103 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

It's canon, but only for the specific save file it was written for. If you had a Drunkistair, events would play out differently for how everything happened -- ideally, anyway, provided DA3 could address that and needed to address that as David Gaider has said in the past.

What he was saying was canon for a specific world state were the events inside the story of the comics. The narration of the series isn't an event inside the universe. It's an outside event from the DA world-builders to the reader.

So apparently... completely canon for Loghain to be a traitor. Not a person doing the militarily sound maneuver during the hopeless battle. Just a traitor.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 20 novembre 2012 - 11:56 .

[sylvanaerie]

A codex entry such as you suggest would have helped with that save file. Perhaps you can treat the comic as a 'save file' in which Loghain was seen as a traitor by the general populace. This is a viable viewpoint as well, given what we see in game. *Edited because I was going to post all the reasons a person might view him as a traitor but it was getting too long, and this argument has been had many times on the boards, with far more eloquence than I can bring to bear.*

If you, as a player don't see it from that perspective, I can respect that, can even see it from your point of view, even if I don't personally agree with you. Origins is a very personal thing, and it just doesn't bother me as much what the writers, or other players think about him. Gaider has admitted to actually liking Loghain. I believe the quote was 'an unholy love for', if I remember right.

Maybe if I liked him, I'd feel differently, but I am content with the niche he fills in my game since no other character in Origins comes close to filling it for me. There has to be an antagonist. For Origins, for me, it was Loghain, and always will be.

I think he summed it up best when he said his line about the measure of a man being the quality of his enemies, and then muses if that speaks well for him, or the Warden. I think it speaks well for both.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Jedimaster88 wrote...


That a fictional character can raise this much strong emotions...Its amazing.

If only any of the characters from DA2 were half this conflict-inducing...

It was by accident I wager.

Their original idea for Loghain was crap. Dev problems cut it and by accident, he became great.
Had their original idea remained, I would have executed him.

I'll even add this, Loghain in Stolen Throne was meh and at the end, was a creepy moron. No, a guy killing someone in a blind rage is not what kings are made out of, stop pretending you know what the hell you are talking about. 

EDIT: I still love the character irrespective of whether he was planned to be this good or not. But I'm done giving as much praise to the writers like I used to.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 20 novembre 2012 - 01:24 .

[sylvanaerie]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Jedimaster88 wrote...


That a fictional character can raise this much strong emotions...Its amazing.

If only any of the characters from DA2 were half this conflict-inducing...

It was by accident I wager.

Their original idea for Loghain was crap. Dev problems cut it and by accident, he became great.
Had their original idea remained, I would have executed him.

I'll even add this, Loghain in Stolen Throne was meh and at the end, was a creepy moron. No, a guy killing someone in a blind rage is not what kings are made out of, stop pretending you know what the hell you are talking about. 

EDIT: I still love the character irrespective of whether he was planned to be this good or not. But I'm done giving as much praise to the writers like I used to.

What was their original idea?  I hate Loghain, but as a character (the writing and voice acting) I can respect.  Would he have been as 'mustache-twirly' over the top as Howe?  I much prefer the complex characterization we are given to some stock bad guy.

[KnightofPhoenix]

sylvanaerie wrote...
What was their original idea?  I hate Loghain, but as a character (the writing and voice acting) I can respect.  Would he have been as 'mustache-twirly' over the top as Howe?  I much prefer the complex characterization we are given to some stock bad guy.

Their original idea was that Loghain knew about Cailan's plan to marry Celene, so did what he did.
I think that's horrible. Loghain could have assassinated the idiot brat, instead of leave his army and men to die to get to Cailan. It's stupid, and I would have executed him for it.

[sylvanaerie]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

sylvanaerie wrote...
What was their original idea?  I hate Loghain, but as a character (the writing and voice acting) I can respect.  Would he have been as 'mustache-twirly' over the top as Howe?  I much prefer the complex characterization we are given to some stock bad guy.

Their original idea was that Loghain knew about Cailan's plan to marry Celene, so did what he did.
I think that's horrible. Loghain could have assassinated the idiot brat, instead of leave his army and men to die to get to Cailan. It's stupid, and I would have executed him for it.

Yea, that would have been 'over the top' bad, all that life lost when it would have been simpler to just assassinate Cailan.  I'm much happier with him as the flawed and human Loghain, who does bad things with the best of intentions, making him much more 'human' and relatable.  I like that he's surprised when you find the letters in RtO, and they didn't retcon to their original idea there.

[Jedimaster88]

Ist it possible that if they had used the original idea for Loghain, the reasons for his plans MIGHT have been something like this;

1) Assasinating Cailan alone could raise suspicion if its done at Ostagar. If it would be done BEFORE Ostagar and somewhere else, it would work better.

2) Doesnt the surviving half of the army consist of men loyal to Loghain in the game? If so then his reasoning could be that the ones, who are going to die, are expendable and a necessary sacrifice.

Loghain returns with men loyal to HIM and he would deliver "the devastating news about Cailan´s death plus all the brave men who fought with him". He could tell that he did everything he could and all his loyal soldiers simply confirm it. This would raise peoples´ sympathies and fears and after that the nobility would throw all the support and men they can to Loghain and he would build a new army etc...


What do you think? Im using my imagination here and you people may have it more than I do.

Modifié par Jedimaster88, 20 novembre 2012 - 07:14 .

[Persephone]

sylvanaerie wrote...

What surprises me is 3 years later someone posts something like this when Gaider himself has said Loghain was in the dark about Howe's actions in Highever at the time it was committed. Still doesn't change the fact that my Cousland offed the bastard with extreme prejudice because he supported Howe's actions even if he wasn't privy to them at the time, he certainly was aware of what happened once the Cousland got to Ostagar. AND he had the freaking audacity to call my warden a 'murderer' at the Landsmeet. Like Howe was some innocent victim...

People who live in glass houses...

He had little choice but to ignore Howe's actions for the time being. He couldn't a afford a third war on top of the civil war and the darkspawn. Politics are never b/w.

Well, you broke in and murdered the man. That's a fact. It was breaking the law then just as it would be today. I am not defending Howe whatsoever. But killing your family's murderer still is murder. Today's laws reflect this. And if that is reason enough to murder someone again....I'm not even going to continue down that path.

[sylvanaerie]

Jedimaster88 wrote...

Ist it possible that if they had used the original idea for Loghain, the reasons for his plans MIGHT have been something like this;

1) Assasinating Cailan alone could raise suspicion if its done at Ostagar. If it would be done BEFORE Ostagar and somewhere else, it would work better.

2) Doesnt the surviving half of the army consist of men loyal to Loghain in the game? If so then his reasoning could be that the ones, who are going to die, are expendable and a necessary sacrifice.

Loghain returns with men loyal to HIM and he would deliver "the devastating news about Cailan´s death plus all the brave men who fought with him". He could tell that he did everything he could and all his loyal soldiers simply confirm it. This would raise peoples´ sympathies and fears and after that the nobility would throw all the support and men they can to Loghain and he would build a new army etc...


What do you think? Im using my imagination here and you people may have it more than I do.

That's pretty much the account he gives actually.  And if anyone says differently, they just disappear (like Bann Sighard's son and his friend) into the depths of Howe's 'funhouse of horrors'.

[sylvanaerie]

Persephone wrote...

sylvanaerie wrote...

What surprises me is 3 years later someone posts something like this when Gaider himself has said Loghain was in the dark about Howe's actions in Highever at the time it was committed. Still doesn't change the fact that my Cousland offed the bastard with extreme prejudice because he supported Howe's actions even if he wasn't privy to them at the time, he certainly was aware of what happened once the Cousland got to Ostagar. AND he had the freaking audacity to call my warden a 'murderer' at the Landsmeet. Like Howe was some innocent victim...

People who live in glass houses...

He had little choice but to ignore Howe's actions for the time being. He couldn't a afford a third war on top of the civil war and the darkspawn. Politics are never b/w.

Well, you broke in and murdered the man. That's a fact. It was breaking the law then just as it would be today. I am not defending Howe whatsoever. But killing your family's murderer still is murder. Today's laws reflect this. And if that is reason enough to murder someone again....I'm not even going to continue down that path.

It's the hypocrisy I object to.  He calls the PC a murderer when he's no better, sending a mage to poison Eamon.  Whether he meant to kill Eamon or not is irrelevant since, were it not for the Warden, that's exactly what would have been the result.  This wasn't an act of war, this was a deliberate plotting on his part (not to mention calling out Crow assassins and bounty hunters on the Warden).   I found it hard not to take that personally.

And it's obvious Howe isn't going to be brought to justice with conventional channels as long as Loghain had him as an ally.  I actually wish there were an option to call him (Howe) out and have him stand trial at the Landsmeet too, but the game doesn't give you that.  I work with the tools I'm given, and in this instance it's kill or be killed.

Like I said, I hate him but it's a 'love to hate' thing.  He's a complex character and a great deal of fun opposing.

Modifié par sylvanaerie, 20 novembre 2012 - 10:18 .

[Monica21]

sylvanaerie wrote...
It's the hypocrisy I object to.  He calls the PC a murderer when he's no better, sending a mage to poison Eamon.  Whether he meant to kill Eamon or not is irrelevant since, were it not for the Warden, that's exactly what would have been the result.  This wasn't an act of war, this was a deliberate plotting on his part (not to mention calling out Crow assassins and bounty hunters on the Warden).   I found it hard not to take that personally.

And it's obvious Howe isn't going to be brought to justice with conventional channels as long as Loghain had him as an ally.  I actually wish there were an option to call him (Howe) out and have him stand trial at the Landsmeet too, but the game doesn't give you that.  I work with the tools I'm given, and in this instance it's kill or be killed.

Like I said, I hate him but it's a 'love to hate' thing.  He's a complex character and a great deal of fun opposing.

I know I'm splitting hairs here, but poisoning Eamon with the intent to simply keep him out of the game isn't the same as murder. He simply couldn't have planned for Connor's role. The Crows were also obviously pretty clearly a reluctant agreement to Howe's pushing. Howe was the one who hired Zevran. Loghain's only action was inaction, in letting Howe continue with his plan. Like I said, I know it's splitting hairs, but I see it as the difference betwen someone who's actively plotting to kill and take over the throne and someone who's trying to hold the country together because he distrusts the Wardens and fears Orlesian troops.

As for Howe, I kind of wish he hadn't been in the estate. I would have liked to see him try to defend himself at the Landsmeet and see his interaction with Loghain, and then make a decision about what to do with them. Giving the player the option to recruit both of them would pretty quickly solve the business about a Cousland who gets revenge but doesn't let Alistair get his.

[Monica21]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
It was by accident I wager.

Their original idea for Loghain was crap. Dev problems cut it and by accident, he became great.
Had their original idea remained, I would have executed him.

I'll even add this, Loghain in Stolen Throne was meh and at the end, was a creepy moron. No, a guy killing someone in a blind rage is not what kings are made out of, stop pretending you know what the hell you are talking about. 

EDIT: I still love the character irrespective of whether he was planned to be this good or not. But I'm done giving as much praise to the writers like I used to.

Even if it was accidental (which makes the most sense, since everybody keeps talking as if Loghain is going to be the next king, even going so far as to make him a crown, except for Loghain, who seems content keeping the seat warm for Anora) why pretend he's less interesting than he turned out to be? That's the part I don't understand. If I mess something up and accidentally make it fantastic, then I'm more than willing to take full credit for it, instead of trying to turn a very gray game into something purely black and white.

[TEWR]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I'll even add this, Loghain in Stolen Throne was meh and at the end, was a creepy moron. No, a guy killing someone in a blind rage is not what kings are made out of, stop pretending you know what the hell you are talking about

How was he portrayed in The Stolen Throne?

Also, if he's calling Maric a great king for killing someone in a blind rage... well... that's consistent with him being a horrible politician in DAO.

[sylvanaerie]

Monica21 wrote...

sylvanaerie wrote...
It's the hypocrisy I object to.  He calls the PC a murderer when he's no better, sending a mage to poison Eamon.  Whether he meant to kill Eamon or not is irrelevant since, were it not for the Warden, that's exactly what would have been the result.  This wasn't an act of war, this was a deliberate plotting on his part (not to mention calling out Crow assassins and bounty hunters on the Warden).   I found it hard not to take that personally.

And it's obvious Howe isn't going to be brought to justice with conventional channels as long as Loghain had him as an ally.  I actually wish there were an option to call him (Howe) out and have him stand trial at the Landsmeet too, but the game doesn't give you that.  I work with the tools I'm given, and in this instance it's kill or be killed.

Like I said, I hate him but it's a 'love to hate' thing.  He's a complex character and a great deal of fun opposing.

I know I'm splitting hairs here, but poisoning Eamon with the intent to simply keep him out of the game isn't the same as murder. He simply couldn't have planned for Connor's role. The Crows were also obviously pretty clearly a reluctant agreement to Howe's pushing. Howe was the one who hired Zevran. Loghain's only action was inaction, in letting Howe continue with his plan. Like I said, I know it's splitting hairs, but I see it as the difference betwen someone who's actively plotting to kill and take over the throne and someone who's trying to hold the country together because he distrusts the Wardens and fears Orlesian troops.

As for Howe, I kind of wish he hadn't been in the estate. I would have liked to see him try to defend himself at the Landsmeet and see his interaction with Loghain, and then make a decision about what to do with them. Giving the player the option to recruit both of them would pretty quickly solve the business about a Cousland who gets revenge but doesn't let Alistair get his.

My Warden isn't privy to Loghain's motivations or the statements Gaider and the other devs have posted here on the boards when he/she is confronting him at the Landsmeet.  From my Wardens' perspective, Loghain poisoned Eamon, a premeditated act, not a crime of passion or a manslaughter situation, a premeditated act of attempted murder.  Not once does he state in the Landsmeet (or prior) "I never meant to kill you, just keep you out of the game till I could _______".  He certainly had the opportunity during the private chat at Eamon's estate to clarify things without an audience, but instead all he offers up is threats.  "The Emperor of Orlais didn't think I'd take him down either".  And at the Landsmeet, it was only "I didn't do that", denying culpability, despite evidence to the contrary, when he most definitely did.   Where I'm concerned, lying at that point was just stupid.  Had he said, "It was a calculated move, a mistake, since I never meant to kill him." it would have cut a different slant to the arguments in there for me, but he didn't, so I have to go on what information the game gives me, not metagaming that my warden can read minds and know what his motivations are.  

Nor is my Warden a 'fly on the wall' watching Loghain and his lukewarm acceptance of Crow assassins to take out his enemies.  But he sure as hell wasn't saying "No" to them either, and all my Warden has to go on once Zevran and bounty hunters come after her is "Loghain hired people to kill me".  No one ever says "No, this was all Howe's doing, Loghain didn't send us."  The only ones who confirm they are on Howe's payroll are those yahoos in the Pearl with the ambush tactics.  Howe didn't go behind his back to hire the Crows, he introduces Zevran, so Loghain was fully aware of what was happening, even if he wasn't very enthusiastic about the whole thing.  Culpability comes into play here.  If you sign off your approval on something, your consent is given, you have agreed to a course of action and you should be called into account if your target survives and comes after you for justice. There are reasons why the person who solicits someone to kill another is just as much at fault to the crime as the person doing the actual killing. Politics be damned, as if that excuse is going to make it any less of a crime.  And Zevran never says "I was hired by Howe" it was "I was hired by a man named Loghain" even though Howe introduces him as his "warden solution".  Howe's death happens when he fights the Warden, a spur of the moment thing (for any of my Warden's but my Cousland, who frankly is a murderer at that moment, since she/he enters that estate, with malice aforethought, not a nice attitude but forgiveable considering the nature of Howe's crimes).   Loghain's actions are premeditated and this is what makes what he does different from the Warden's killing of Howe.  Also at this point, the warden is innocent of crimes, he's just 'in the way' and Loghain wants him gone.   Manslaughter/self defense vs premeditated murder. His reluctance is irrelevant since the warden never sees this reluctance, nor does Zevran bring it up in any conversations prior to the Landsmeet.

I will concede that not once does Loghain claim he wants the throne, nor do I believe he does it just for power's sake, and is actually doing it from a desire to 'protect' his daughter and Ferelden from (Orlais? Ambitious nobles?).  But WTF is he supposed to be protecting her from that he couldn't do more capably as the general of her armies vs her regent?  An outsider (IE my warden) looking in only sees the man who refuses to let his daughter (someone trained from birth to rule) do what she does best, leading the country.  The idiot also created a crisis situation with the rulership in question, causing the civil war.  Some of the banns objected to Loghain's actions, but I also truly believe some of them saw it as an opportunity in a 'power vaccuum' putting the succession in doubt.  Kind of self fulfilling prophecy situation going on here. His lies all come into play here as well.  Just what is my warden supposed to think when he says one thing, but his actions are completely contrary to his words?  That he's a man who sees his daughter as 'a 6 year old in pigtails and scraped knees' cuts him a wee bit of slack here, but not much since he is making the situation worse than it has to be.

Had he left ruling the country to Anora and wanted to be the general leading her armies, I might have let him live, even with the debacle at Ostagar, Alistair's revenge be damned.  That said, another part of being a good leader is knowing when to delegate tasks to those best capable of handling them, not trying to do it all yourself. He had no business trying to lead the country, or killing the only people capable of dealing with the crisis, and I'm not speaking of the Archdemon thing, I'm speaking of 1000 years of history/lore that tells everyone in Thedas that only wardens can deal with the Blight. At least with the latter he actually delegates others to do his dirty work. His rampant paranoia/ego overruns any good sense he had once he realizes what they are dealing with isn't a large excusion to the surface but an actual Blight.

Everyone makes mistakes, I can forgive mistakes, and I believe he even says (if you choose the "you left Cailan to die" dialogue option) that he couldn't have prevented Cailan's death, so I can believe it was a no win scenario (or he felt at that point it was unwinnable) and he was just trying to keep as many men as he could alive. But since everything else he's saying at the Landsmeet is lies, I have to sift through all the bullsh*t to find the nuggets of truth beneath the stench.  Frankly I don't have the patience for that crap. 

And I can't forgive ignoring your mistakes and continuing to screw up when everyone around you tells you you're screwing up.  Even Howe tells him they are losing too many men to deal with the blight because of the civil war, and Loghain still insists he can do it all, kind of negating the entire purpose of Howe being his advisor if he doesn't listen anyway on the rare time Howe actually makes an advice that isn't wholly self serving.  Of course, the warden isn't privy to this conversation either, but can see the results in the civil war raging on one front while the blight devastates the land (West Hills and in several side quests, the countryside) on another.

Of course, if he had done (or didn't do) any of these things, DAO would have been either a very short game, or at the least a very different one, and he wouldn't have been half so compelling a character. 

Modifié par sylvanaerie, 21 novembre 2012 - 01:49 .

[TEWR]

Bear in mind, however, that although history shows the Wardens being present in every Blight it doesn't say just how they're necessary. Saying Wardens have always fought in the Blights isn't saying "Wardens are needed in every Blight", despite that being the case. Very few outsiders of the order are privy to such knowledge, and this is part of why Loghain felt they weren't necessary.

He didn't know why they were needed. Not even the Warden himself or Alistair truly knew why they were necessary.

Another part is that he truly viewed them as agents of Orlais, knowingly or not -- which, historically, was true at one point. The Wardens were people that helped spread the Andrastian faith and the Orlesians used the Blights as a pretense to "aid" a country weakened by it and then never left said country.

The history of the Free Marches, Nevarra, and the Anderfels show us this.

[Jedimaster88]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


Another part is that he truly viewed them as agents of Orlais, knowingly or not -- which, historically, was true at one point. The Wardens were people that helped spread the Andrastian faith and the Orlesians used the Blights as a pretense to "aid" a country weakened by it and then never left said country.

The history of the Free Marches, Nevarra, and the Anderfels show us this.

But is it TRULY the wardens´ fault? They fought the darkspawn like they were supposed to. What Orlais did is another matter entirely. Seems more like that Orlais just used this opportunity. How do you know that the wardens "aided" Orlais? Is it possible that they just followed their own rule about not to get involved in politics in any way?

Even Loghain himself says to Maric in the calling; "You must know that the grey wardens have always had their OWN agenda. They serve NO nation, and NO king..."

[Monica21]

Jedimaster88 wrote...
But is it TRULY the wardens´ fault? They fought the darkspawn like they were supposed to. What Orlais did is another matter entirely. Seems more like that Orlais just used this opportunity. How do you know that the wardens "aided" Orlais? Is it possible that they just followed their own rule about not to get involved in politics in any way?

Does it matter if it was the Wardens fault? History tells us that they used Blights as opportunities to expand their influence. Given their previous occupation, ended just 30 years earlier, why would anyone in Ferelden want Orlesians in the country? We know that in addition to the Orlesian Warden order, chevaliers were ready to enter.

Even Loghain himself says to Maric in the calling; "You must know that the grey wardens have always had their OWN agenda. They serve NO nation, and NO king..."

No, but the Wardens often work with existing forces because their own order is too small to defeat a Blight on their own. So, again, it doesn't matter who they serve if Orlais keeps presenting itself to aid a country, only to stay and occupy.

And let's not forget that Loghain had no reason to believe this was a Blight, hence no reason for the Wardens and certainly no reason for chevaliers.

[TEWR]

Jedimaster88 wrote...

But is it TRULY the wardens´ fault? They fought the darkspawn like they were supposed to. What Orlais did is another matter entirely. Seems more like that Orlais just used this opportunity. How do you know that the wardens "aided" Orlais? Is it possible that they just followed their own rule about not to get involved in politics in any way?

I recall reading that they didn't sign a treaty where they resigned themselves to neutrality in Thedosian politics until the Third Blight, because of a lot of political tension that was going on between the various countries -- Tevinter and Orlais, for starters.

[Jedimaster88]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Jedimaster88 wrote...

But is it TRULY the wardens´ fault? They fought the darkspawn like they were supposed to. What Orlais did is another matter entirely. Seems more like that Orlais just used this opportunity. How do you know that the wardens "aided" Orlais? Is it possible that they just followed their own rule about not to get involved in politics in any way?

I recall reading that they didn't sign a treaty where they resigned themselves to neutrality in Thedosian politics until the Third Blight, because of a lot of political tension that was going on between the various countries -- Tevinter and Orlais, for starters.

I stand corrected.

Where is this information? I tried to look from dragon age wiki but didnt found any. I propably searched from the wrong place.

Modifié par Jedimaster88, 23 novembre 2012 - 10:34 .

[alschemid]

Jedimaster88 wrote...
How do you know that the wardens "aided" Orlais? Is it possible that they just followed their own rule about not to get involved in politics in any way?

There is a dialogue with Riordan that goes like this:

PC: What are you doing here?
R: For the most part, attempting to hold my tongue. I was sent when we received no word from King Cailan as to the outcome at Ostagar. The king had invited all the Wardens of Orlais and their support troops to join him, then... nothing.
PC: How large a force did you bring with you?
R: We had two hundred Wardens and two dozen divisions of cavalry. The first we heard of Loghain's edict was when everyone was turned back at the border. That was when the rumor reached us that Wardens were being blamed for the massacre. We finally decided it was safest to send someone alone, to learn how best to fight the Blight and this regime simultaneously. As a native Fereldan, I volunteered to make the crossing.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

alschemid wrote...

Jedimaster88 wrote...
How do you know that the wardens "aided" Orlais? Is it possible that they just followed their own rule about not to get involved in politics in any way?

There is a dialogue with Riordan that goes like this:

PC: What are you doing here?
R: For the most part, attempting to hold my tongue. I was sent when we received no word from King Cailan as to the outcome at Ostagar. The king had invited all the Wardens of Orlais and their support troops to join him, then... nothing.
PC: How large a force did you bring with you?
R: We had two hundred Wardens and two dozen divisions of cavalry. The first we heard of Loghain's edict was when everyone was turned back at the border. That was when the rumor reached us that Wardens were being blamed for the massacre. We finally decided it was safest to send someone alone, to learn how best to fight the Blight and this regime simultaneously. As a native Fereldan, I volunteered to make the crossing.

That doesn't seem to indicate that they came intending to attack the Ferelden regime. Merely that they realized they now had to if they wanted to get someone capable of killing the archdemon to the front lines.

[TEWR]

Jedimaster88 wrote...

I stand corrected.

Where is this information? I tried to look from dragon age wiki but didnt found any. I propably searched from the wrong place.

Honestly, I don't recall where I saw it. It wasn't a codex, that much I know. So it'd be fair to take what I'm saying with a grain of salt until I actually did find it.

Might be an ancient dev quote from here. Might be something from one of the DA guides. I can't say. I just know I saw it somewhere.

[Monica21]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

alschemid wrote...

Jedimaster88 wrote...
How do you know that the wardens "aided" Orlais? Is it possible that they just followed their own rule about not to get involved in politics in any way?

There is a dialogue with Riordan that goes like this:

PC: What are you doing here?
R: For the most part, attempting to hold my tongue. I was sent when we received no word from King Cailan as to the outcome at Ostagar. The king had invited all the Wardens of Orlais and their support troops to join him, then... nothing.
PC: How large a force did you bring with you?
R: We had two hundred Wardens and two dozen divisions of cavalry. The first we heard of Loghain's edict was when everyone was turned back at the border. That was when the rumor reached us that Wardens were being blamed for the massacre. We finally decided it was safest to send someone alone, to learn how best to fight the Blight and this regime simultaneously. As a native Fereldan, I volunteered to make the crossing.

That doesn't seem to indicate that they came intending to attack the Ferelden regime. Merely that they realized they now had to if they wanted to get someone capable of killing the archdemon to the front lines.

I'm not sure how that means anything but attacking and/or claiming the Ferelden throne. If it was just the Blight, wouldn't Riordan have stopped at that? If they attack Loghain's regency, they're still attacking, and potentially taking down, the throne, reinserting themselves as occupiers.

[TEWR]

Honestly I just took it to mean that the current Wardens wanted to figure out a way to get Ferelden's **** back together and needed to know what Loghain's regime was like before doing that.

Not so much an attack in the sense of "Orlesian ****s!" but in the sense of "This is part of the problem on why the Blight is this bad here, how can we solve it?"

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 24 novembre 2012 - 05:48 .

[Monica21]

Possibly, but sending chevaliers in with the Wardens makes me suspicious. But, I'm suspicious of everything Orlesian.