seems to follow, that's the wrong move. I'd like to restate that Gaider may or may not follow those rules in future works, but leaving aside such speculation you can pretty well detect a pattern from the sheer number of people who seem to get away with graft and backstabbing all over the continent from the tone of the Codex.

The issue is that the societies with the highest backstabbing quotient are also the worst places to live. The people who are meant to be in charge are so busy being sneaky that nothing actually gets done. Why would I want that for Ferelden?

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

"What if she does this on a bigger scale?" You mean the thing where you throw inconvenient allies under the bus, rather like what The United States did when Britain attacked France shortly after the Revolution? Or like what they did to the Filipino resistance they brutally put down shortly after the Spanish-American war? I'd say nothing major.

Yeah, sort of like that. Dropping allies when they're inconvenient to you and picking them up when you need some, even if you have nothing in common with them, leads to stuff like WWI. You get a way more stable geopolitical picture if you kick realpolitik to the curb.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

If I understand the sequence of events properly, it gets a subordinate killed. This man was supposed to be under your protection, along with the entire rest of Amaranthine. Not to mention that you could have done much better by playing the game. Either investigate their meetings and off the dissidents, or simply "invite" a member of each noble family to come live with you, either keeps you and him safe.

The latter is quite unacceptable. I've done the former sometimes (but the weird time system trips me up sometimes) but I don't know if that's playing politics - more like launching a criminal investigation.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
(An exception should be made for those who get it at the hands of someone who isn't you if the person who takes them down deserves punishment as much or more, since that doesn't really help your case.)

It kind of does, given that it shows the dangers of being a backstabber among backstabbers.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

I don't think you're giving the problems the proper weight here. Even the very worst scum among lawyers typically don't cross that line, largely because they can be punished big for this. (Anora can be too, theoretically, if she really screws up big.) On the other hand, an untrained lawyer can be worse than not having one, if it's even allowed. (It won't be, but this analogy doesn't work unless it somehow is.)

The question was vague. I guess it sort of does depend on how dishonest the lawyer in question is. If they're as dishonest as Anora then I'm going with the untrained guy.

[SeptimusMagistos]

Faerunner wrote...

Just because you don't get the option to suggest imprisoning Loghain doesn't mean she wouldn't agree to it.

Which is a moot point since I can't suggest it.

Faerunner wrote...
Again,
Anora only throws her support in with Loghain after you refuse to support her bid for the throne and/or insist he has to die. Considering the alternative candidate is an inexperienced green horn, her belief in being the more worthy candidate over Alistair is justified. Considering Loghain is her father, her wish to spare his life is understandable.
However, that's not to say she would use her power as a monarch to allow him to keep doing what he's been doing.

Consider this: Anora would be queen. She would be Loghain's superior. She would be able to tell him to step down with the Landsmeet's support and witness. She would be able to keep him in line as she makes decisions that benefit Fereldan. Anora might publically support Loghain just long enough to get the opposition suppressed (the Warden and/or Alistair and Eamon), but that does not mean she would let things continue as they were before. She's got it more under control than that.

So now she's using Loghain exactly long enough to get what she wants and then drops him afterwards, leaving two extremely powerful people mad at her. Is this meant to be selling her as Ferelden's ruler?

Faerunner wrote...
Try telling that to all the nobles and royals who retain their power despite literally centuries of political powerplay.

I shall do so at the earliest possible opportunity.

Faerunner wrote...
The only way to win a game is to play by the rules. So yes, you need a political candidate who can play at politics.

The countries with the governments who 'play the game' the hardest are the dystopias of the continent. I'm putting my chips on a responsible, honest government which negotiates in the spirit of fairness and keeps its alliances.

Faerunner wrote...
The problem with ignoring political ramifications is that it causes, you know, political ramifications. As Riverdaleswhiteflash said, choosing not to get involved with a political scheme causes you to get attacked. Choosing not to punish a deserter causes people to desert. There are a lot of seemingly selfless choices in Awakening that actually have negative consequences down the line that reflect badly on you and your people.

Going for the obviously politically advantageous choices reflects on you and your people much worse.

Faerunner wrote...
Again, just because Anora knows how to play at politics doesn't mean she doesn't have her people's best interests at heart. You seem to believe that being able to double-talk and/or double-cross political foes (who would do the same to you in an instant) and being able to make decisions that benefit common people are mutually exclusive. This is simply not the case.

That bit might be prejudice left over from the first playthrough, where I only saw her work in her own interests. I still have no idea what she would do if forced to choose between what was good for her and what was good for the country.

In any case, she certainly doesn't seem as inclined to help people as Alistair.

Faerunner wrote...

Just look at Bhelen. He is the most brutal, ruthless, dishonest noble you can encounter in Orzammar, and yet he ends up passing even more progressive laws that benefit common dwarves (casteless and merchants especially) and Orzammar than his father or Harrowmont ever could. He loosens the oppressive caste system, brings in more trade and revenue, pushes the darkspawn further, recovers more thaigs, brings Orzammar into the modern world, and puts the nobles in their place when they try to run over him. Unlike Harrowmont, who folds on every issue except "tradition" (isolationism and classism) and ends up giving even MORE power to greedy nobles who want to suck the life out
of Orzammar for their own self-gain. "Honest" =/= better intentions for common citizens.

Bhelen is a complicated case. The times I side with him it's because he destroys the game. He cheats and lies his way to the top, but then he wrecks the system and ensures no one can do what he did. Obviously I would prefer he simply fight the nobles like I did, but he's got enogh good intentions and his opponent has enough moral failings that I break for him roughly half the time.

Faerunner wrote...
No, it doesn't. All you do is choose between two monarchs for one country, but you don't change the political structure of the said country or the entire continent. You don't even change the status quo so much as uphold it. Both Fereldan and Thedas is still run by people vying for power and someone needs to be able to play them at their own game better
than them in order not to be bulldozed by them. That's just how it is in Thedas.

Well, I've seen no evidence of these claims thus far, but I'll be on the lookout.

Modifié par SeptimusMagistos, 15 novembre 2012 - 06:11 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

NyxFTW wrote...

Simply put, I kind of like Anora now. And I will be very sad when she's locked up in a tower in this playthrough, but alas. XD

Anora's a rather intriguing character. I can't say I ever disliked her, though it took a few replays before I actually warmed to her. She plays her emotions close to the chest and doesn't try to win the PC over with a show of charm or flirtation. I think she wants to be admired and respected for her ability and intelligence more than anything. While she's interested in her own position and the security of her power, I would not call that an evil. She is a capable ruler. She is not a paragon of virtue, and I doubt she lets compassion get in the way of practical decisions, but neither is she a tyrant. And she loves her country.

[TEWR]

So now she's using Loghain exactly long enough to get what she wants and then drops him afterwards, leaving two extremely powerful people mad at her. Is this meant to be selling her as Ferelden's ruler?

No she isn't dropping him. She wants her father alive. If he died in the Joining, that was out of her control. It would simply be fate.

She's not selling him out. She's supporting the option most likely to allow him to live and redeem himself in the eyes of the nation, even if it comes with a heavy risk.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

[quote]SeptimusMagistos wrote...

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Why do you assume it hasn't occurred to him? It's driven home in every Origin, so far as I recall, that it's universally an option. (At least on paper, but the only way this can't be sold to the Landsmeet is if you failed the vote.)[/quote]

Mainly because being chosen to be a Warden was a huge honor. He got to leave the tower, thumb his nose at Templars, walk out into the world and really show everyone how much good a mage could do. He wouldn't think of using it as a punishment any more than Alistair would. [/quote]

He got that honor by covering the escape of a maleficar. (Or selling out his best friend, but that just doesn't seem like you.) Of course he had the best intentions, but then so did Loghain.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
There's also the possibility of actually playing this game, if you want Loghain to die, by either lying to her or, if you're trying to play a non-liar, just not bringing it up. Or, if what's important is Alistair on the throne instead of in the party, just harden him and put them both on the throne.[/quote]

Did this once on my first playthrough after originally being betrayed by Anora and coming up slightly short. Not really a fan of this approach, but I do consider it okay to use antagonists' tactics against them. [/quote]

What I'm saying is that's what Anora would do to the Orlesians and the Tevinters. She doesn't betray you until you try to screw her over, remember?

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

That's a trickier issue, but then Eamon does warn you to be careful with her.[/quote]

She messed up what was supposed to be a simple negotiation. Should I trust Ferelden's trading policy to her? [/quote]

Apparently, she was handling it the whole of Cailan's reign. As I've said at least twice previously, the place hasn't been sacked yet.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Maybe considering Alistair's lack of training, she has a point.[/quote]

Eh, he'll do fine. He's got Eamon to help him. [/quote]

I'd like to repeat that she doesn't trust Eamon's motivations. For that matter, I'm not 100% sure about them myself.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
According to the rules Thedosian politics seems to follow, that's the wrong move. I'd like to restate that Gaider may or may not follow those rules in future works, but leaving aside such speculation you can pretty well detect a pattern from the sheer number of people who seem to get away with graft and backstabbing all over the continent from the tone of the Codex.[/quote]

The issue is that the societies with the highest backstabbing quotient are also the worst places to live. The people who are meant to be in charge are so busy being sneaky that nothing actually gets done. Why would I want that for Ferelden? [/quote]

You don't. But Anora has the best interests of the country at heart, from all we can tell from the epilogue and her own words. Besides, Thedas as a whole has a pretty high backstabbing quotient. You need someone who can see this coming.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

"What if she does this on a bigger scale?" You mean the thing where you throw inconvenient allies under the bus, rather like what The United States did when Britain attacked France shortly after the Revolution? Or like what they did to the Filipino resistance they brutally put down shortly after the Spanish-American war? I'd say nothing major.[/quote]

Yeah, sort of like that. Dropping allies when they're inconvenient to you and picking them up when you need some, even if you have nothing in common with them, leads to stuff like WWI. You get a way more stable geopolitical picture if you kick realpolitik to the curb. [/quote]

Point one: WWI occurred because European nations didn't drop allies who were toxic assets.

Point two: There was little to no retribution for either of my examples. (I say little to no because we did have some trouble with that resistance.)

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

If I understand the sequence of events properly, it gets a subordinate killed. This man was supposed to be under your protection, along with the entire rest of Amaranthine. Not to mention that you could have done much better by playing the game. Either investigate their meetings and off the dissidents, or simply "invite" a member of each noble family to come live with you, either keeps you and him safe.[/quote]

The latter is quite unacceptable. I've done the former sometimes (but the weird time system trips me up sometimes) but I don't know if that's playing politics - more like launching a criminal investigation. [/quote]

If I understand the latter right, that's it and no more said. The quest simply stops and the epilogue says that the head traitor hanged herself in despair of shaking you. The criminal investigation, on the other hand, means that you actually have to kill some Crows.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
(An exception should be made for those who get it at the hands of someone who isn't you if the person who takes them down deserves punishment as much or more, since that doesn't really help your case.)[/quote]

It kind of does, given that it shows the dangers of being a backstabber among backstabbers. [/quote]

Not really. I'm not denying that danger. I'm stating that its more dangerous not to be a backstabber if that's your environment.

[quote]
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

I don't think you're giving the problems the proper weight here. Even the very worst scum among lawyers typically don't cross that line, largely because they can be punished big for this. (Anora can be too, theoretically, if she really screws up big.) On the other hand, an untrained lawyer can be worse than not having one, if it's even allowed. (It won't be, but this analogy doesn't work unless it somehow is.)[/quote]

The question was vague. I guess it sort of does depend on how dishonest the lawyer in question is. If they're as dishonest as Anora then I'm going with the untrained guy.
[/quote]

Your client was stuck in a car accident and was injured badly enough that she can't work for the forseeable future. Her previous lawyer filed a case before the statute of limitations ran out, but under the wrong name. He later recieved information from the wrongfully sued person himself giving the name of the person he ought to be suing, but does nothing with it. The statute expired before he switched to the right defendant. The lawyer then died of a heart attack. What do you do?

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 15 novembre 2012 - 03:20 .

[Corker]

Buy a red velvet tux and base my case on the cooking time of proper grits?

[SeptimusMagistos]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

He got that honor by covering the escape of a maleficar. (Or selling out his best friend, but that just doesn't seem like you.) Of course he had the best intentions, but then so did Loghain.

Well, he was being recruited even prior to that and he views becoming a Warden as getting away with what he did. He waltzed into a position that let him escape punishment and left his place of confinement biting his thumb at his former captors all the while. Then he got to be one of the most important people in Ferelden and was put in charge of several armies. He doesn't really want Loghain to share his fate.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

What I'm saying is that's what Anora would do to the Orlesians and the Tevinters. She doesn't betray you until you try to screw her over, remember?

Well, since I wasn't trying to screw her over and was in fact doing my utmost to help her - and was seriously considering letting her be queen prior to the incident - I kind of don't want that extrapolated to national scale.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Apparently, she was handling it the whole of Cailan's reign. As I've said at least twice previously, the place hasn't been sacked yet.

I know the lore portrays her as being competent, but from my personal interactions with her I just don't see it.

[

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

You don't. But Anora has the best interests of the country at heart, from all we can tell from the epilogue and her own words. Besides, Thedas as a whole has a pretty high backstabbing quotient. You need someone who can see this coming.

I think we won't come to an agreement on this point.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

If I understand the latter right, that's it and no more said. The quest simply stops and the epilogue says that the head traitor hanged herself in despair of shaking you. The criminal investigation, on the other hand, means that you actually have to kill some Crows.

Yes, but what did these children ever do to deserve to be held as hostages? Should I be threatening them with death by virtue of being born into the wrong family? As someone who spent far too long inside the Circle Tower my Warden isn't about to be involved in this. It's a despicable tactic anyway.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Not really. I'm not denying that danger. I'm stating that its more dangerous not to be a backstabber if that's your environment.

I disagree.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Your client was stuck in a car accident and was injured badly enough that she can't work for the forseeable future. Her previous lawyer filed a case before the statute of limitations ran out, but under the wrong name. He later recieved information from the wrongfully sued person himself giving the name of the person he ought to be suing, but does nothing with it. The statute expired before he switched to the right defendant. The lawyer then died of a heart attack. What do you do?

Your lawyer recevives pressure from within his firm and just sort of lets your case come to an unfavorable conclusion because using the tactics he'd need to get you acquitted could cost him a raise. What do you do?

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

He got that honor by covering the escape of a maleficar. (Or selling out his best friend, but that just doesn't seem like you.) Of course he had the best intentions, but then so did Loghain.

Well, he was being recruited even prior to that and he views becoming a Warden as getting away with what he did. He waltzed into a position that let him escape punishment and left his place of confinement biting his thumb at his former captors all the while. Then he got to be one of the most important people in Ferelden and was put in charge of several armies. He doesn't really want Loghain to share his fate.

Sounds hypocritical.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

What I'm saying is that's what Anora would do to the Orlesians and the Tevinters. She doesn't betray you until you try to screw her over, remember?

Well, since I wasn't trying to screw her over and was in fact doing my utmost to help her - and was seriously considering letting her be queen prior to the incident - I kind of don't want that extrapolated to national scale.

Are we talking about the first time, or the second? The second is kind of shady, and depends on her honestly having the best interests of the country at heart. The first time really could have gone poorly for all concerned.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

If I understand the latter right, that's it and no more said. The quest simply stops and the epilogue says that the head traitor hanged herself in despair of shaking you. The criminal investigation, on the other hand, means that you actually have to kill some Crows.

Yes, but what did these children ever do to deserve to be held as hostages? Should I be threatening them with death by virtue of being born into the wrong family? As someone who spent far too long inside the Circle Tower my Warden isn't about to be involved in this. It's a despicable tactic anyway.

Are you arguing morals, or results? Most people can afford to do the former. Rulers can't always.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Not really. I'm not denying that danger. I'm stating that its more dangerous not to be a backstabber if that's your environment.

I disagree.

Which is hard to reconcile with the fact that you played Anora's game in one of your playthroughs, and got a better result. And that the hostage situation you're refusing to consider solves the problem entirely.

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Your client was stuck in a car accident and was injured badly enough that she can't work for the forseeable future. Her previous lawyer filed a case before the statute of limitations ran out, but under the wrong name. He later recieved information from the wrongfully sued person himself giving the name of the person he ought to be suing, but does nothing with it. The statute expired before he switched to the right defendant. The lawyer then died of a heart attack. What do you do?

Your lawyer recevives pressure from within his firm and just sort of lets your case come to an unfavorable conclusion because using the tactics he'd need to get you acquitted could cost him a raise. What do you do?

The joke is that depending on the jurisdiction the law might still be on your side in mine. Which you don't seem to have known, judging by your response. But the point I was making was that an untrained lawyer wouldn't know that. I wouldn't want you running my case or my country, because you haven't been properly trained.

As to your example, yes, if there's an actual law against it, avoid breaking it. But Thedas doesn't seem to be all that big on international law, or else Orlais and Tevinter couldn't operate.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 15 novembre 2012 - 06:52 .

[NyxFTW]

Wow, a lot of discussion is going on here. XD

I've been dabbling in politics and it's very very difficult to remain morally good within the system. Sometimes you have to bend your beliefs for the greater good, even if it means doing some questionable things. Politics is messy and always corrupt. The bigger the land, the harder it is to manage. Politics 101 states that humans in tribes are morally superior than governments simply because it is easier to manage and maintain. Because people demand different things and when a country is internally struggling, things get much harder, especially for a monarchy.

This is why I respect Anora a bit more. I try to see things from her perspective. She is a capable ruler and she will do whatever it takes to make sure Ferelden is on the right path. That's mad respect right there. She can shelve her personal plights in the pursuit of the good of country, even at the cost of her father's life.

The argument I'd like to chip in is that politics doesn't yield in a black and white morality. It's gray, really gray, and a capable leader has to make sacrifices for the good of country. Even if he/she's resorting to underhanded tactics to quell rebels or trick their own people into submitting. It's not evil because they aren't doing it for kicks. They're doing it to bring security to the people. A strong leader is known for their ability to hold a country together at all costs. That's just how it is.

Neutrality in politics are used sparingly. There's a saying that sitting on the fence can lead to splinters. Neutrality can cause tensions in wars and a weak leader who cannot pick a side will get overrun by the other. And if your country is already torn apart by civil war because you don't have the backbone to settle it, you're in for a world of hurt by both your people and other nations. You should only have neutrality if you can actually afford it (like a great prosperous country with a highly competent army for example...and yeah, no civil war).

To summarize, weak leaders are bad, strong leaders are good. Sometimes strong leaders have to do bad things for their country's security or to do major reforms for the good of the country. Sure it's not fair and it's probably not right, but that's reality. There's no such thing as a perfect monarchy, nor a perfect government. And certainly there's no such thing as a perfect leader. Sometimes we get fair and just leaders, sometimes we get tyrants.

[Eventide]

I've never disliked Anora, either. She's just a very ambitious, independent and politically-savvy person. It can be easy to write her off as cold and selfish, but like her father, she honestly has the well-being of Ferelden in mind and thinks she's the best person for the job. However, her positive traits have the large potential of becoming negative; I can see her turning out like Loghain when she gets older--power-mad and completely blind to her own faults.