555 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Ariella wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

The whole "Sound the retreat" cutscene? Or how about the fact that A) they were winning until Loghain quit the field (which we are told direct) Loghain's responsibility if he had to pull out would be to save the king first and foremost.

He set Cailan up. He did as he was prophecied to do.

Can you provide some dialog to the effect that they were winning?  I'd love to see that, because the field in the cutscene is far from showing me a winning battle.  Aren't the mages pulling out before the beacon is lit?  Doesn't Alistair state, at the top of the tower, that you'd probably missed the signal?  By how long did you miss the signal?  You were supposed to have about an hour, how long did it actually take to get to the top of the tower?  You see, while I believe that Loghain is a right bastard, I also believe that if you're going to present something as fact, you should be able to document it as such.
Here's a compelling thought for you, that you seem to overlook, mentioning abandoning the King to die at Ostagar loses you points at the Landsmeet.

[Eruanna Guerrein]

robertthebard wrote...

There are more than 2 wardens at Ostagar.  Even before your Joining, you would know that they are down on the field with the rest of the army.  So why is he desperate with more than two, and in the Dwarven Noble Origin, you can see what, 4 more?  So he's desperate to bolster his numbers with at least twice as many, aside from him and Alistair, and yet, with just three, you should be more than comfortable?  Starting to grasp at some straws here?  Is he desperate because he believes that the more Wardens he has on the field the better?  Why does this logic not apply to the PC?

This is a good point. Not good enough to change my mind about how I view it but good... 

I have to ask though... why doesn't Riordan have to look at other options in addition to Loghain then? So instead of why Loghain, why JUST Loghain if the numbers make such a difference?

I'm not saying numbers can't make a difference but why does your PC have to live by this rule and accept only Loghain or let down the GWs and Riordan does not by allowing more than just Loghain? It really doesn't make sense that you aren't allowed to suggest any other options, even if the game made those other options say no... Morrigan would say no, so would Sten and Zev and Wynne and probably even Ohgren (dog and Shale have no choice but no). I don't really see Leliana saying no but it doesn't matter. The point is that it's all forced to fit the final hard decision and consequences of that decision. So depending on how you playthrough and how you feel (which will often influence how your PC feels one way or another), there are pros and cons to your decisions. That's why they are there. Bioware writers/devs see threads like this and say, "Woot! Mission accomplished!"

[Ariella]

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I can answer this in one line:  Alistair is Maric's son, and as such, should have come forward to tell the PC that, and that going to Eamon would be adviseable because then we could follow Morrigan's advice in Lothering, and go after Loghain directly, by calling a Landsmeet, and forcing the confrontation.  We could then pursue our treaties in relative peace.

This is how it ends up anyway, isn't it?  Amazing how one that's not metagaming could see this this when they eventually do get his confession, or have Eamon tell them, isn't it.  It's amazing the dimensions that can be added to a role playing game by role playing it.

Yet you want Alistair to act OUT of CHARACTER for himself to achieve all of this. You don't want him to be Alistair.
 
For all your pious commentary about role play, you don't want the other character to be played they way THEY are developed. You want them to do what you want based on metagame knowlegde you have.

I expect him to be honest.  He isn't.

ETA:  I suppose that does make you right, though.  I expect him to do something that he is constitutionally incapable of, owning up to his responsibilities, something that he will not do until he knows he's going to have to face it anyway.

You've known him for how long, and you expect him to tell you the deep dark secret he's never told anyone in his entire life? That's a bit much.

He does admit he was wrong when he does tell you, and admits that he should have told you before, and in doing this, he's overcoming a lifetime of being told that he HAS to keep this a secret. He apologizes for his mistake, something Loghain NEVER does. He doesn't see the throne as his responsibility because he's been told time and again he's never going to sit on it. You just can't seem to accept the fact, Robert, that at the point you're talking about you might as well ask Alistair to go to the moon as to Alistair's perception he has as much chance of getting there as being king.

Alistiar sees his duty as getting those treaties and managing to end the blight. That's where he believes his duty and his responsibility lay. He has no problem with that and in fact chafes at the fact that Duncan keeps him out of the fighting thus keeping him from doing his duty. It's only when Eamon breaks through those years of "you're not going to be king, don't even think about it" that Alistair accepts that this IS part of his duty. He doesn't like it, but he'll do it.

...and yet, he's known me for how long, and he's willing to dump responsibility for saving Ferelden in my lap?  Yeah yeah, game mechanics, that's surely not metagaming?  Yet, with trusting me to do all the "right" things to save Ferelden, he feels perfectly justified to do the "wrong" thing, something he even admits to if you press him.  Sorry, but those are his words, "I know I should have told you sooner, but I was afraid...".

Wow... Alistair was human rather than perfect like your PC. He has this terrible flaw we call "character", you know, having a back story, having quirks,  and flaws?


Thing is you say you hate Alistair, because what? He doesn't "man up", but you even bother to try and understand his reactions. It's possibole to dislike a characters flaws, fine. But you don't seem to be doing that. You seem to be basing your dislike on your expectations of what the character should have done regardless of his backstory or personality.

[robertthebard]

Eruanna Guerrein wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

There are more than 2 wardens at Ostagar.  Even before your Joining, you would know that they are down on the field with the rest of the army.  So why is he desperate with more than two, and in the Dwarven Noble Origin, you can see what, 4 more?  So he's desperate to bolster his numbers with at least twice as many, aside from him and Alistair, and yet, with just three, you should be more than comfortable?  Starting to grasp at some straws here?  Is he desperate because he believes that the more Wardens he has on the field the better?  Why does this logic not apply to the PC?

This is a good point. Not good enough to change my mind about how I view it but good... 

I have to ask though... why doesn't Riordan have to look at other options in addition to Loghain then? So instead of why Loghain, why JUST Loghain if the numbers make such a difference?

I'm not saying numbers can't make a difference but why does your PC have to live by this rule and accept only Loghain or let down the GWs and Riordan does not by allowing more than just Loghain? It really doesn't make sense that you aren't allowed to suggest any other options, even if the game made those other options say no... Morrigan would say no, so would Sten and Zev and Wynne and probably even Ohgren (dog and Shale have no choice but no). I don't really see Leliana saying no but it doesn't matter. The point is that it's all forced to fit the final hard decision and consequences of that decision. So depending on how you playthrough and how you feel (which will often influence how your PC feels one way or another), there are pros and cons to your decisions. That's why they are there. Bioware writers/devs see threads like this and say, "Woot! Mission accomplished!"

I'm really not trying to change your mind about Loghain, or any of it, just showing that it's possible to overlook "Prince stabbity kill kill kill" and have a logical reason to recruit Loghain.  As to any of the other worthy people around, the world may never know.  Unless one of those pesky dev guys looks in here and spills the beans.  To me, it would make perfect sense, barring that aforementioned 50% survival rate at the PC's joining.  Guess it would kinda suck if your whole party died of the Joining.

[Addai]

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

 

So you interpret Loghain's decision to withdraw as a spur-of-the-moment thing?  He looks at the beacon and thinks "hm, well, I guess not"?  Not being facetious, just want to clarify that that's really how you saw that going down.

Didn't look that way to me.  The whole battle strategy was Loghain's.  As soon as he saw the beacon, he called the retreat in what certainly looked to me like a calculated decision rather than something spur-of-the-moment.  It's not as if he had a view of the battlefield and could see that it was a lost cause or anything.  He knew what he was doing.  Later on, he and Howe are discussing the fact that Grey Wardens survived Ostagar as something that comes as an unwelcome surprise... that wasn't supposed to happen.  They were all supposed to die.  He also certainly would have calculated Cailan's death, else how did he think he was going to get out of being called a traitor for deserting?

[eschilde]

Ariella wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

The whole "Sound the retreat" cutscene? Or how about the fact that A) they were winning until Loghain quit the field (which we are told direct) Loghain's responsibility if he had to pull out would be to save the king first and foremost.

He set Cailan up. He did as he was prophecied to do.

I'd like you to quote evidence for the first assumption you're making, which is that you were winning at Ostagar. My understanding of Ostagar was that Loghain was to charge from cover on lighting the beacon, and that the beacon was necessary because due to the geographical layout of Ostagar, the vanguard would be unable to signal him directly to charge. That implies that he did not have a direct view of the field he was to charge into, and therefore would not know whether they were winning or losing on the front. That is a fact that can work both for and against Loghain in proving his motives, but as far as I know, he never gives his exact reasoning for leaving the field upon seeing the beacon. 

Loghain's responsibility to save the king is nullified if there is no feasible way for him to do it. It would be a distinct failure of his responsibilities if he used his troops in a suicide mission.

As for prophecies, I am only making my assumptions on what I've seen in the game. I have not read the books, if that is what you are drawing this information from, so I don't know what prophecy you are talking about, but as for setting Cailin up, I don't believe that the entire battle at Ostagar was engineered to get Cailin killed. That is my personal opinion, but I do believe that there is no way to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Loghain had such intentions.

[Ariella]

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

The whole "Sound the retreat" cutscene? Or how about the fact that A) they were winning until Loghain quit the field (which we are told direct) Loghain's responsibility if he had to pull out would be to save the king first and foremost.

He set Cailan up. He did as he was prophecied to do.

Can you provide some dialog to the effect that they were winning?  I'd love to see that, because the field in the cutscene is far from showing me a winning battle.  Aren't the mages pulling out before the beacon is lit?  Doesn't Alistair state, at the top of the tower, that you'd probably missed the signal?  By how long did you miss the signal?  You were supposed to have about an hour, how long did it actually take to get to the top of the tower?  You see, while I believe that Loghain is a right bastard, I also believe that if you're going to present something as fact, you should be able to document it as such.
Here's a compelling thought for you, that you seem to overlook, mentioning abandoning the King to die at Ostagar loses you points at the Landsmeet.

I love how you point out a metagame mechanic to try and prove a point when you are so pious about role play.

Alistair, and Oswyn (for which knowledge Oswyn was imprisoned and tortured) both say that the army was winning until Loghain quit the field thus leaving the king and the grey wardens to their fates.

I do realize I was wrong when I said earlier that the fourth floor od Ishtal had no windows. It does, and the entire valley could be easily seen after the beacon was lit so it is sensible for Alistair to have this knowledge.

So you have witnesses. Plus if it was just a case of the beacon coming too late, why didn't he sortie to save the king at least? And why this whole elaborate lie about the Wardens, which makes no sense to a rational person.

I mean when his second even mentions trying to do something about the king he grabs her and says "Do as I command!" I think that's pretty good evidence there.

[eschilde]

Addai67 wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

 

So you interpret Loghain's decision to withdraw as a spur-of-the-moment thing?  He looks at the beacon and thinks "hm, well, I guess not"?  Not being facetious, just want to clarify that that's really how you saw that going down.

Didn't look that way to me.  The whole battle strategy was Loghain's.  As soon as he saw the beacon, he called the retreat in what certainly looked to me like a calculated decision rather than something spur-of-the-moment.  It's not as if he had a view of the battlefield and could see that it was a lost cause or anything.  He knew what he was doing.  Later on, he and Howe are discussing the fact that Grey Wardens survived Ostagar as something that comes as an unwelcome surprise... that wasn't supposed to happen.  They were all supposed to die.  He also certainly would have calculated Cailan's death, else how did he think he was going to get out of being called a traitor for deserting?

Well, perhaps not in that exact manner. My interpretation of the battle at Ostagar was more that Loghain's strategy was intended to win, and that while he would not be as upset as he should have been at Cailin's death, that was not the purpose of his strategy. There are certainly justifications he could have used in his own mind for calling a withdrawal, such as "The beacon has taken too long to be lit, there's no way Cailin's forces would have lasted that long against the horde of this size," as an example. Not saying that's what he thought, but it is certainly feasible. 

Loghain does not stand to gain as much by losing at Ostagar as he would by winning, if you assume he was acting with Orlais in mind. Conserving troops by having them bolstered by another army, rather than losing them at Ostagar to fight a two-fronted war, would put him in a much better strategic position, which I sincerely doubt would be lost on someone like Loghain. The two soldiers near the archery range in Ostagar say pretty much that--if the chevaliers come in and decide to stay, they'll fight them after killing the horde. There is practically no benefit to losing at Ostagar that would be better than winning, unless you for some reason think that Cailin's stubbornness at letting Orlesians in would persist if they tried to stay to conquer Fereldan. 

Edit: It is possible that you think Loghain was so paranoid that he was no longer acting rationally, in which case it would be a distinctly bad idea to recruit him, I guess.

Addendum: About the Wardens surviving. Ostagar was overwhelmed, and the majority of the Wardens were with the king, except for you and Alistair, who lit the beacon. He saw the beacon lit, and he also left the field, leaving Ostagar to be overwhelmed. Of course he would be surprised Wardens survived, regardless of whether or not he had intended them all to die at Ostagar.

Modifié par eschilde, 06 janvier 2010 - 07:04 .

[Addai]

eschilde wrote...

That implies that he did not have a direct view of the field he was to charge into, and therefore would not know whether they were winning or losing on the front.

Exactly.  That is why he can't possibly be acquitted for having reasonable motives for a retreat.

[Eruanna Guerrein]

eschilde wrote...



Loghain does not stand to gain as much by losing at Ostagar as he would by winning, if you assume he was acting with Orlais in mind. Conserving troops by having them bolstered by another army, rather than losing them at Ostagar to fight a two-fronted war, would put him in a much better strategic position, which I sincerely doubt would be lost on someone like Loghain. The two soldiers near the archery range in Ostagar say pretty much that--if the chevaliers come in and decide to stay, they'll fight them after killing the horde. There is practically no benefit to losing at Ostagar that would be better than winning, unless you for some reason think that Cailin's stubbornness at letting Orlesians in would persist if they tried to stay to conquer Fereldan. 

Except that Ferelden would still have a king insistent upon allying with Orlais.

Modifié par Eruanna Guerrein, 06 janvier 2010 - 07:02 .

[ejoslin]

It looked like the king died around the same time the beacon was lit, and it didn't look like a winning battle. But it was also not a spur-of-the-moment decision to quit the field. You know that someone let the darkspawn in the tower, that they knew the plan (go in with a cunning of 30+ and see the PC point that out to Alistair). In fact, when the beacon was lit, that's when the darkspawn vanguard surged. Plus the events leading up to the battle show there was more going on -- every contender to the throne was taken care of. Bryce Cousland and family, murdered; Arl Eamon, poisoned; Alistair should have perished with the rest of the gray wardens.



So Loghain did the unthinkable and deserved to die. Why does that death have to be right there? One thing I don't like about the ending when you spare Loghain is he ends up with a decent ending, whether you take the sacrifice or not. I would like to have seen him hang after the battle.

[robertthebard]

Ariella wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

The whole "Sound the retreat" cutscene? Or how about the fact that A) they were winning until Loghain quit the field (which we are told direct) Loghain's responsibility if he had to pull out would be to save the king first and foremost.

He set Cailan up. He did as he was prophecied to do.

Can you provide some dialog to the effect that they were winning?  I'd love to see that, because the field in the cutscene is far from showing me a winning battle.  Aren't the mages pulling out before the beacon is lit?  Doesn't Alistair state, at the top of the tower, that you'd probably missed the signal?  By how long did you miss the signal?  You were supposed to have about an hour, how long did it actually take to get to the top of the tower?  You see, while I believe that Loghain is a right bastard, I also believe that if you're going to present something as fact, you should be able to document it as such.
Here's a compelling thought for you, that you seem to overlook, mentioning abandoning the King to die at Ostagar loses you points at the Landsmeet.

I love how you point out a metagame mechanic to try and prove a point when you are so pious about role play.

Alistair, and Oswyn (for which knowledge Oswyn was imprisoned and tortured) both say that the army was winning until Loghain quit the field thus leaving the king and the grey wardens to their fates.

I do realize I was wrong when I said earlier that the fourth floor od Ishtal had no windows. It does, and the entire valley could be easily seen after the beacon was lit so it is sensible for Alistair to have this knowledge.

So you have witnesses. Plus if it was just a case of the beacon coming too late, why didn't he sortie to save the king at least? And why this whole elaborate lie about the Wardens, which makes no sense to a rational person.

I mean when his second even mentions trying to do something about the king he grabs her and says "Do as I command!" I think that's pretty good evidence there.

How does Alistair know the situation on the battlefield?  He's with you in the tower.  If Alistair knows, surely you know, yes?  Sorry, you're falling a bit flat again.

[Ariella]

eschilde wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

 

So you interpret Loghain's decision to withdraw as a spur-of-the-moment thing?  He looks at the beacon and thinks "hm, well, I guess not"?  Not being facetious, just want to clarify that that's really how you saw that going down.

Didn't look that way to me.  The whole battle strategy was Loghain's.  As soon as he saw the beacon, he called the retreat in what certainly looked to me like a calculated decision rather than something spur-of-the-moment.  It's not as if he had a view of the battlefield and could see that it was a lost cause or anything.  He knew what he was doing.  Later on, he and Howe are discussing the fact that Grey Wardens survived Ostagar as something that comes as an unwelcome surprise... that wasn't supposed to happen.  They were all supposed to die.  He also certainly would have calculated Cailan's death, else how did he think he was going to get out of being called a traitor for deserting?

Well, perhaps not in that exact manner. My interpretation of the battle at Ostagar was more that Loghain's strategy was intended to win, and that while he would not be as upset as he should have been at Cailin's death, that was not the purpose of his strategy. There are certainly justifications he could have used in his own mind for calling a withdrawal, such as "The beacon has taken too long to be lit, there's no way Cailin's forces would have lasted that long against the horde of this size," as an example. Not saying that's what he thought, but it is certainly feasible. 

Loghain goaded Cailan into being on the front lines with his constant objections. With the exception of the Grey Wardens, everyone who was supposed to light the signal (Loghain's men or mages under Uldred) had connections to Loghain and his later plotting.

Plus there's Howe. Cailan HAD to be out of the way for Howe to even consider taking out the Couslands. There's a reason Howes' men slaughtered everyone down to the servants, but Howe's not stupid. Craven yes, but not stupid. He'd need some assurance from someone strong before he stuck his neck out to a possible charge of treason against the King. The only other person in Fereldan besides Cailan and Bryce Cousland with the power to pull that off is Loghain, and the fact that Loghain rewards him with Highever, even though if your noble talks to Loghain at Ostagar so he KNOWS what the king was planning to do.

[Ariella]

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

The whole "Sound the retreat" cutscene? Or how about the fact that A) they were winning until Loghain quit the field (which we are told direct) Loghain's responsibility if he had to pull out would be to save the king first and foremost.

He set Cailan up. He did as he was prophecied to do.

Can you provide some dialog to the effect that they were winning?  I'd love to see that, because the field in the cutscene is far from showing me a winning battle.  Aren't the mages pulling out before the beacon is lit?  Doesn't Alistair state, at the top of the tower, that you'd probably missed the signal?  By how long did you miss the signal?  You were supposed to have about an hour, how long did it actually take to get to the top of the tower?  You see, while I believe that Loghain is a right bastard, I also believe that if you're going to present something as fact, you should be able to document it as such.
Here's a compelling thought for you, that you seem to overlook, mentioning abandoning the King to die at Ostagar loses you points at the Landsmeet.

I love how you point out a metagame mechanic to try and prove a point when you are so pious about role play.

Alistair, and Oswyn (for which knowledge Oswyn was imprisoned and tortured) both say that the army was winning until Loghain quit the field thus leaving the king and the grey wardens to their fates.

I do realize I was wrong when I said earlier that the fourth floor od Ishtal had no windows. It does, and the entire valley could be easily seen after the beacon was lit so it is sensible for Alistair to have this knowledge.

So you have witnesses. Plus if it was just a case of the beacon coming too late, why didn't he sortie to save the king at least? And why this whole elaborate lie about the Wardens, which makes no sense to a rational person.

I mean when his second even mentions trying to do something about the king he grabs her and says "Do as I command!" I think that's pretty good evidence there.

How does Alistair know the situation on the battlefield?  He's with you in the tower.  If Alistair knows, surely you know, yes?  Sorry, you're falling a bit flat again.

Unless you say he's lying when he tells Flemeth that "we were winning."

[eschilde]

Please, please, read my entire post, I spent a lot of time trying to formulate logical reasons for Loghain's actions >.>

Exactly. That is why he can't possibly be acquitted for having reasonable motives for a retreat.

As I said:

There are certainly justifications he could have used in his own mind for calling a withdrawal, such as "The beacon has taken too long to be lit, there's no way Cailin's forces would have lasted that long against the horde of this size," as an example. Not saying that's what he thought, but it is certainly feasible.

Except that Ferelden would still have a king insistent upon allying with Orlais.

They would be allied against the darkspawn for the duration of the blight, and only if Cailin and Loghain had reason to believe they could not win against the horde with their own forces. Which, again, would be more likely to happen if they hadn't lost at Ostagar.

[Addai]

eschilde wrote...

Loghain does not stand to gain as much by losing at Ostagar as he would by winning, if you assume he was acting with Orlais in mind.

I disagree.  IMO he calculated that a lose-lose at Ostagar was going to be the best outcome.  The darkspawn numbers are reduced + Cailan and the troops most loyal to him and the Wardens are decimated, leaving him and Anora in charge with no rivals to challenge them.

Not to complicate it, but just as an aside:  Don't think we can rule out that there wasn't personal malice against Cailan at play.  Loghain's guard indicates he and Cailan were arguing about the queen.  Reading between the lines, maybe about Cailan's infidelities?  Just a thought.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, BTW.  I enjoy discussing different points of view and am often surprised at how people see the same story events differently. 

Modifié par Addai67, 06 janvier 2010 - 07:11 .

[Vicious]

One thing I don't like about the ending when you spare Loghain is he ends up with a decent ending, whether you take the sacrifice or not. I would like to have seen him hang after the battle.

It's easy. You redeem yourself by spending your life doing so. Death redeems nothing, particularly in DAO where all spirits go to the Fade when they die and the idea of a heaven with the maker is highly likely to be completely made up. All death does is make yourself feel better. If you feel you can't trust Loghain even as a Grey Warden, then by all means, kill him.

Anyway some party banter:


Sten: I didn't think it was a human practice, making a comrade of a defeated foe.
Loghain: It isn't. These are... unusual circumstances.
Sten: It is... encouraging to see.
Loghain: Encouraging? How so?
Sten: Perhaps your people are becoming more like qunari. You could do worse.
Loghain: Do you mean to say that qunari do make comrades of their beaten opponent?
Sten: Qunari do not waste resources. And few are more valuable than lives.
Loghain: How exactly do you go about making your enemies work for you?
Sten: We're a persuasive people, if you couldn't tell.

Don't think we can rule out that there wasn't personal malice against Cailan at play.  Loghain's guard indicates he and Cailan were arguing about the queen.  Reading between the lines, maybe about Cailan's infidelities?  Just a thought.

I thought the same.

Modifié par Vicious, 06 janvier 2010 - 07:14 .

[eschilde]

Plus there's Howe. Cailan HAD to be out of the way for Howe to even consider taking out the Couslands. There's a reason Howes' men slaughtered everyone down to the servants, but Howe's not stupid. Craven yes, but not stupid. He'd need some assurance from someone strong before he stuck his neck out to a possible charge of treason against the King. The only other person in Fereldan besides Cailan and Bryce Cousland with the power to pull that off is Loghain, and the fact that Loghain rewards him with Highever, even though if your noble talks to Loghain at Ostagar so he KNOWS what the king was planning to do.

You are forgetting what Duncan says to Cailin when you arrive in Ostagar as a HN. "Had we not escaped, Howe would have killed us and told you any story he wished." And it is postulated by Howe later that the Couslands had been engaging in treacherous activity. As has been stated by others, although Loghain finds out about the Couslands at Ostagar if you are a HN, it does not mean that Loghain knew previously or was involved in any way at all. His wrongdoing is in not pursuing justice for the Couslands as regent, which, why would he, when Howe's doing all his political maneuvering for him?

[robertthebard]

Ariella wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

The whole "Sound the retreat" cutscene? Or how about the fact that A) they were winning until Loghain quit the field (which we are told direct) Loghain's responsibility if he had to pull out would be to save the king first and foremost.

He set Cailan up. He did as he was prophecied to do.

Can you provide some dialog to the effect that they were winning?  I'd love to see that, because the field in the cutscene is far from showing me a winning battle.  Aren't the mages pulling out before the beacon is lit?  Doesn't Alistair state, at the top of the tower, that you'd probably missed the signal?  By how long did you miss the signal?  You were supposed to have about an hour, how long did it actually take to get to the top of the tower?  You see, while I believe that Loghain is a right bastard, I also believe that if you're going to present something as fact, you should be able to document it as such.
Here's a compelling thought for you, that you seem to overlook, mentioning abandoning the King to die at Ostagar loses you points at the Landsmeet.

I love how you point out a metagame mechanic to try and prove a point when you are so pious about role play.

Alistair, and Oswyn (for which knowledge Oswyn was imprisoned and tortured) both say that the army was winning until Loghain quit the field thus leaving the king and the grey wardens to their fates.

I do realize I was wrong when I said earlier that the fourth floor od Ishtal had no windows. It does, and the entire valley could be easily seen after the beacon was lit so it is sensible for Alistair to have this knowledge.

So you have witnesses. Plus if it was just a case of the beacon coming too late, why didn't he sortie to save the king at least? And why this whole elaborate lie about the Wardens, which makes no sense to a rational person.

I mean when his second even mentions trying to do something about the king he grabs her and says "Do as I command!" I think that's pretty good evidence there.

How does Alistair know the situation on the battlefield?  He's with you in the tower.  If Alistair knows, surely you know, yes?  Sorry, you're falling a bit flat again.

Unless you say he's lying when he tells Flemeth that "we were winning."

Isn't he?  It would be consistent with his character.  However, he has no better view of the battle field than the PC, so if we say my referencing the cutscene of the battle is metagaming, what is Alistair doing?  I realize that you seem to think I'm arguing that Loghain is a good guy, but I'm really not.  However, as I have said, I like my facts to be just that, facts.  Any knowledge that Alistair would profess to have about the battle should be yours as well, you are both in the same place.

Regarding the kid in the dungeon, he was not there.  His nursemaid's son was, with Loghain.  They could not see the battle field, which is something you'll readily admit to, so how could he have known the state of the battle?  Your case has more holes than swiss cheese.

[Vicious]

Alistair is the ultimate metagamer.

[Cybercat999]

Ariella wrote...
Wow... Alistair was human rather than perfect like your PC. He has this terrible flaw we call "character", you know, having a back story, having quirks,  and flaws?


Thing is you say you hate Alistair, because what? He doesn't "man up", but you even bother to try and understand his reactions. It's possibole to dislike a characters flaws, fine. But you don't seem to be doing that. You seem to be basing your dislike on your expectations of what the character should have done regardless of his backstory or personality.

Are you saying we are obliged to like and understand Alistair because he has flaws? Interesting point of view.
Next time my husband calls me a cold selfish bish I am going to tell him he has to love my flaws because they make my "character".

Are you just so infatuated with his *whatever* that you cant understand that your cute "quirks" can be a very annoying deal breakers for somebody else?
He is what he is. You like him, I dislike him, even more so I despise him. Nothing you say can make me change my mind and I see no reason whatsoever to try and justify him, he is not worth the effort.

[robertthebard]

Vicious wrote...

Alistair is the ultimate metagamer.

That cheating Royal bastard.

[Ariella]

eschilde wrote...

Plus there's Howe. Cailan HAD to be out of the way for Howe to even consider taking out the Couslands. There's a reason Howes' men slaughtered everyone down to the servants, but Howe's not stupid. Craven yes, but not stupid. He'd need some assurance from someone strong before he stuck his neck out to a possible charge of treason against the King. The only other person in Fereldan besides Cailan and Bryce Cousland with the power to pull that off is Loghain, and the fact that Loghain rewards him with Highever, even though if your noble talks to Loghain at Ostagar so he KNOWS what the king was planning to do.

You are forgetting what Duncan says to Cailin when you arrive in Ostagar as a HN. "Had we not escaped, Howe would have killed us and told you any story he wished." And it is postulated by Howe later that the Couslands had been engaging in treacherous activity. As has been stated by others, although Loghain finds out about the Couslands at Ostagar if you are a HN, it does not mean that Loghain knew previously or was involved in any way at all. His wrongdoing is in not pursuing justice for the Couslands as regent, which, why would he, when Howe's doing all his political maneuvering for him?

Thing is the King told Loghain what he intended to do. He says so himself "the king told me of his promise to you."

But think for a minute, why would he allow Howe to do all his political manuvering if he hadn't recruited him in the first place to remove a rival in Bryce Cousland?

Howe's the kind of man to not put himself at risk unless he had ultimate assurances and backup plans.

[Lotion Soronarr]

robertthebard wrote...

Thank you for proving my point.  There is no set rule book, so why not recruit Loghain?

IPerrin wrote...

   Riordan is the senior grey warden at
the landsmeet.  He decides that Loghain should join the wardens.  
Loghain is a ferelden hero.  Why do you continue insisting that these
are not "satisfactory answers" to "why Loghain?? 

Do I need to go over this AGAIN? Loghain is a dangerous, crazy man who's proven that his word means nothing, that's he capable and willing to kill pretty much anyone and a man who still has some power and suporters. He doesn't magicly stop being a danger just because he passes the Joining. His schizio. His sudden change of heart at the duel makes NO FRIGGIN SENSE.
Aside from being a great fighter, is there any reason to make him a GW?
There are plenty capable (and younger) men and women willing and able who would do just as fine.

[Ariella]

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Ariella wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Well, that is assuming he did deliberately set them up. Unfortunately, there is very little evidence to prove his motives beyond his personal testimony. There's a number of assumptions you can make, which people have gone through multiple times already, but no direct evidence correlating withdrawal at Ostagar with intent to get Cailin out of the picture.

The whole "Sound the retreat" cutscene? Or how about the fact that A) they were winning until Loghain quit the field (which we are told direct) Loghain's responsibility if he had to pull out would be to save the king first and foremost.

He set Cailan up. He did as he was prophecied to do.

Can you provide some dialog to the effect that they were winning?  I'd love to see that, because the field in the cutscene is far from showing me a winning battle.  Aren't the mages pulling out before the beacon is lit?  Doesn't Alistair state, at the top of the tower, that you'd probably missed the signal?  By how long did you miss the signal?  You were supposed to have about an hour, how long did it actually take to get to the top of the tower?  You see, while I believe that Loghain is a right bastard, I also believe that if you're going to present something as fact, you should be able to document it as such.
Here's a compelling thought for you, that you seem to overlook, mentioning abandoning the King to die at Ostagar loses you points at the Landsmeet.

I love how you point out a metagame mechanic to try and prove a point when you are so pious about role play.

Alistair, and Oswyn (for which knowledge Oswyn was imprisoned and tortured) both say that the army was winning until Loghain quit the field thus leaving the king and the grey wardens to their fates.

I do realize I was wrong when I said earlier that the fourth floor od Ishtal had no windows. It does, and the entire valley could be easily seen after the beacon was lit so it is sensible for Alistair to have this knowledge.

So you have witnesses. Plus if it was just a case of the beacon coming too late, why didn't he sortie to save the king at least? And why this whole elaborate lie about the Wardens, which makes no sense to a rational person.

I mean when his second even mentions trying to do something about the king he grabs her and says "Do as I command!" I think that's pretty good evidence there.

How does Alistair know the situation on the battlefield?  He's with you in the tower.  If Alistair knows, surely you know, yes?  Sorry, you're falling a bit flat again.

Unless you say he's lying when he tells Flemeth that "we were winning."

Isn't he?  It would be consistent with his character.  However, he has no better view of the battle field than the PC, so if we say my referencing the cutscene of the battle is metagaming, what is Alistair doing?  I realize that you seem to think I'm arguing that Loghain is a good guy, but I'm really not.  However, as I have said, I like my facts to be just that, facts.  Any knowledge that Alistair would profess to have about the battle should be yours as well, you are both in the same place.

Oh what utter crap. Alistair keeps one thing from the PC, and he's a liar? Did you even bother to get to know the character?

Regarding the kid in the dungeon, he was not there.  His nursemaid's son was, with Loghain.  They could not see the battle field, which is something you'll readily admit to, so how could he have known the state of the battle?  Your case has more holes than swiss cheese.

Then why pray tell, was Oswyn catpured and tortured? Because he had first hand information and was in a position to bring it out thus was a threat.