1429 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Archonsg wrote...

Egads! Love this thread, it has been very interesting reading trying to catch what I can when I can at work using my mobile.
Though, you guys should realize that in a society where a duel can decide the outcome of one's fate, it doesn't really matter if Loghain is guilty or not.
Ultimately the victor of the duel decides whether or not he deserves death, which in Alistair's case if you allow him to duel, he doesn't even stop to ask (Hah! For all those who says he's indecisive!) and its off with the traitor's head.
IF you however are left to make the decision, then well, you just have to ask yourself, which is more important to you, (remember, at this point you DO NOT YET KNOW that the only way to kill an Archdemon is to have a warden sacrifice his life) having an extra sword (and you do not know yet that Alistair leave in disgust if you spare Loghain) is worth the pardon or if you can forgive all that he has done to you *personally* Which includes sending assassins, setting up ambushes and smearing your name and naming you falsely a traitor all because he believes that your loyalties and intent are only for the benefit of Orlai even though you are a native Felreldan.

IF you can answer "yes" you can forgive what he has done to you, all the more power to you.

Me, personally, I won the duel, and I'll take off his head if I so feel darn like it. So sue me, or better yet, duel me.

This assumption always cracks me up.  Who says that allowing Loghain to live is a pardon?  He has an extended death sentence, assuming he survives the Joining, which everyone may be secretly hoping he does not.  The fact is, I have a more pressing matter to attend to, that being a Blight.  Killing him then and there, or allowing him to do the Joining is still taking up too much of my time.  The Landsmeet takes up entirely too much of my time.  So I make my decision based on whether or not I need the Achievement.  Yes, you can say you need all the swords you can get, after all, Duncan in the Origins is desperate to bolster the numbers of Grey Wardens to throw at the Blight, and he has at least 3x as many in the Origin as we have at the Landsmeet.

[sethroskull79]

You can strip him of all his stuff. I just wanted to know if anybody knew his stats. I will eventually pick Loghain just to fullfill my curiosity, but Allistair was with you the whole time, so loyalty does play a part for me.

[nos_astra]

Some people like to roleplay that you got to the landsmeet with Alistair near-naked.

[robertthebard]

klarabella wrote...

Some people like to roleplay that you got to the landsmeet with Alistair near-naked.

Just what were you two doing in the back room?

[eschilde]

sethroskull79 wrote...

You can strip him of all his stuff. I just wanted to know if anybody knew his stats. I will eventually pick Loghain just to fullfill my curiosity, but Allistair was with you the whole time, so loyalty does play a part for me.

As I recall, his stats were pretty decent. As a replacement tank for Alistair, Loghain does fine. But, nothing a respec mod can't fix if you don't like how he is. I know you can strip Alistair, but I figure fair warning is fair warning ^^

[eschilde]

klarabella wrote...

Some people like to roleplay that you got to the landsmeet with Alistair near-naked.

Stick him in the noble clothing set you get from Marjolaine ^^ that's roleplayable.

[nos_astra]

eschilde wrote...

klarabella wrote...

Some people like to roleplay that you got to the landsmeet with Alistair near-naked.

Stick him in the noble clothing set you get from Marjolaine ^^ that's roleplayable.

That wouldn't be as much fun as imagining him leaving Ferelden in his underwear, you know.

The ways of the Maker... *handwave*


Edit:

robertthebard wrote...

klarabella wrote...

Some people like to roleplay that you got to the landsmeet with Alistair near-naked.

Just what were you two doing in the back room?../../../images/forum/emoticons/crying.png

PC: Um, nothing... So what about Loghain redeeming himself by fighting at our side?
Alistair: *&$%§o#+!!!
PC: Sure!
Alistair: It's freezing outside! *cries*

Modifié par klarabella, 11 janvier 2010 - 02:59 .

[Archonsg]

robertthebard wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

Egads! Love this thread, it has been very interesting reading trying to catch what I can when I can at work using my mobile.
Though, you guys should realize that in a society where a duel can decide the outcome of one's fate, it doesn't really matter if Loghain is guilty or not.
Ultimately the victor of the duel decides whether or not he deserves death, which in Alistair's case if you allow him to duel, he doesn't even stop to ask (Hah! For all those who says he's indecisive!) and its off with the traitor's head.
IF you however are left to make the decision, then well, you just have to ask yourself, which is more important to you, (remember, at this point you DO NOT YET KNOW that the only way to kill an Archdemon is to have a warden sacrifice his life) having an extra sword (and you do not know yet that Alistair leave in disgust if you spare Loghain) is worth the pardon or if you can forgive all that he has done to you *personally* Which includes sending assassins, setting up ambushes and smearing your name and naming you falsely a traitor all because he believes that your loyalties and intent are only for the benefit of Orlai even though you are a native Felreldan.

IF you can answer "yes" you can forgive what he has done to you, all the more power to you.

Me, personally, I won the duel, and I'll take off his head if I so feel darn like it. So sue me, or better yet, duel me.

This assumption always cracks me up.  Who says that allowing Loghain to live is a pardon?  He has an extended death sentence, assuming he survives the Joining, which everyone may be secretly hoping he does not.  The fact is, I have a more pressing matter to attend to, that being a Blight.  Killing him then and there, or allowing him to do the Joining is still taking up too much of my time.  The Landsmeet takes up entirely too much of my time.  So I make my decision based on whether or not I need the Achievement.  Yes, you can say you need all the swords you can get, after all, Duncan in the Origins is desperate to bolster the numbers of Grey Wardens to throw at the Blight, and he has at least 3x as many in the Origin as we have at the Landsmeet.

Uhh what? Assumption? Pardon?
I think you misunderstood me. 
Let me spell it out simply. By the time you have arrived at the decision whether to spare Loghain or not at the landsmeet, it has in my opinion, *nothing* to do with justice based on evidence of guilt or the lack of. If that was the case, there would not even be a need for a duel. In Fereldan society, you win the duel, Loghain is guilty. End of story. 
What you are then deciding on whether or not to spare him depends on your view of his worth if allowed to live. Let him live if you think you can stomach him and what he has done to you, kill him if you can't. Which is why I mentioned this being a "personal" matter once you have won the duel. There is no "right or wrong" either way you choose.

Modifié par Archonsg, 11 janvier 2010 - 02:54 .

[j_j_m]

outlaworacle wrote...

CAUSE FOR REJOICE FOR THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH ME AND/OR HATE MY STINKING GUTS!!

So, I PM'd Mr. Gaider to see if he could weigh in on this thread and hopefully put the debate to rest. He did not want to get dragged into this thread but he was kind enough to answer the questions I had for him via PM, so here's the skinny. There was more said but this is the most relevant part in regards to whether Loghain and Howe were in cahoots prior, whether Loghain authorized the Cousland murder, and whether he consciously premedidated Cailan's betrayal.

I don't think Loghain had anything to do with the death of the
Couslands. Once it was done, however, there wasn't really anything he
could do -- his alliance with Howe already existed, and the situation
at Ostagar tied his hands. He couldn't get rid of the only powerful
ally he had in his pocket.

I stand corrected. My execution is at 8, party starts at 8:15.

Don't worry, Gaider also said Loghain was planning things before Ostagar. Arl Howe is irrelevant in the big picture. This thread is still about Loghain, and we may have been wrong about Howe, but not about Loghain. With that in mind, this thread is kind of pointless, but let them go on.

[Xandurpein]

eschilde wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

There is simply no reason to believe that Loghain was unable to see the battlefield at a certain time of the battle, yet able to see it later. Either he could see or he didn't. As an excellent commander he must understand the value of seeing the battlefield for himself. It would take a lot to keep him away from watching, even if it was difficult, so if he had a chance he would have watched it all the time.

I disagree with this. A great commander doesn't need to see the battlefield; he needs to have a fluid idea of what the battlefield is likely to look like and have good signals. The reality is, especially in medieval times, a commander might not have the ability to oversee the whole battlefield; that's not something you can really argue, since terrain and conditions (weather, enemy numbers) can always change. Using signals isn't something at all unheard of. 

Whether using the beacon was a good idea is what is questionable, given that he definitely did know there were tunnels leading up to the Tower. He knew it could possibly compromised. Though I seriously doubt that he somehow let the darkspawn in on it, he definitely made a big mistake by not securing it properly.

I'm not sure if if you misunderstand me or not. What I am sying is that IF there was a chance for him to position himself in a way to see the battle for himself he would have done it as much as possible. The only time a Medieval commander had real control of his forces was when he positioned them and when he committed them to attack. As soon as the lines met, the commander had little control of anything. He could still order his reserves in or he could lead his bodyguard and hope that the troops saw roughly where his banner was, but that was it.

The entire battle plan hinged on Loghain sending his "hammer" force to hit the enemy at the right time. I find it inconcievable that an experienced commander like Loghain would not have done his utmost to position himself in a way so he could see the battlefield in person, to see for himself, rather than just trust in the beacon, unless it was physically impossible for him by the layout of the battlefield.

My point was only that either he could see the battlefield and then he ought to have charged at the right time, beacon or no beacon. He was experienced enough for that, OR he couldn't see the battlefield and then he shouldn't have left until he moved into a position where he could see what actually happened on the battlefield before he left. Either way he is at fault. It is simply not believable that he magically became aware of the plight of the "Anvil" force and that it was too late to save them, exactly at the time the beacon was lit, but not before.

[Tirigon]

I have hold a Public trial over Loghain which can be found in the FereldonTV post.
Link here: http://social.biowar.../index/579009/2

There is also a Poll over Loghain´s fate, which can be found HERE: http://social.biowar...952/polls/1141/

Have fun, ladies and Gentlemen.

[Asylumer]

robertthebard wrote...

Yet this point is refuted by Eamon himself in Redcliffe.  If Loghain cannot be stopped, it will be necessary to surrender to him in order to unite Ferelden against the Blight.  This because Alistair doesn't want to be King.

Is this the line you're referring to?

"You have a responsibility, Alistair. Without you, Loghain wins. I would have to support him, for the sake of Ferelden. Is that what you want?"

This sounds like an attempt to get Alistair on board with his plan. Almost everything else I found while searching for that line says that Eamon strongly opposes surrendering to Loghain. He does also imply that surrender may be an option with "I hope it does not come to that. If you are suggesting surrender, consider that he has already sought your death. You think he will spare you, knowing what you know?" but he's also convincing the player to not take that course.

Keep in mind that Eamon also rebels and starts a big fight if your side loses the Landsmeet. Admittedly he's being charged with treason, but the Landsmeet did decide against him. Both he and Loghain are very committed to keeping the other's influence off the throne. How do we know his earlier statements were made in earnest given the lengths he'll go through to oppose Loghain?

... I really wish I read to books at this point. Do they go into detail about Eamon and his relation to Loghain? It would probably help clarify things here.

This would be the easiest way to remove Cailin.  Cailin insisted on being on the front lines, after all.  If any of his men heard this discussion, and survived, such as Wynne, for example, it would give him plausible deniability, and allow him to make the comment he makes to Anora when she straight out asks if he killed Cailin, which was;  "Cailin's death was his own doing".  Cailin did indeed insist on being on the front lines, despite Loghain attempting to talk him out of it.

And why did he attempt to talk Cailan out of it? If Cailan were nowhere near the front lines, Loghain having a plot to kill him would be no less plausible than killing him in a way that didn't threaten the army. Hiring assassins or otherwise making Cailan's death look like it wasn't his fault would be easy. The Landsmeet and presence of the press gangs is strong evidence that the loss at Ostagar took its toll on Ferelden's security. Loghain would be risking much, while sacrificing the son of the man he revered, to do such a thing.

Is that within Loghain's character?

He didn't scew up, as far as his plan was concerned, other than Flemeth saving the two Grey Wardens at the Tower of Ishal, his plan was a booming success.  He killed Cailin, and almost killed all the Grey Wardens in Ferelden.  This after turning Orlesian forces back at the border.  So, no Orlesians are coming, and no "Orlesian spy Grey Wardens" in Ferelden either.  Yet he's not insane?  None of my PC's are Orlesian.

The Grey Wardens only recently returned to Ferelden after they've been exiled for "treason." Most of the Wardens you see seem to be from Orlais or at least living there until recently, hence he thinks of the Wardens as an Orlesian organization. It is not unheard of for spies to be recruited from the local population.

[eschilde]

Xandurpein wrote...

eschilde wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

There is simply no reason to believe that Loghain was unable to see the battlefield at a certain time of the battle, yet able to see it later. Either he could see or he didn't. As an excellent commander he must understand the value of seeing the battlefield for himself. It would take a lot to keep him away from watching, even if it was difficult, so if he had a chance he would have watched it all the time.

I disagree with this. A great commander doesn't need to see the battlefield; he needs to have a fluid idea of what the battlefield is likely to look like and have good signals. The reality is, especially in medieval times, a commander might not have the ability to oversee the whole battlefield; that's not something you can really argue, since terrain and conditions (weather, enemy numbers) can always change. Using signals isn't something at all unheard of. 

Whether using the beacon was a good idea is what is questionable, given that he definitely did know there were tunnels leading up to the Tower. He knew it could possibly compromised. Though I seriously doubt that he somehow let the darkspawn in on it, he definitely made a big mistake by not securing it properly.

I'm not sure if if you misunderstand me or not. What I am sying is that IF there was a chance for him to position himself in a way to see the battle for himself he would have done it as much as possible. The only time a Medieval commander had real control of his forces was when he positioned them and when he committed them to attack. As soon as the lines met, the commander had little control of anything. He could still order his reserves in or he could lead his bodyguard and hope that the troops saw roughly where his banner was, but that was it.

The entire battle plan hinged on Loghain sending his "hammer" force to hit the enemy at the right time. I find it inconcievable that an experienced commander like Loghain would not have done his utmost to position himself in a way so he could see the battlefield in person, to see for himself, rather than just trust in the beacon, unless it was physically impossible for him by the layout of the battlefield.

My point was only that either he could see the battlefield and then he ought to have charged at the right time, beacon or no beacon. He was experienced enough for that, OR he couldn't see the battlefield and then he shouldn't have left until he moved into a position where he could see what actually happened on the battlefield before he left. Either way he is at fault. It is simply not believable that he magically became aware of the plight of the "Anvil" force and that it was too late to save them, exactly at the time the beacon was lit, but not before.

He is at fault, yes, because his plan failed. I was not trying to imply he magically knew anything, only that I would guess that an unreasonable amount of time had passed before the lighting of the beacon, at which point he needed to make a decision.

Edit: That does not mean he had some supernatural awareness. It is that he may have logically thought that the "Anvil" couldn't have lasted that long. As for why he waited for the actual lighting of the beacon, this was the point where he was forced to make a decision. He either had to charge, or leave, because sitting there doing nothing would be the worst out of the three options. Again, we can only guess his logical process if we assume he didn't do it on purpose; I'm only suggesting a scenario that makes sense, not necessarily that this is what happened.

Given that the charge was coming from cover, he has no way to observe the battlefield. (I am assuming that this is true, and that was not somehow able to see the battlefield.) Hence the beacon. Which leads back to, maybe he didn't charge when he saw the beacon because an unreasonable amount of time passed.

My interpretation of your argument is, "Why didn't Loghain sit atop the Tower of Ishal and light the beacon himself?" There can be any number of reasons (he wants his troops to have high morale, so he's leading them himself; or maybe he doesn't trust another commander to do it or thinks he is the best possible leader of the flank for this; or he doesn't want to appear cowardly when Cailin is going to be on the front lines, etc.) he would want to lead the charge himself rather than sitting in the Tower.

From the wiki:
Morrigan: You are much taller than I expected.
Loghain: Am I? You expected me to be short?
Morrigan: Well, you are also younger than I imagined. Great generals are supposed to be old men who sit far from the battlefield.
Loghain: I have never been, nor hope to be, a great general, then.
Morrigan: No? I suppose that explains your loss at Ostagar, then.[/list]
I don't know Loghain's history from the books, but judging by this conversation he's never been the kind of person that sits away from the battlefield and observes. You don't need to sit on top of a mountain and watch what happens in realtime to plan it. The best armies have divisions with good leaders who can react to the situation (at least, that is what I'm assuming, I've never commanded a real army) which is another reason why Loghain might want to lead the charge himself. 

Modifié par eschilde, 11 janvier 2010 - 03:31 .

[Xandurpein]

eschilde wrote...
I don't know Loghain's history from the books, but judging by this conversation he's never been the kind of person that sits away from the battlefield and observes. You don't need to sit on top of a mountain and watch what happens in realtime to plan it. The best armies have divisions with good leaders who can react to the situation (at least, that is what I'm assuming, I've never commanded a real army) which is another reason why Loghain might want to lead the charge himself. 

I expected to see him sit on top of the ridge observing the battlefield and at the right time wave his troops waiting on the reverse slope behind him to come after him as he charges down.

[eschilde]

@Xandurpein

What ridge are you talking about? I don't know, there's no proper map of Ostagar so you can't really tell. Judging by the cut scene, from where they're charging they can only see the top of the Tower. I didn't get the impression there _was_ a place for him to sit on a ridge and signal his men.

[KnightofPhoenix]

eschilde wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

So if anyone can provide me an explanation as to why Loghain waited for the beacon to be lit, if he supposeedly never planned to join the battle.  

This is also something strange, but I've theorized that Loghain didn't decide his course of action until actually seeing the beacon. It's feasible that he didn't intend to pull out, but given the amount of time he spent waiting for the beacon (3 full floors of fighting darkspawn for the Wardens, which could easily take maybe a couple of hours), he may also have been on edge trying to decide whether or not he should go. The beacon was the point where he had to make a tough decision. I don't want to really analyze the cut scene, since expressions and tones of voices can be open to interpretation, but it does seem like there's a little bit of hesitation when he says, "Sound.. the retreat." 

Yes that's how I interpreted it as well. I think Loghain decided to retreat right at that moment, but was possibly entertaining the thought before.

Of course, one can argue that it doesn't matter whether he planned it or not, he still committed treachery. Which is a valid position to take. But it's treachery against the King and not against Ferelden. Had Cailan been smart, much of this could have been avoided. A monarchy, especially like the one in Ferelden, is as good as its king. If it has a bad king (which it did), then the entire system collapses. So we have to understand the context that Loghain is in. It was a system that was bound to collapse because of Cailan's idiocy.
No king in his right mind plays the bait in tactics and fights in the frontlines when victory is not assured. And that's what Loghain insisted that Cailan does not do.
  

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 janvier 2010 - 04:05 .

[eschilde]

@KnightofPhoenix

I'm not sure that it can be considered treachery if he didn't plan the battle to kill Cailin. Treachery isn't making a mistake in a battleplan or pulling your troops from an unwinnable battle, it's purposely acting against the interests of your state. That's why whether or not he intended to kill Cailin can play a big role in how you decide to deal justice to his character. It's also why these threads tend to span a lot of pages.

Cailin's being on the front lines was stupid, yes. Loghain's battleplan was flawed, yes. But whether he was guilty of treachery is up to interpretation. Plenty of people think that Loghain was a traitor right from the beginning, whatever his reasons were, but logically, there's plenty to suggest he didn't start acting against the interests of Fereldan until he forced Anora to appoint him regent.

[KnightofPhoenix]

@ eschilde, I agree with you entirely.

but even appointing himself regent wasn't necessarily betrayal. If he plotted a coup d'etat and removed the Queen, it would have been one 100%. But whether appointing hiself regent is betrayal or not is debatable. But what is fact that he wasn't efficient at it and he had to be removed from power if Ferelden had any chance to defeat the darkspawn.



And on an interesting note, few remember that the Warden himself / herself can plot a Coup d'Etat against the landsmeet and decide the fate of the monarchy all by himself / herself. But that would be considered ok because the Warden would have won.

[robertthebard]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

@ eschilde, I agree with you entirely.
but even appointing himself regent wasn't necessarily betrayal. If he plotted a coup d'etat and removed the Queen, it would have been one 100%. But whether appointing hiself regent is betrayal or not is debatable. But what is fact that he wasn't efficient at it and he had to be removed from power if Ferelden had any chance to defeat the darkspawn.

And on an interesting note, few remember that the Warden himself / herself can plot a Coup d'Etat against the landsmeet and decide the fate of the monarchy all by himself / herself. But that would be considered ok because the Warden would have won.

The PC wins the right to do that when they win the duel.  Conditions of the duel:  Fight until one party yields, and we follow the winner.  Pretty simple there.  You win the duel, the Landsmeet follows your decisions.  There can be no coup when you are supported by all the represented government.  At this point, even Loghain's lone supporter will follow you.

[SandiKay0]

@Asylumer



Read the books. There is not much about Arl Eamon in the Stolen Throne becuase he is a child and his father sent him somewhere safe. What you do get in the Stolen Throne is an inside veiw of the character of Loghain, Maric, and Rowen. You will get your hero worship with Loghain, becuase he is a hero here. But you will also be able to see his faults. It was well written in my opinion.



In the Calling you learn about the Grey Wardens. But you also learn about how King Maric feels after his Queen Rowan passed, and that Loghian has changed.



Read them and then you will see how badly he really did betray King Maric and Ferelden by allowing Cailin to die at Ostagar. After you read those books the picture gets much clearer why everyone is so shocked at his choices in the game.

[David Gaider]

I haven't read this entire thread, so forgive me for offering some input on something with incomplete knowledge, but my impression is that there is a question about Loghain's intentions prior to Ostagar? If so, I can shed some light on what my thoughts regarding it are. You can take them for what it's worth -- if there's no evidence of something in the game it's debateable whether that can be taken as truth, after all.

In my mind, Loghain did not go to Ostagar expecting to walk away from the battle. It was clear, however, that he and Cailan were already having profound disagreements -- mainly centering on Cailan's overtures to Orlais. Loghain was obviously moving to confront Cailan in some way, undercutting his access to allies and so forth. But did Loghain plan on killing Cailan? No, I don't think that. I think he was doing what Loghain does, and trying to ensure that when that moment of confrontation with Cailan came the battle was already won.

That said, he had been fighting the darkspawn for some time in the south with Cailan there, and had already seen what Cailan was capable of. I think he made preparations prior to that last battle for the possibility that he would have to walk away. He once made a promise to Maric that he would never allow one man to be more important than the Kingdom -- and in his eyes Cailan was recklessly endangering both himself and his kingdom. Whether that error in judgement condemns him right there is up to you.

There is also the matter of his association with Arl Howe, someone Loghain evidences great distaste for -- but politics makes for strange bedfellows, as they say. In my mind, Loghain always thought that Howe was an ally completely under his control and was probably never able to admit even to himself how much Howe was able to manipulate him. Howe acted on a great number of things without Loghain's involvement or approval, but by then the two were already in bed together -- Loghain was committed, as it were, and after Ostagar doubly so. For all his faults, Loghain is not a man to waver once a decision is made -- good or bad. The only reason he gives up, in the end, is because he sees that there is someone else beside himself who can save Ferelden, someone who hasn't made the mistakes he has. The burden does not rest entirely on his shoulders -- which, yes, is how he feels.

Hope that makes sense, although I understand the topic of conversation here has gone in a lot of different directions.

[AndreaDraco]

But what about the poisoning of Arl Eamon through Jowan? Wasn't this decided and accomplished before Ostagar? And, while we're at it, I'm completely wrong in thinking that Loghain and - especially - Uldred had a say in the Tower of Ishal being swamped by darkspwan? I don't why, but it always strikes me as odd that Uldred proposed to use the mages for light the beacon and that the beacon was the signal Loghain was waiting to go away.

[eschilde]

@KnightofPhoenix
Well, I'm not sure of the conditions where a regency is allowed in Fereldan. Generally speaking, in history, a regent is selected when "the ruler is a minor, not present, or debilitated" (from Wikipedia), none of which apply in this case. There is also the condition, "may also be elected to rule during the interregnum when the royal line has died out." While this does apply (since Alistair's existence is unknown to most except Loghain, Anora, Eamon and Teagan, apparently) it would be the Bannorn who elect a regent, who probably wouldn't be Loghain.

If Fereldan follows these kinds of rules, Loghain taking the regency probably is illegal/treasonous. But what I intended to say was that, his actions against the state were a result of taking the regency (the likelihood of civil war being one) not the act itself.

Edit: Holy crap, the word of DG actually supports my POV this time! Excuse me while I do my happy dance XD

Modifié par eschilde, 11 janvier 2010 - 04:36 .

[T1l]

AndreaDraco wrote...

But what about the poisoning of Arl Eamon through Jowan? Wasn't this decided and accomplished before Ostagar? And, while we're at it, I'm completely wrong in thinking that Loghain and - especially - Uldred had a say in the Tower of Ishal being swamped by darkspwan? I don't why, but it always strikes me as odd that Uldred proposed to use the mages for light the beacon and that the beacon was the signal Loghain was waiting to go away.

Don't forget sending assassins after the Grey Warden and Alistair and out-lawing them.

Yeah, that Loghain, he's a real stand up guy.

EDIT: As far as I'm concerned, despite his own motivations and best intentions, Loghain is a traitor to the crown and his country. He's the sole instigator of a civil war when his own country, the one he swears to protect, is on its knees. For a General of his stature, he's the very definition of a failure; a once great man who has succumbed to fear; fear from a threat which does not exist. Death was showing him mercy.

Modifié par T1l, 11 janvier 2010 - 04:44 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Thank Mr.Gaider!
That's how I interpretted it as well.

@ Robert
But that's after the Warden resists arrest and resists the decision of the landsmeet and resorts to force.
 
@ Eschilde, yes I see your point. It would have been illegal (and imprudent). But in principl,e it wasn't betraying the country as he wasn't doing this to gain power. He just thought that only he can save Ferelden, which isn't true.