597 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Eamon was involved in the seemingly scrapped Celene plot. Might have something to do with it.

More then likely, though I can't seem to recall anything from the scrapped idea dealing with Eamon. Only the letter we see in-game.

Filament wrote...

I don't think pointing to cut content is really relevant to interpreting the scene as it is. It's certainly a valid interpretation that Loghain seems to have sinister intentions, and because that cut content was cut, that does have implications about Loghain's character as an end result, even if it wasn't necessarily intended.

Sure, the interpretation is valid. It's wrong, given Word of God, but it's valid nonetheless. I'm not saying anything to the contrary.

Honestly, Bioware's portrayal of Loghain as the deep character that he is seems to largely have been an accident rather then intentional, since their original ideas would've rendered him as being an actual card-carrying villain who's EVIL.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 31 décembre 2012 - 01:27 .

[Dave of Canada]

Loghain sees the Darkspawn horde, pulls out and saves the lives of everyone under his command. Most people who've been at Ostagar admit this, the battle was lost and they went in unprepared. Afterwards, he returns to Denerim and tries to recruit everyone underneath his banner to help hold the border from Orlais and fight the Darkspawn Horde.

Unfortunately, the nobility decide to complain about his claim and rise up against him in and wage a civil war. Loghain's forces are divided between dealing with Darkspawn and the civil war. Up until the Landsmeet, everyone's gossip indicates the civil war is going badly for the rebels and Loghain's men will crush all opposition and unite Ferelden underneath his banner.

Meanwhile, he's sent Uldred to recruit the Circle of Magi without Chantry oversight into his army and he's sent envoys to Orzammar. They didn't go according to plan but it does demonstrate he's put some effort into recruiting allies for the Blight, he wouldn't need Orzammar and an unrestricted Circle to secure the border (which he's already done).

In addition to this, he sells elves to supply the kingdom's coffers and pay the expenses of war. Not the most moral thing to do (not that it matters much since no-one cares about elves), yet it's clearly a wise logistical decision when you've got Orlais on your doorstep and Darkspawn crawling across the hills to kill everyone (which also diminishes your resources as you quickly lose ground).

I'd say the biggest problem with Loghain in this situation is that he didn't accept outside help, it's understandable why he doesn't do it but he'd rather let an independent Ferelden burn than allow it to remain (but possibly under Orlesian oppression).

Hell, he's proven right with his fears in Return to Ostagar.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 31 décembre 2012 - 04:03 .

[Savber100]

Murdario wrote...

wow, people are STILL trying to make loghain seem like some misunderstood anti-hero instead of an utterly evil semi-retarded scumbag that he was clearly portrayed as? LOL!

please stop wasting bandwith. im sure there are plenty of imprisoned serial killers in real life who you can write love letters to and subsequently marry.

And you're pretty much the reason why we're stuck with crap antagonists like post-ME3 TIM and Meredith since anything more complex blows your mind. 

It's pity people nowadays see people in such bi-polar fashion where characters have to be either a baby-killer or a shining saint. 

[PaulSX]

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...

I liked the choice of whether or not to recruit Loghain, but I HATED the fact that, no matter how great your relationship was with Alistaire, no matter how diplomatic and fasttalking you were, you couldn't stop him from leaving if you recruited Loghain.

I actually agree with this. A companion character like death hand from Jade Empire is much better than Alistair/Loghain choice. But the thing is DAO's choice fits the character's personality as you really could not believe that a character like Alistair would actually be willing to work with Loghain, the one who indirectly killed his father-figure.  

Back to this topic, I think Cole from the asunder book could be this kind of character if BioWare ever considered writting him into DA:I. 

[Dabrikishaw]

Sure, I'm game.

[Gandalf-the-Fabulous]

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Ostagar being unwinnable was something Xanthos Aeducan picked up when he saw the strength of the Darkspawn engagement and how the soldiers at Ostagar were acting.
[/quote]

Oh this is just rediculous, now we are using your own character's testimony (which you made up with metagame knowledge and explained as "a vibe from the soldiers") as evidence that Ostagar was unwinnable?

Well I got some bad news for you son, guess who else was at Ostagar? Thats right, B. A. Brosca baby (the B. A. stands for BAD ASS) and he saw the battle was totally winnable provided Loghain diddnt betray the king because the Maker appeared to him in a vision when he drank the blood and told him so.

Looks like its Xanthos' word against B.A's and B.A always wins.

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

[quote]Gandalf the Fabulous wrote...

You are going to have to show me your source for that as I can find nothing on the matter of Orlais using the blight to as a pretense to conquer nations nor can I see anything that suggests that the Wardens have assisted Orlais in their conquest, In fact the only thing I can recall is that the Wardens are supposed to be politically neutral.[/quote]

History of the Free Marches, Nevarra, and IIRC the Anderfels.

As for Warden neutrality, they only signed off on that during the Third Blight when nations were refusing to help one another and they had to be the mediators.

That didn't stop Orlais from using Blights to their expansionist advantage, and the Wardens didn't care who was ruling so long as they weren't targeted.

[/quote]

Again SHOW me your source dont just tell me about it, I still see nothing.

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



[quote]You keep saying that the battle at Ostagar was unwinnable but everything I see in the game seems to suggest that it was Loghain's betrayal that caused their defeat[/quote]

Then you weren't paying attention. You can see how far back the Darkspawn horde goes in that screenshot I posted on the previous page.

[/quote]

What you mean this one

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



[/quote]

This is a map that you (or KOP) drew in MS paint and as such isnt an official representation of anything, if we are now using evidence that we create ourselves as proof then feast your eyes on this quote PROVING Loghain's guilt.

[quote]Loghain wrote...
Mwahahaha I the big evil Loghain am the GREETEST, my plan to make Cailan dead worked perfection, now I am going to enslave elves for no apparant raisin!
[/quote]

Said it was written by Loghain so it must be true!

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



[quote]The only thing that suggests it wasnt is Loghain's own testimony (who also claims that part of the reason the battle was lost is because the Grey Wardens betrayed them) and a half a dozen fan theory based on little more than speculation.[/quote]

Read my post on the previous page and you'll understand just why the man felt the Grey Wardens helped Cailan create his own demise.
[/quote]

It was a long post so just point it out for me, all I can see is that you think it was the Warden's fault for not being as forthcomming with information about how they knew it was a blight as they should have been. I hardly see how that can be blamed for the outcome of the battle.


[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



[quote]Pretty sure he used the world "Orlesian" far more than the word "Darkspawn" during the Landsmeet.[/quote]

*ahem*

[quote]TEWR wrote...

I suppose him trying to rally the Landsmeet to unify under his leadership to deal with the Darkspawn immediately after Ostagar was really just him using code words, where "Darkspawn" truly means "Orlesians".[/quote]
[/quote]

Ok I apologise, I must have missread your post.

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



[quote]as it is hardly evidence of how Cailan cocked up the battle[/quote]

Except that it is, because he found tactics and strategy to be boring and was solely focused on glory.



[quote]As I dont believe Loghain ever mentioned how Cailan refused to stick to the plan[/quote]

Explicitly no, but it's incredibly obvious when you see how Cailan ruined the Hammer&Anvil strategy by having his men charge out into the open as opposed to using the walls of Ostagar to protect their left and right flanks.



[quote]ut more evidence that shows that the Dragon Age team also suck as much at depicting realistic medieval battles[/quote]

Not contesting this. They know jack **** about warfare.



[quote]we are going to take that as evidence why dont we also comment on the lack of pikes and horses?[/quote]

Ferelden has horses, actually. The HN can remark upon them and there are some cavalry units in Ferelden's army IIRC.

But they don't have many horses.

[/quote]

I already told you I am not going to debate these points as you are reading far too much into Bioware's inability to depict realistic medieval warfare, if Cailan's actions were truely not a part of Loghain's battle plan then dont you think he would have brought it up in his defense at the landsmeet?


[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



[quote]Tell me again how selling Elves to Tevinter was somehow in the best interests of the safety of Ferelden?[/quote]

Ignoring how from a military standpoint it was unable to be saved during the Blight -- barring a miracle, which is the Warden -- there's the following:

Economically, it was his only option. Had the Circle been allied with him, he could've made use of the Lucrosians and the Formari to raise money for Ferelden's coffers.

But once Wynne opened her fat yap about Ostagar, the Circle refused to support Loghain.

During times of war -- especially civil war -- the treasury will often empty out faster. So it's crucial for Loghain to trade with other nations -- Orzammar and the Free Marches being the two he would interact with.

But he can't do that as Ferelden's only real source of earning goods would be the Circle. With them not on his side, he's left with slavery.

The idea being, I think, that he was forced to sell some people into slavery so that he could save the rest of the nation. He had to sell a few Elves into slavery in order to save the rest of the nation -- other Elves included, as there are other Alienages besides Denerim's.

Additionally, by this time Howe's worked his way into manipulating Loghain's mind. Howe shows absolutely no compassion for the Elves, citing them as "animals needing to be put down". He's a complete monster who does things For the Evulz. So I can't say it's too far-fetched to assume it was originally Howe's idea.

So it's equal parts "last resort" and "Howe's idea". Is it still bad? Of course. Does he bear blame for authorizing it? Yes, and he will say a few times that he's done a lot of things wrong -- even if his intentions were in the right place.

But when you look at everything else, can you understand why he had to do it? For me, yes.

[/quote]

Yet the only reason Loghain gives in game for doing it is "The Alienage sucks and I suppose living as a Tevinter slave cant be worse than living in an Alienage right?". Besides I find it quite hard to believe that Ferelden's only source of income is the Mages tower and slavery, source?

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



[quote]So Eamon would have been to emotionally blinded by the death of Cailan to veiw Loghain's actions rationally yet he will still back a Warden who actively MURDERS his son?[/quote]
Hardly applicable. Connor was an Abomination. He's going to be upset, of course, but he's not going to hold it against the Warden because the Warden actually did do what he/she thought was best and Eamon regrettably understands that.
[/quote]

Yet you also claim that Loghain was only doing what he thought was best as well, so why would Eamon hold a grudge against Loghain for abandonning his nephew in an unwinnable battle and not the Warden for actively MURDERING his only son even when there is still a way to save him without sacrficing anything?

Honestly with all the half cocked excuses you guys have been giving me I am surprised you havent tried to claim Cailan was an abomination as well.

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

[quote]Plaintiff wrote...

declare war on my own countrymen[/quote]

He never declares war on them. He says things that antagonize them and definitely put them off, sure. But he never declares war on them. They geared up for war first and demanded he step down from the Regency, which realistically would've probably resulted in him being tried for high treason against the crown and regicide based on what people believed he did as opposed to Ostagar's truth of the matter.

Which isn't the case. He never betrayed Cailan.

Then he would've been imprisoned and stripped of his titles at best and executed at worst. Then his allies would've launched a war anyway probably.

What he does do is fight the Civil War to try and bring them to line after they've struck the first blow. After they saw fit to rather fight amongst themselves then unify -- even temporarily -- to defeat the Darkspawn and settle matters of politics later.
[/quote]

So what you are suggesting is dispite how suspicious everything looks the nobility should have put all this aside and blindly followed him under the assumption that "Loghain knows best (even when he is clearly wrong about everything)"? You are suggesting that the Nobles should do for Loghain what Loghain clearly couldnt do for the Wardens? Hypocracy anyone?

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
[quote]Plaintiff wrote...

accuse people of crimes I knew they had not committed, and subsequently place bounties on their head.[/quote]


But he didn't know they hadn't committed those crimes.
[/quote]

Nor did he have any proof or reason to believe that they might have committed such crimes, the only reason he has to make such claims is to create a smokescreen in order to hide his own crimes.

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

[quote]Dorrieb wrote...

You're ignoring Loghain's sinister aside toward the camera. It's about as subtle as a brick in screaming 'here is a man planning dastardly deeds'.[/quote]

Sure, it's not subtle at all. But that's simple foreshadowing that ****'s gonna hit the fan in some way or another and is no longer applicable in saying "LOL Loghain's so evil he planned to kill his son-in-law well in advance!" since Loghain, as we see him in-game due to cut ideas, no longer has any reason to do so because he doesn't know of the correspondence between Cailan and Celene.

As it stands, all it happens to be is a foreshadowing remark that has no subtlety. But it has nothing to do with Loghain's actions any longer.
[/quote]

Yet it is still there for no reason other than to make Loghain look evil. It is the same with all of his actions, he poisons Eamon, sells elves into slavery and generally performs all manner of evil actions for no real reason other than to have him fill the role of antagonist. His actions (and the sinister aside) have no reason to be in game other than to show off how evil he is and yet you wonder why we cant take the game seriously when we are told that Loghain was only doing what he thought was right? Contradiction does not = complexity nor does it make for good writing, Loghain was a poorly written mess and it bogles the mind why anyone with at least half a brain would consider him to be well written, but then I guess all it takes these days for a Villain to be considered "well written" is to slap on some "good intentions" no matter how irrelevant they are to the actions the villain performs.

[quote]Savber100 wrote...

The fact that we can debate over Loghain's qualities is proof of his complexity as a character. Try to argue the same about The Illusive Man post-ME3... The qualities of a character comes through the perspectives that one sees him or her.

[/quote]

No it isnt, the fact that these guys have to stretch so far to find reasons for Loghain's actions that fit within the context of his character is only proof of how illogical and poorly written he is. In truth these guys have done far more to try and explain Loghain's actions than the writers ever did.

Modifié par Gandalf-the-Fabulous, 31 décembre 2012 - 12:17 .

[Plaintiff]

Dave of Canada wrote...
Unfortunately, the nobility decide to complain about his claim and rise up against him in and wage a civil war.

Rightfully so. Loghain's claim is illegitimate, and if he'd left Anora to act in her capacity as a legit monarch, which the people would've likely accepted, he wouldn't be haivng this problem.

Loghain's forces are divided between dealing with Darkspawn and the civil war. Up until the Landsmeet, everyone's gossip indicates the civil war is going badly for the rebels and Loghain's men will crush all opposition and unite Ferelden underneath his banner.

Divided how? Where is it shown that Loghain is devoting more than a token effort to defeating the Darkspawn? He doesn't even believe that they are true threat. He stubbornly refuses to accept the possibility of a Blight, even though the situation clearly matches the criteria of every previous Blight.

Meanwhile, he's sent Uldred to recruit the Circle of Magi without Chantry oversight into his army and he's sent envoys to Orzammar. They didn't go according to plan but it does demonstrate he's put some effort into recruiting allies for the Blight, he wouldn't need Orzammar and an unrestricted Circle to secure the border (which he's already done).

You don't get praise for "effort". His deal with Uldred and the selection of his Orzammar delegate prove only that he is an astoundingly poor judge of character and lacks even the barest modicum of tact.

In addition to this, he sells elves to supply the kingdom's coffers and pay the expenses of war. Not the most moral thing to do (not that it matters much since no-one cares about elves), yet it's clearly a wise logistical decision when you've got Orlais on your doorstep and Darkspawn crawling across the hills to kill everyone (which also diminishes your resources as you quickly lose ground).

It is not a "wise logistical decision" to reduce the number of able-bodied citizens under your command. What is he going to spend that money on? Training soldiers that don't exist? Buying equipment to be worn by nobody? Ferelden doesn't need money. After the heavy losses at Ostagar, it needs every arm that can hold a weapon. There is no way to justify this action as tactically sound.

I'd say the biggest problem with Loghain in this situation is that he didn't accept outside help, it's understandable why he doesn't do it but he'd rather let an independent Ferelden burn than allow it to remain (but possibly under Orlesian oppression).

Hell, he's proven right with his fears in Return to Ostagar.

Unless Cailan and Celene were using a secret code that exists outside of Loghains's paranoid mind, the mere existence of correspondance between the two is not evidence of an invasion. If anything, it suggests diplomatic relations between the two nations were improving, before Loghain ****ed it all up with his astounding racism.

Even if there were any evidence of an invasion, which there wasn't, Ferelden clearly has more pressing problems. If the Orlesians helped end the Blight and then refused to leave, that can be dealt with later, once there is no longer any danger of the country being reduced to a twisted blightland. Orlesian occupation is only a problem if the Orlesians behave badly, anyway. The nationality of the reigning monarch doesn't matter; what people should be concerned with is tyrannical despotism, which, as Loghain himself demonstrates, is not solely the domain of the Orlesian empire.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 31 décembre 2012 - 01:08 .

[New Display Name]

I don't think Loghain is a good example of a villain you can easily hate or sympathize for. Hate yes, you get so little of his background and the sheer bulk of the interactions with him are cold at best.

[HiroVoid]

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...
Well I got some bad news for you son, guess who else was at Ostagar? Thats right, B. A. Brosca baby (the B. A. stands for BAD ASS) and he saw the battle was totally winnable provided Loghain diddnt betray the king because the Maker appeared to him in a vision when he drank the blood and told him so.

Looks like its Xanthos' word against B.A's and B.A always wins.

That's where you're wrong, and you've obviously not watched enough Gargoyles.  Xanatos always wins.  ....Oh wait.  We're talking about Xanthos?  Well, he still wins by the default of being a dwarf.  Is your character a dwarf?

[Gandalf-the-Fabulous]

HiroVoid wrote...

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...
Well I got some bad news for you son, guess who else was at Ostagar? Thats right, B. A. Brosca baby (the B. A. stands for BAD ASS) and he saw the battle was totally winnable provided Loghain diddnt betray the king because the Maker appeared to him in a vision when he drank the blood and told him so.

Looks like its Xanthos' word against B.A's and B.A always wins.

That's where you're wrong, and you've obviously not watched enough Gargoyles.  Xanatos always wins.  ....Oh wait.  We're talking about Xanthos?  Well, he still wins by the default of being a dwarf.  Is your character a dwarf?

Of course.

[Dorrieb]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Sure, it's not subtle at all. But that's simple foreshadowing that ****'s gonna hit the fan in some way or another and is no longer applicable in saying "LOL Loghain's so evil he planned to kill his son-in-law well in advance!" since Loghain, as we see him in-game due to cut ideas, no longer has any reason to do so because he doesn't know of the correspondence between Cailan and Celene.

Of course he had a reason. Cailan wanted to bring in the Orlesians to help. Loghain was convinced that it was all an Orlesian plot to invade Ferelden. He tried to talk Cailan out of it, but since Cailan would not be talked out of it, he did the only thing he could think of to prevent it.

The tone of his voice, the look in his eyes, and his body language all imply sinister intent. It wouldn't be there if it weren't meant to cue you in that he is a villain.

Except David Gaider has said Howe did that on his own, of his own volition, with no backing from Loghain. Loghain did not have any connection to Howe prior to Ostagar. Loghain is innocent of the Cousland's murder at Howe's hands...

That makes no sense. It wouldn't have worked if Cailan had been king. The only way Howe could have gotten away with invading Highever is if his actions were legitimised by the Throne, and the only reason for him to expect the Throne's support is if he had already made a deal with Loghain, and known in advance that Loghain would be ruling instead of Cailan. Otherwise what was his plan? Go before the King and the Bannorn and say 'Hey, everyone! Yeah, I killed the Couslands and took over their lands. We're all cool with that, yeah? Oh yes, and they were traitors, trust me!'

And it's astonishing how people are willing to say "Loghain caused the Civil War" when the friggin' Bannorn were the first to make accusations and the first to gear up for civil war, when they weren't at Ostagar. God, the hypocrisy...

They weren't but we were. Their accusations are right on the money, and Loghain is in fact lying his arse off.

Loghain had the antidote.

*Could really have been anything from allergies to a natural sickness that only made it easier for the poison to take effect, and is not necessarily indicative of Eamon having been poisoned at that point in time.

So Eamon wasn't poisoned at the time, it was just allergies, or something he ate, and Loghain had the antidote so it's okay that he had him poisoned anyway? You're reeeally reaching here. Keep in mind that you're not defending him in a court of law where reasonable doubt is enough to acquit based on the principle of presumption of innocence. This is a character in a work of fiction in which he was the main antagonist, and who was shown in a villainous light (albeit one with complex motivations).

[Dorrieb]

Faerunner wrote...
Indeed, it's very jarring that, at the Landsmeet, Ser Cauthrien tells a CE Warden: "You have torn Fereldan apart to oppose the very man who ensured you were born into freedom," right after they just witnessed their family being sold into slavery on his orders.

Yes, this a million times! I accidentally used 'Persuade' during that dialogue and she backed down and became unattackable, forcing me to reload and repeat it. I only wanted to hear her admit it, but I had no intention of letting her off the hook!

[Dorrieb]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Loghain sees the Darkspawn horde, pulls out and saves the lives of everyone under his command. Most people who've been at Ostagar admit this,

Who, exactly? Except for Loghain's own men, most people who were at Ostagar ended up either in Fort Drakon or Howe's dungeons, precisely because they would not admit this.

[mmarty]

This type of debate is exactly why Loghain is such a good villain.

[Lintanis]

He just felt chucked in as a bad guy to bulk out the story .  

[Althix]

Loghain: You think so, do you? I knew their names, mage, and where they came from. I knew their families. I do not know how you mages determine the value of things, but they were my men. I know exactly how much I lost that day.

[Addai]

Dorrieb wrote...
The tone of his voice, the look in his eyes, and his body language all imply sinister intent. It wouldn't be there if it weren't meant to cue you in that he is a villain.

That's because audiences are stupid.  The writers admitted they made Loghain into a villain that would be easy to kill.  It's for casual players who just want to feel all-powerful and slay the big bad at the end.  For more subtle players, there's a lot more to the story than this if they want to explore it.

That makes no sense.

Nevertheless it's true.

[Addai]

In Exile wrote...
No, no. His motives are understandable. His actions don't make any sense, even if you start from his own POV. Let's assume that Cailan actually goes with what he says. At Ostagar, he realizes Loghain is right, and retreats (or leaves the GWs to die, or whatever).

Well, suddenly Loghain has already been responsible for executing Teryn Cousland and poisoning Eamon. 

He had nothing to do with the Cousland massacre, and was poisoning Eamon in order to take him out of the equation for a showdown with Cailan over his (Cailan's) dealings with Orlais.  So if Cailan survived, none of that changes except fortuitously another royalist (Bryce) had been taken out in the meantime and Cailan lost a battle.  It leaves Loghain in the political position he was angling for.  He didn't simply want Cailan dead- Anora's authority would have been threatened by that, as we see in the game- he wanted him politically weakened.

Modifié par Addai67, 31 décembre 2012 - 09:41 .

[Monica21]

Addai67 wrote...

Dorrieb wrote...
The tone of his voice, the look in his eyes, and his body language all imply sinister intent. It wouldn't be there if it weren't meant to cue you in that he is a villain.

That's because audiences are stupid.  The writers admitted they made Loghain into a villain that would be easy to kill.  It's for casual players who just want to feel all-powerful and slay the big bad at the end.  For more subtle players, there's a lot more to the story than this if they want to explore it.

That makes no sense.

Nevertheless it's true.

I never got the, "But he had a funny look on his face!" argument. It's ridiculous. He literally has that look on his face nearly the entire game. It's just his Resting Face. "What, angry? No, don't be silly. I was just thinking about dinner."

And I've just kind of been reading this thread and sighing. Kudos to Ethereal for continuing to fight the good fight. However, I'm beginning to find it boring trying to argue in favor of a complex and subtle antagonist to people who want to be spoon fed the bad guy. That's how we got Meredith, who shot lasers out of her eyes in her death throes. C'mon people. We're better than that.

Modifié par Monica21, 01 janvier 2013 - 01:06 .

[Monica21]

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...
Oh this is just rediculous, now we are using your own character's testimony (which you made up with metagame knowledge and explained as "a vibe from the soldiers") as evidence that Ostagar was unwinnable?

Well I got some bad news for you son, guess who else was at Ostagar? Thats right, B. A. Brosca baby (the B. A. stands for BAD ASS) and he saw the battle was totally winnable provided Loghain diddnt betray the king because the Maker appeared to him in a vision when he drank the blood and told him so.

Of course it stands for Bad Ass.

Anyway, did Bad Ass talk to anyone? Listen in on a single conversation other than Cailan telling Duncan how glorious the battle would be? Because Duncan is not as confident as Cailan. He wants to wait for reinforcements. He tells you that. You don't even have to overhear it. One group of soldiers talks about how the scouts are bring back bigger numbers every time. Another (obviously tainted) soldier tells you that you're all going to be slaughtered. There are a lot of clues at Ostagar that the battle will not go well for the Fereldens and none of them have to do with Loghain's retreat.

[In Exile]

Addai67 wrote...
He had nothing to do with the Cousland massacre

That doesn't make sense. It means that Howe is quite literally nuts - he kills Bryce because, what, exactly? There had to have been a plan in motion. Otherwise, he has to know that every single noble in Ferelden would see his head on a pike. There's no way the nobles could condone this kind of Warlord-escque behaviour, and Howe is a coward. There's no way he'd make this ploy without more political support.

and was poisoning Eamon in order to take him out of the equation for a showdown with Cailan over his (Cailan's) dealings with Orlais.

Which only makes it more premeditated.

So if Cailan survived, none of that changes except fortuitously another royalist (Bryce) had been taken out in the meantime and Cailan lost a battle.  It leaves Loghain in the political position he was angling for.  He didn't simply want Cailan dead- Anora's authority would have been threatened by that, as we see in the game- he wanted him politically weakened.

Oh, so he just had a plot to eliminate two of the most prominent members of Ferelden's nobility so that he could consolidate political power in his own person to protect Ferelden from what he believed it's true foes were.

Well, that's certainly a moral and upstanding position.

[Plaintiff]

Monica21 wrote...

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...
Oh this is just rediculous, now we are using your own character's testimony (which you made up with metagame knowledge and explained as "a vibe from the soldiers") as evidence that Ostagar was unwinnable?

Well I got some bad news for you son, guess who else was at Ostagar? Thats right, B. A. Brosca baby (the B. A. stands for BAD ASS) and he saw the battle was totally winnable provided Loghain diddnt betray the king because the Maker appeared to him in a vision when he drank the blood and told him so.

Of course it stands for Bad Ass.

Anyway, did Bad Ass talk to anyone? Listen in on a single conversation other than Cailan telling Duncan how glorious the battle would be? Because Duncan is not as confident as Cailan. He wants to wait for reinforcements. He tells you that. You don't even have to overhear it. One group of soldiers talks about how the scouts are bring back bigger numbers every time. Another (obviously tainted) soldier tells you that you're all going to be slaughtered. There are a lot of clues at Ostagar that the battle will not go well for the Fereldens and none of them have to do with Loghain's retreat.

Cailan did want to wait for reinforcements. From Orlais. Loghain did not.

[Plaintiff]

Addai67 wrote...
He had nothing to do with the Cousland massacre, and was poisoning Eamon in order to take him out of the equation for a showdown with Cailan over his (Cailan's) dealings with Orlais.

Oh, well that makes it all okay!

It's totally sensible and not at all morally bankrupt to poison a fellow nobleman and military leader if he disagrees with you on minor points of policy. Especially during a time of war, when he and his forces are very much needed.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 01 janvier 2013 - 02:20 .