1429 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

[quote]Asylumer wrote...

EDIT: I wonder if this counts as a spoiler title or not. It's somewhat ambiguous and folks who've not yet completed Ostagar may think it refers to Loghain's defense plan.
EDIT2: Hopefully that fixed the format issue.



(because it helps if I put everything together in one place)

Ladies and Gentlemen, I post today in behalf of a maligned man, who's only crime (in regards to this particular case) was to fit into certain stereotypes from fantasy cliche, and do whatever it took to save his country. I speak, of course, of Loghain Mac Tir.



There have been many debates surrounding Loghain and whether or not he intentionally betrayed the King at Ostagar. Yet, if one looks at the facts, this betrayal is impossible without first assuming that Loghain is insane, which is itself incredibly far-fetched for reasons I will cover later in this post.



I will address each of the many arguments against Loghain to show once and for all, why they cannot be true, and why most of them are simply conjecture spurred forward by Protagonist-centric bigotry.



1. Was Arl Eamon poisoned before or after the battle?



This is one of the most oft repeated reasons for why Loghain is guilty. In Lothering, the player encounters a knight of Redcliffe by the name of Ser Donall. When probed by the PC, this man worriedly expresses concerns that Loghain had poisoned Eamon before the King died.



However, this testimony is clearly impossible when we put together what we know about the incident.



One need only look at the circumstances surrounding the flight of Jowan to realize Ser Donall may have been sneaking into the Templar lyrium stash.



The Facts:



1. In both the Human Noble and the Mage Origins, we learn from Duncan that the King is AT Ostagar.[/quote]

We know the King is at Ostagar.  For all we know, and nothing is stated to the contrary, Loghain arrived shortly before we do.  There is not enough here to give a jury reasonable doubt.

[quote]2. We also know that Loghain is the general of the army and the reason many think they've been successful in the battles they've had so far -- 2 before the player arrives.[/quote]

Actually, it's several battles, which implies three, as two would be a couple.  Your fact here isn't enough to cause reasonable doubt.

[quote]3. Jowan escapes the Circle tower right before the player sets off with Duncan.
4. Duncan constantly expresses a need to hurry back to Ostagar.
5. From Jowan's own testimony, when he was captured he was sent directly to Denerim to await execution. He remains there until Loghain shows up to give him the offer.
6. Jowan required not only time to travel to Redcliffe, but also had time to set himself up as Connors tutor and poison Arl Eamon.[/quote]

Yet we know that the Arl was indeed ill prior to Ostagar.  We know this from both Ser Donall, and from conversations inside the castle once we get in, and we have a confession from Jowan, which he holds to right up to accepting a death sentence from Eamon.  Again, not enough to suggest reasonable doubt.

[quote]Ser Donall's claim is preposterous. How would Loghain have been commanding the armies, butting heads with Cailan (who was definitely at Ostagar), AND setting up his plot with Jowan, yet somehow reaches Ostagar in advance of the PC and Duncan who is insistent that they hurry to Ostagar? Even if Loghain were hiding all the horses in Ferelden for personal use, that'd be quite a feat.



Ser Donall's testimony is garbage and needs to be discarded.[/quote]

You have not shown any evidence that suggests Loghain was indeed at Ostagar the whole time.  Speculation is not proof.  Argument 1 dismissed.

[quote]2. Loghain sided with Uldred



So what? The only evidence we have that they sided together before the battle is the suspicions of the self-admittedly prejudiced Wynne. That is not evidence at all. It's horrifying that people even use that as proof of Loghain's wrongdoing.



What we do know is that Loghain made an alliance with Uldred in hopes that he'd have Ferelden's best weapon at his side. Uldred first tried to peacefully convince the council to join Loghain, and then Wynne showed up. At that point she was rather convinced that Loghain betrayed the King at Ostagar (something I'll show she dropped later). Unfortunately here we only have the testimony of the half-asleep Niall, who displayed the virtues of the Isolationist fraternity by ignoring the rest of the world. What he does seem to recall vaguely is that Uldred started making what he thought excuses for Loghain's actions, and only after Uldred unleashed an attack on the room did he wake up from his day-dreaming. We already know that Uldred was a vocal proponent of mage freedoms and given how many Blood Mages he had on his side, it's likely that he already had supporters waiting for his signal. The battle turned against Uldred and in a panic he summoned the pride demon.



... yet none of that involved Loghain. All we know is that Loghain made an alliance with Uldred to gain the support of the mages, before or after the battle is not known... it's pure conjecture to state for a fact they made their alliance beforehand, and rather underhanded to use an assumption, Loghain's insanity, as proof for it.[/quote]

Guilt by association.  Rather than prove his innocence, you have indeed shown his involvement, even though Uldred undoubtably use methods outside of what Loghain anticipated.  I find that Loghain is indeed innocent of the Abominations, but is guilty of conspiring with Uldred. 

[quote]3. Slavery



A terrible thing, but thankfully only the most absurd posters use it as evidence against Loghain. It doesn't matter whether Loghain betrayed Cailan or not, whether he was insane or not, we know he'd have done this.



This is a real crime that Loghain has committed. He did it to save Ferelden, but it was a crime.[/quote]

The fact that he did this to fund a civil war that results not from circumstances at Ostagar, but from consequences of his seizing the throne as regent, instead of simply taking control of the armies means that he is indeed trying to cover something up.


[quote]4. The Murder of the Couslands



Why do people involve Loghain in this at all? We know that Howe is a very ambitious man who believes he deserves a lot more. There is a war and the normal defenses of Highever are gone on campaign.



That was the perfect time for Howe to strike. He could eliminate the Cousland family and tell the King whatever story he liked. The only indication that Loghain might be involved in their deaths is an interpretation of Howe's line to the Human Noble, and it's rather a stretch to assume Howe's talk-down must have pointed towards the family murder and not how Loghain wanted to eliminate the PC, "last" of the Couslands. It could just as easily refer to the assassins Howe urged Loghain to hire, so that's nothing definite which we can use to ascribe guilt.[/quote]

Given Loghain's hatred of all that is Orlesian, and Cousland's known friendship with Orlais, it makes perfect sense, and with Howe's stating that he has proof that Cousland was indeed conspiring with Orlais would give Loghain cause to order the coup.  If he did not order the coup, he was aware of it, and took no action against Howe, other than also awarding him the Arling of Denerim, a post he did not hold until after the events of Ostagar.
[quote]
5. The Battle of Ostagar



And we finally return to the scene of the "crime", Ostagar itself. Let's go over what we saw during the battle again:



1. The PC and Alistair were chosen to light the beacon due to the King's fascination with Grey Wardens.
2. Cailan insists on fighting on the front lines alongside the Wardens.
3. Loghain urges Cailan to not fight at the front
4. The PC and Alistair are delayed by the Darkspawn from underneath.
5. PC and Alistair miss the signal to light the beacon -- we don't know how long by
6. When the beacon is finally lit, Loghain makes the call to retreat.



This is where many people automatically assume Loghain betrayed the king. They believe he's a madman who despises Orlais, would do anything to stop them, and kills the King because he brought in Cheveliers from Orlais. They never stop to think: "Hey, I took quite a long time to light that beacon, maybe the battle was hopeless when I finally got there?"



But no, they run off the suspicions of Wynne and use the seemingly-villainous cutscene where Loghain tells his men to retreat. They also take their assumptions from arguments 1-4 to conclude that Loghain was a bad man and that was proof of betrayal... which is itself laughable. What people are doing here is exactly how so many false convictions happen in the justice system -- they're so prejudiced against the defendant they believe he'd commit any crime because that's just how bad he is. It's completely ridiculous because their assumptions which brought them to conclude Loghain was a bad guy were also assumptions about his involvement. "Aha! Loghain must have made plans with Uldred before the battle, ergo he planned the betrayal, ergo he must have betrayed Cailan because he was crazy about the Orlesians!"



No, seriously, that's what I've seen argued here. People assume Loghain had a plan with Uldred beforehand, just because he had an alliance we can only confirm was in effect AFTER the battle. That's proof Loghain definitely betrayed Cailan, and he betrayed Cailan because he was insane?



The only thing insane is their logic.



The only evidence that might mean Loghain had done some kind of plotting beforehand, with the poisoning
of Arl Eamon, has been debunked in Argument #1. And even that wouldn't necessarily entail regicide! If Arl Eamon was the one pushing Cailan to do the things Loghain disagreed with, he could try to remove Eamon without killing the King.



How does one make that connection in the first place? They assume Loghain was crazy. They assume Loghain was so crazy about the Orlesians that he'd have killed the King, that he knew there would be a civil war (more about that below), and that he poisoned Eamon in advance.



Too bad for them their argument falls apart here -- If Loghain were truly so crazy that he'd do anything to stop Orlais, he could have killed his own daughter and been crowned King. He could have completely avoided the Civil War from the start. We learn this from one of Loghain's conversations with Shale. A rational decision like that is NOT the hallmark of insanity.



The prosecution also conveniently forgets that sacrificing the army is completely idiotic and that we're talking about the Hero of the Dane, the strategic genius who is the only reason Ferelden is free in the first place. Again, they assume that Loghain must have been crazy to do something so stupid, but that's using their own assumptions to come to a conclusion. It's ridiculous!



Furthermore my opponents like to forget the conversation between Wynne and Loghain where they discuss the battle at Ostagar. Wynne accuses Loghain of betrayal but Loghain shoots back that she is just as guilty of "betrayal" if he is. He remarks that he had no magic to break the Darkspawn ranks. He was clearly thinking about what he could see of the battle. Wynne, a highly opinionated woman, backed down on that point. Why would she back down if she did not think there was something to Loghain's words? Why would a highly opinionated woman also admit in another conversation that she was mistaken about Loghain if she still thought he was guilty of betrayal?



The answer to that is self-evident. Loghain never betrayed Cailan, at least not intentionally.



But Asylumer, you say, if Loghain saw the battlefield, why didn't he charge in when he saw the opportunity?! I respond with: Why have a freakin' beacon in the first place?! The only reason they would even use a beacon in that situation is if they needed a scout to signal the tower for the perfect opportunity, a scout who could see the battlefield in a way Loghain could not. We ourselves could see the Darkspawn horde in the background of the "betrayal" cut-scene. Loghain could see enough of the battle to make his judgment at the time of the lighting. He might not have been in position to spot the perfect moment, but he knows enough of the plan to know when it's impossible to pull off. From his vantage he would've been able to tell that much. Again, if Wynne stuck around long enough to see Loghain's "betrayal", she would've known whether Loghain's assessment was plainly wrong or if he couldn't make an assessment at all from his view. How often does Wynne back off? She's one of the most persistent and intrusive characters in the game. Would she even consider backing down if she didn't think she was wrong?



Here is the complete conversation about Ostagar:[/quote]



[quote]



Loghain: You can stop scowling at me, madam.

Wynne: Did I need your permission? I see.

Loghain: Fine. I confess: It was entirely my idea that Uldred consort with demons. I had a dastardly scheme in which the utter destruction of Ferelden's best weapon would benefit me, personally.

Loghain: Are you satisfied now?

Wynne: Do you think your deal with Uldred was where you earned my contempt? I was at Ostagar. I witnessed Cailan's murder.

Loghain: Such loyalty.

Wynne: What is that supposed to
mean?

Loghain: Did you try to save him, then? My apologies.

Wynne: I was fortunate to escape with my life!

Loghain: So you didn't rush to your king's rescue? I see. Then both of us left the boy to die.

Wynne: I was no general at the head of an army! I could never have reached him!

Loghain: And I had no magic that could break those darkspawn ranks. But perhaps you think I ought to have tried, regardless. No doubt, the lives of mere soldiers are cheap in the eyes of the Circle.

Wynne: And what of all the soldiers who died with their king? Their lives were worth nothing to you.

Loghain: You think so, do you? I knew their names, mage, and where they came from. I knew their families.

Loghain: 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.

[/quote]

This completely ignores the fact that Loghain could not see the battlefield from his position.  If he could see it, then the darkspawn could also see him, and would have attacked him as well.

[quote]
6. Loghain's Madness



This is it. This is the entire assumption that Loghain's guilt depends on. The prosecution accuses Loghain of going off the deep end because of his Orlesian paranoia. This madness is supposed to have driven Loghain into passively murdering Cailan with an elaborate plot, lose his strategic sense and weaken Ferelden by killing most of its army, accuse the Grey Wardens of being Orlesian agents without reason, and to do whatever it takes to keep those Orlesian bastards out of Ferelden.



This accusation is completely baseless. In fact, it has become apparent to me that this trait was tacked onto Loghain to make everything else fit, and used to determine whether Loghain betrayed Cailan in the first place. I ask the prosecution -- WTF. You make an assumption about Loghain's character and try to sledgehammer everything into place? That is intellectually despicable.



Too bad for you, the rational mind can see the holes produced by your forceful measures.



I'll start by retreading old ground. IF Loghain was truly cuckoo about Orlais, why didn't he kill off his daughter and grab the throne? A regent can be removed through the Landsmeet, a King is not so easy to dispose of.




Secondly, there is after the Landsmeet if you spare Loghain. I've seen many people remark that Loghain seems like a completely different person afterwards. Why would that be? Because they were completely wrong about him. Something the prosecution has always failed to explain is why Loghain would go from "total nut-job" to rather reasonable sort of dude after you beat him. An insane person, calmly giving up and letting the player exact judgment?



... yes, VERY INSANE /sarcasm



There is nothing to point towards Loghain being insane, nothing. He hates Orlais, so what? He has reason to. He broods on the throne during cut-scenes? Dude has a lot to think about. He accuses the player of being an Orlesian agent? Well... there's a good reason for that. I'll cover that in my conclusion.[/quote]

Isn't it convenient to get to try to ignore facts presented in game.  The very first dialog you get at the Landsmeet has Loghain going on about how Orlais would take control of Ferelden.  He asks the PC if they will send troops, or rule through the puppet Alistair.  Since we do have this from Loghain's own mouth, it cannot be refuted.
[quote]
7. Word of God



[quote]Irrational conclusion after irrational conclusion has driven the mob against Loghain. Conclusions I've shown above to have no real basis, and only prejudice to lead them. It is no surprise then that they would further leap to false conclusions which fit their prejudice from David Gaider's posts... which admittedly led the players on with rather vague wording.
[/quote]


[quote]David Gaider wrote...



It's interesting. "He will betray you, each time worse than the last." In my mind, the bigger crime for Loghain is that he kill *Rowan's* son -- but Loghain is definitely capable of that kind of blindness when it comes to doing what he thinks is best.[/quote]



Here I will admit a lack of knowledge. I did not read the Stolen Throne/ Calling yet, so I know not *exactly* of what he's talking about... but I do know it's a prophecy and likely from a Swamp Witch (Flemeth?)



A prophecy. Those things which are often vague even when they are true. How did Loghain betray Maric? By passively killing Cailan, or by trying to kill Alistair? Gaider only hints that Loghain may have killed Rowan's son by saying it would be a bigger crime, and leads the reader on by suggesting Loghain could possibly do it.



David Gaider is one sneaky sob.


[quote]You're only going to ever get a better understanding of the why's involved in what Loghain did if you get him in the party and speak to him, but ultimately his decision was based on the fact that he didn't believe this was actually a Blight -- *couldn't* believe it, in fact, because if it was it made the witch's prophecy true and thus everything else she said true as well. Including the betrayals. About half-way through the game he realizes he is wrong, but at that point the die is already cast.[/quote]



Yes... awfully vague about the betrayals Loghain is guilty of. The explanation I give for events in my conclusion is rather key to Loghain's decision. Loghain is paranoid, but not crazy.


[quote]Whether this makes what he did villainous (he had obviously already begun to act against Cailan prior to Ostagar) or misguided and too easily susceptible to Arl Rendon's poisonous words is ultimately up to the player's perception.[/quote]



Again, Gaider is being vague. He had obviously begun to act against Cailan, but in what way? I understand why he's clouding the truth though. An important part of good writing is getting the audience to talk about it and have different views on a subject. But whether intentionally or not, the writing team let slip enough evidence that leaves a single plausible explanation. Perhaps they left hints because they want the player to consider the concepts of justice?



Oh, and if you want a definite Word of God, here's a clincher:



Open the Toolset -> Open the Conversation File "den600_landsmeet.dlg"-> Look at the dialogue where you confront Loghain -> Open the Localization tab and look at comments.



PC: "You were the one who fled the battle and left him to die!"
[Coerlic mocks the PC depending on origin/race]
Loghain: "You goaded him into making the charge! He believed the tales, Warden! He thought that your handful of men would turn the tide for him, strategy and consequences be hanged!



(Comments): Genuinely angry, and grieving just a little for his friend's son. He's rather believe that it was the Warden's fault that Cailan was an idiot than Cailan's fault.



I have a rather smug face as a type this, because my opponents fervently insisted that the Word of God supported them. How about another nail?



(first PC's line must be about Howe)
PC: "What do you know about justice? You left Cailan to die!
Loghain: "Warden, Cailan was Maric's son. Had there been any chance of reaching him at Ostagar, I would have fought to my last breath to save him."



(Comments): He believes this. It's not true, exactly, but he believes it.



Perhaps the prosecution should have thought twice before they ran to the Word of God... because it damns them utterly.[/quote]

How is it exactly damning?  You say he's paranoid, but not crazy.  Crazy is a mental illness, paranoia is also a mental illness.  Paranoid == Crazy.
[quote]
8. My Conclusion



I have just proved that all accusations pointing towards an intentional betrayal by Loghain are, beyond a reasonable doubt, complete garbage. From the start my opposition has maligned Loghain, ironically, by using their own assumptions to make conclusions. This is a travesty that should appall any person who subscribes to modern industrialized nation morality. The people of Ferelden may not know better, but as a player you belong to the modern world where we've rediscovered the Ancient Greek ideal of justice -- an impartial court to determine guilt. To execute Loghain is criminal, it is vigilante justice, and perhaps most importantly, it is done under false presumptions. It is only the player and his allies prejudice that can conclude Loghain was guilty of betraying King Cailan at Ostagar -- the lens of the protagonist clouds our judgment, and only the clarity of reason can show us the truth of our actions.



Was Loghain insane? No. Misguided perhaps, but he is no less guilty than his murderers. The thirst for vengeance overcame their mind and prejudice guided their blades. It... is a very sad thing that we can be so weak to our own emotions, and in their thrall we do horrible things.



Yet Loghain still had a part to play in this travesty, and is guilty of his own mistakes. I shall now give a much more plausible scenario of the events at Ostagar and up until the Landsmeet finale:



1.We know that Cailan and Loghain fought often about the decisions surrounding this battle. Most of Loghain's complaints concerned how much Cailan trusted the Grey Wardens.



2. We know that Loghain did not believe there to be a Blight from David Gaider. It was the only definite part of his post in fact.



3. The Lighting of the Beacon was delayed. It was not the PC's fault, but that's what occurred.




4. Loghain already had reason to distrust the Wardens, and in his paranoia believed them to have deliberately delayed the beacon's lighting. This is where he jumped to a false conclusion himself.



5. When the beacon was lit, he surveyed the battlefield and felt it wasn't possible or worth sacrificing his men at that point. By now he was convinced that the Warden's had lured the king out here for a false Blight and that they were really a part of an Orlesian plot. He took the delayed tower beacon as proof of that, as he couldn't conceive that there would be another reason to not light the tower in time.



6. Believing an Orlesian invasion on the way, he made the decision to salvage all the troops he could, and called the retreat. He may have had some doubts about being able to save the King, but he was not willing to take that risk.



7. He returned to the capital and took immediate measures against the Grey Wardens. He placed a bounty on them and stopped the Warden army from entering. He became Anora's regent and begun making plans for the Civil War that was soon to start.



8. Loghain's recruitment drive angered many of the nobles, who began protesting against Loghain. There was also the old loyalty to Therin blood and they may have taken issue with the commoners who were "usurping the throne."



9. Loghain needs supporters. Howe is an opportunist who recognizes the opening, and gets in good with Loghain. He gets to be Arl of Denerim for his efforts.



10. Loghain discovers Jowan, and recalls Isolde needed a tutor. He seizes upon this opportunity to capture Jowan and use him for his own purposes -- removing Arl Eamon, who he believed would be the most outspoken against him. This is a very ruthless thing to do, but Loghain could convince himself it was necessary... especially if Howe helped convince him. We don't know how much influence Howe had there though.



11. Loghain learns of the PC's survival, and believes the PC may be an Orlesian agent. Howe convinces Loghain to hire assassins. We know he's involved there.



12. Loghain needs money badly. Either he did this alone, or with Howe's insistence. Howe is likely involved given that he is then the Arl of Denerim and dislikes the elves. We don't have enough proof to definitely say if Howe is involved though.



13. The Landsmeet. Loghain confronts the PC. He's still trying to convince himself that the PC is an Orlesian agent, though he probably realizes that the Blight is real by now, and has doubts. When the PC duels him, he gains a newfound respect for the young Warden, and realizes he may have been wrong about the PC. He is ready to accept his death for the mistakes he's made... but he never felt that he betrayed Cailan.



-------------------------------



Would anybody like to challenge the above? It is far more plausible than the "crazy Loghain" theory, given all that we know. Admittedly the Ser Donall story could've been a mistake on the teams part, because they did change around the story quite a bit and such a slip would be easy, but even if Loghain did poison Eamon before the battle it is at best circumstantial evidence pointing towards betrayal with no corroborating evidence to support it. In fact, the other evidence contradicts the idea that Loghain meant to kill Cailan at Ostagar. The view into Loghain's mind shows us that he cared deeply about Cailan, and even tried to not fault the lad for his own foolish actions by blaming the Wardens.



The defense rests.



[/quote]
You should really try harder to build a case.  Yours fell flat when confronted with ingame evidence.

[Dragon Age1103]

5. When the beacon was lit, he surveyed the battlefield and felt it wasn't possible or worth sacrificing his men at that point. By now he was convinced that the Warden's had lured the king out here for a false Blight and that they were really a part of an Orlesian plot. He took the delayed tower beacon as proof of that, as he couldn't conceive that there would be another reason to not light the tower in time.





This entire thing shows he was paranoid almost to the point of insanity. Longhain & Maric both knew battles never or rarely went as planned. In the book loghain mentions this several times.

[Solica]

Break wind as much as you want.
It's so easy really.

Verdict: Guilty. very, very guilty.
Sentence: Death

[Aseya]

Xandurpein wrote...

He doesn't know a Grey Warden must kill the Archdemon. The last blight is 400 years ago and the whole thing why a Grey Warden must kill the Archdemon is a secret. So he could be perfectly justified in believing it was just a piece of legend promoted by the Grey Wardens that only a Grey Warden kan stop the Blight. You aren't told the truth yourself until very late  by Riordan, up until then you only have the legend that the Blight was nearly unstoppable until the Grey Wardens did it. The Legion of Dead have been fighting Darkspawn hordes for hundreds of years wtihout a Grey Warden (except now and then) and more or less holding their own as long as there is no Archdemon.

Well judging by codex entries and various conversations with people I dont think grey wardens part is that unknown - sure you dont klnow the techinicality yourself but Loghian is familiar with Ferelden history far more than an average person and he came in conatct with Grey Wardens before ( The Calling book )

Fact is that greywarden  are needed to kill archdemon is something even King mentions at the meeting before the battle when Duncan mantions they need to consider the posibility of Archdemon appearence.

I know that at that point Loghian doenst believe Duncan but I think his reason for not doing so are personal ( Maric prophecy) and considering his position in Ferelden society it is utterly moronic to utterly discard the posibility especialy considering teh evidence he must have witnessed in the previous battles. Chasing down wardens is burning all bridges - if he is wrong there is nothing that can stand to blight and strategicaly I just can belive he went down that route.

[Dragon Age1103]

Solica wrote...

Break wind as much as you want.
It's so easy really.

Verdict: Guilty. very, very guilty.
Sentence: Death

  I could see killing Loghain if you onyl played Origins if you read The Stolen Throne I do not see how you would want to execute him. loghain was a great man & one hell of an interesting character...too bad fear consumed him for a while.

[Aseya]

Dragon Age1103 wrote...


  I could see killing Loghain if you onyl played Origins if you read The Stolen Throne I do not see how you would want to execute him. loghain was a great man & one hell of an interesting character...too bad fear consumed him for a while.

I 've read the book and I had no problems killing him - his past good deeds dont outweight the suffering and the peril in which he put entire country and nation for very selfish reasons even thoug he claims they were in nation's best interest

[robertthebard]

Dragon Age1103 wrote...

Solica wrote...

Break wind as much as you want.
It's so easy really.

Verdict: Guilty. very, very guilty.
Sentence: Death

  I could see killing Loghain if you onyl played Origins if you read The Stolen Throne I do not see how you would want to execute him. loghain was a great man & one hell of an interesting character...too bad fear consumed him for a while.

He was a great man once.  No longer, however.  His obssession with Orlais is beyond belief.  I cannot comment on the prophecies from the book, having not read them, but from in game, it's obvious that he's lost his mind.  I can, however, still see reasons to not kill him, but most revolve around my dislike of Alistair, and my sense of what justice is.  Dead people do not learn from their mistakes, they are just enabled to not make any more.  Live people, however, once they see how wrong they truly were, must live with what they have done.

[IPerrin]

Dragon Age1103 wrote...

  I could see killing Loghain if you onyl played Origins if you read The Stolen Throne I do not see how you would want to execute him. loghain was a great man & one hell of an interesting character...too bad fear consumed him for a while.

    Maybe my character sees the whole hiring assasins to kill me thing as inexcusable.  Regardless wether or not the arguement about Loghain's high treason is rubbish (he's clearly guilty there as well), there is still the personal attacks. 

[j_j_m]

Further proof Loghain is truly out of it regarding Orlais, listen to Leliana and Loghain party banter.

Modifié par j_j_m, 10 janvier 2010 - 03:49 .

[Bhatair]

I'm not here to argue any points, just to thank you for your well thought out and presented post. My thoughts tend to get scattered and it's nice to see some of them presented in a way that's organized.

That said though, most of my characters just end up killing Loghain anyway (even though I personally don't think he was wrong, did some wrong things perhaps but not wrong in his beliefs.) on emotional grounds, usually vengeance or rage.

[syllogi]

Dragon Age1103 wrote...
  I could see killing Loghain if you onyl played Origins if you read The Stolen Throne I do not see how you would want to execute him. loghain was a great man & one hell of an interesting character...too bad fear consumed him for a while.

The Stolen Throne SPOILERS:

I thought Loghain behaved in a pretty shady way as the book went on, in how he dealt with Katriel, and how he planned the betrayal of the surrendering nobles at the end.  In both instances he used Maric to execute the "guilty" parties, but he was responsible for each, behind the scenes.  It made me extremely wary and less sympathetic towards his character than I had been.  Then in the Calling, he was pretty one dimensional and just angry, there was nothing there to really sympathize with.

Killing Loghain is one of my favorite moments from this game. 

[sesheta255]

May contain SPOILERS.........................





Howe may have killed the Couslands but Loghain was obviously in cahoots with him to the point where Howe was elevated to the position of his foremost advisor as well as being given a number of titles. Bryce Cousland was one of the most powerful nobles in Ferelden (probably 2nd only to Eamon), was a supporter of the king, and probably had a fair sized army. Such a strong royal supporter had to be eliminated before the battle at Ostagar, & Howe was the perfect one to do it, given that he had his own petty reasons as well.



Loghain probably hatched the plot to get rid of Cailan from the first moment that he mentioned sending to Orlais for help. He protested a bit too much about the wardens lighting the beacon instead of his nonexistent or expendible men that were supposed to be doing it, to me it was quite obvious that the beacon was never meant to be lit - Loghain's troops supposedly cleared the tower of darkspawn (which obviously never occured).



The battle plan was Loghain's yet he withdrew instead of flanking the darkspawn as per the plan when they were engaged. Even his most loyal supporter Ser Cathrien admits his part in Cailans death and everything that followed.



Whether he arranged for Eamon to be poisoned before or after Ostagar is irrelevant to me, the fact is that he was behind it, to the point of interfering with the Templars and setting a blood mage free.

I truly believe that when he gives the speech at the Landsmeet about no-one regretting Cailans death more than him (he was Maric's son, my king) that he is actually referring to Maric as his king rather than Cailan. Poor naive Cailan was marked for death the minute he dared to suggest getting help from the Orlesians against the Blight. There is no way that Loghain can justify that his part in the kings death (& the resulting uncertainty amongst the population), subsequent civil war, poisoning of Eamon, and selling Ferelden subjects into slavery during a blight (or very large darkspawn invasion if he truly didn't believe it was a blight) was in the best interests of Ferelden.



I have never been tempted to make him a warden in any of my numerous playthroughs (I agree totally with Alistair on this point). I'll be damned if I'll let him take the final blow on the archdemon, or even just be present, and elevate his hero status even more in the eyes of the people. He doesn't deserve redemption, he has gone too far for that( I never understood how he could become a warden given that the joining required fresh darkspawn blood (easily obtainable probably), archdemon blood (which they didn't have according to Riordan), and a bunch of mages with lyrium to make it all come together - I'm assuming that the joining ritual and the processes involved would be the same as for the PC's joining).

[ejoslin]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Greyshaft1 wrote...

If Loghain truly believed he could not reach the king why does he publically lie and blame the wardens for the kings death?
.

He says that the battle is lost because the Grey Wardens (you!) lit the Beacon to late, which technically could be perfectly true. Of course there are the matter of all the Darkspawn that was in the way, but still...

Just how the darkspawn got to overrun the tower is a big mystery to me, especially as the tower was supposed to be secured. That's one of the big question marks in the game, for me.

Not really a question mark.  A high cunning character (30+) points out that the darkspawn had to know of the plan ahead of time.  

[ejoslin]

sesheta255 wrote...

May contain SPOILERS.........................


Howe may have killed the Couslands but Loghain was obviously in cahoots with him to the point where Howe was elevated to the position of his foremost advisor as well as being given a number of titles. Bryce Cousland was one of the most powerful nobles in Ferelden (probably 2nd only to Eamon), was a supporter of the king, and probably had a fair sized army. Such a strong royal supporter had to be eliminated before the battle at Ostagar, & Howe was the perfect one to do it, given that he had his own petty reasons as well.

Loghain probably hatched the plot to get rid of Cailan from the first moment that he mentioned sending to Orlais for help. He protested a bit too much about the wardens lighting the beacon instead of his nonexistent or expendible men that were supposed to be doing it, to me it was quite obvious that the beacon was never meant to be lit - Loghain's troops supposedly cleared the tower of darkspawn (which obviously never occured).

The battle plan was Loghain's yet he withdrew instead of flanking the darkspawn as per the plan when they were engaged. Even his most loyal supporter Ser Cathrien admits his part in Cailans death and everything that followed.

Whether he arranged for Eamon to be poisoned before or after Ostagar is irrelevant to me, the fact is that he was behind it, to the point of interfering with the Templars and setting a blood mage free.
I truly believe that when he gives the speech at the Landsmeet about no-one regretting Cailans death more than him (he was Maric's son, my king) that he is actually referring to Maric as his king rather than Cailan. Poor naive Cailan was marked for death the minute he dared to suggest getting help from the Orlesians against the Blight. There is no way that Loghain can justify that his part in the kings death (& the resulting uncertainty amongst the population), subsequent civil war, poisoning of Eamon, and selling Ferelden subjects into slavery during a blight (or very large darkspawn invasion if he truly didn't believe it was a blight) was in the best interests of Ferelden.

I have never been tempted to make him a warden in any of my numerous playthroughs (I agree totally with Alistair on this point). I'll be damned if I'll let him take the final blow on the archdemon, or even just be present, and elevate his hero status even more in the eyes of the people. He doesn't deserve redemption, he has gone too far for that( I never understood how he could become a warden given that the joining required fresh darkspawn blood (easily obtainable probably), archdemon blood (which they didn't have according to Riordan), and a bunch of mages with lyrium to make it all come together - I'm assuming that the joining ritual and the processes involved would be the same as for the PC's joining).

Bryce was more powerful than Eamon and in fact, many nobles felt HE should be king, not Cailin according to the codex.

[Xandurpein]

ejoslin wrote...

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Greyshaft1 wrote...

If Loghain truly believed he could not reach the king why does he publically lie and blame the wardens for the kings death?
.

He says that the battle is lost because the Grey Wardens (you!) lit the Beacon to late, which technically could be perfectly true. Of course there are the matter of all the Darkspawn that was in the way, but still...

Just how the darkspawn got to overrun the tower is a big mystery to me, especially as the tower was supposed to be secured. That's one of the big question marks in the game, for me.

Not really a question mark.  A high cunning character (30+) points out that the darkspawn had to know of the plan ahead of time.  

Very interesting. Could you perhaps elaborate on this? When do you get the onversation that allows you to realize this and what exactly is being said?

[Galad22]

I adress few of your points here.



You say that Ser Donalls testimony should be discarded? Why exactly? He has no reasons to lie, he doesn't even believe Loghain has anything to do with Arl eamon falling sick, just points out that it happened before Ostagar. So this is just dumb.



Then you say that Loghain believes Pc purposedly delayed lighting the beacon, this is just as dumb, since our pc was only a packup for lighting the beacon. Loghain had his own mens there whose real job it was.



And even if what you argue would be in anyway true, (which they really aren't) he was still responsible for recicide, cowardice, desertion and treason.



And even if he did everything for Ferelden as you argue, keep in mind that everything he did just went and did things for ferelden that much worse. Ferelden would have been completely destroyed if he had succeeded in his plans because no one could have destroyed arcch demon.



Road to hell is paved with good intentions. And in this case you can really argue if his intentions were any good to begin with.

[prizm123]

doesnt matter, he tried to have me killed, therefore he dies, end of story

[Dragon Age1103]

Aseya wrote...

Dragon Age1103 wrote...


  I could see killing Loghain if you onyl played Origins if you read The Stolen Throne I do not see how you would want to execute him. loghain was a great man & one hell of an interesting character...too bad fear consumed him for a while.

I 've read the book and I had no problems killing him - his past good deeds dont outweight the suffering and the peril in which he put entire country and nation for very selfish reasons even thoug he claims they were in nation's best interest

 He didn't have selfish reasons. He was scared, paranoid..on the brink of insantiy. This man freed Ferelden from Orlais, I think he is entitled to a little forgivenes which he asked for...he certainly didn't desevre to die at the hands of some cry baby templar wannabe bastard child(if you chose that option)

[Asylumer]

The defense re-opens to respond to the few decent points, or at least points that should be addressed.

Fleshsucker wrote...

The prosecution calls its first witness...Ser Cauthrien..(As she walks in with tearful eyes avoiding Logans gaze) I won't tell you about this (don't want to spoil) but its before the Landsmeet and she broke and told everything...A damming testimony towards Logan...

Does Ser Cauthrien have a strategic mind? Does her concern for the King change if Loghain is betraying Cailan or not?

The answer is obviously no, on both counts. She's Loghain's second because of her loyalty (and ridiculous swordarm), not because she's a brilliant commander. She's very confused, sees Loghain doing terrible things, and can be convinced he was going mad at the Landsmeet -- but her beliefs are not proof, and don't corroborate any evidence. They're just opinions.

Chas1024 wrote...

So Loghain is perfectly sane but somehow beleives the Warden's have a plan to kill the King that involves the sacrifice of all their forces in Ferelden.

Why not believe it was a high-risk mission? He knew more Orlesians were coming in. If their "plot" would remove the King and most of the army, wouldn't that be worth it?

Loghain came to a bad conclusion because of his paranoia, but it wasn't completely out there, given what he thought he knew. And because people keep bringing it up... no, paranoid doesn't necessarily mean crazy. Loghain was looking for reasons to be suspicious, but he was given rather good ones. It's not as ridiculous a leap as "ZOMG Cailan brought in Orlais, DIE!!!"

melkathi wrote...

Nowhere do we see him surveying the battlefield as you suggest. He looks at the signal and, without ever taking his gaze from the tower of Ishal, commands Ser Cauthrien to sound the retreat.
So if he had made an informed decission to retreat without having previously planned to do so, he must have done so before the signal was lit. And for that we have no proof. Speculation on both sides.
With all the ruins and trees it is not even certain that he had a good enough view of the battlefield to have a clear picture of how the battle went.

I myself checked the cut-scene before writing my post. Just because he's looking (rather darkly) at the tower when you see him, doesn't mean that he wasn't looking elsewhere before that. And again, why would Wynne not push Loghain if she knew he couldn't see the battle from there? They both seemed to accept that there was a rather large amount of Darkspawn between Loghain and the King.

You go to greta lengths to make clear that there is no proof that Loghain was involved or even aware of Howe's crimes. You are right, there isn't. But now you are involving Howe in Loghain's crimes when there is no proof or even the slightest indication of Howe's involvement.
You make some fair points in your OP, but you are also falling in the same trap as the people you are arguing against.

I made a point to say where we knew Howe was involved, and the places we can only suspect. We know he brought the assassins to Loghain. We do not know if he was involved with the poisoning or the slaves.

I decided to include points where Howe might be involved because Gaider was getting at some influence from the guy. They're possible, but like you noticed, I went out of my way to show which were more likely and which we had no clue on. If I were trying to use the assumption to strengthen my case I wouldn't have pointed out the difference, and nothing is built ontop of them.

Gipp3r wrote...

Even if Loghain had legitimate reasons to retreat from the Ostagar battle, he still left the king to die.

he had an army at his back, could've in theory, swooped in and saved Cailan, yes, suffering huge loses.

But when you have a King, his life is more important than ten thousand men, Loghains job, as a Teyrn and general would be to protect the king at all costs, but he didn't, he left the field, and left the king of Ferelden die.

Oh Loghain certainly may have not been giving it his all there. If he believed an Orlesian threat was on the way he'd be more inclined to ditch Cailan if he worried for Ferelden's liberty. But he didn't betray Cailan intentionally. If you think he should die for that, well, that's up to you.

But you also have no way of knowing whether he'd save Cailan or not. Another poster said that the beacon only lit when Duncan looked up. I can't confirm if that's true right now, but if it is, then it was far too late for Loghain to do anything.

Anybody want to pipe up about that? I myself don't know when the beacon was lit.


Oh, and there's another good response (from Dragon Age1103) that I'm not sure about right now: Why would Loghain decide on a plan that could go wrong so easily? That does give me pause. The only reason I can speculate on at the moment is that Loghain's plan was the first of many that Cailan accepted. From his tone I got the idea that he wasn't too happy with this plan and it was the result of compromise with Cailan's wishes.

It's probably a better line of inquiry to pursue than suspecting that Loghain alerted the hivemind Darkspawn of the tower beforehand... Just saying.

[Dragon Age1103]

robertthebard wrote...

Dragon Age1103 wrote...

Solica wrote...



Break wind as much as you want.

It's so easy really.



Verdict: Guilty. very, very guilty.

Sentence: Death

I could see killing Loghain if you onyl played Origins if you read The Stolen Throne I do not see how you would want to execute him. loghain was a great man & one hell of an interesting character...too bad fear consumed him for a while.

He was a great man once. No longer, however. His obssession with Orlais is beyond belief. I cannot comment on the prophecies from the book, having not read them, but from in game, it's obvious that he's lost his mind. I can, however, still see reasons to not kill him, but most revolve around my dislike of Alistair, and my sense of what justice is. Dead people do not learn from their mistakes, they are just enabled to not make any more. Live people, however, once they see how wrong they truly were, must live with what they have done.

your perspective makes sense to me. Loghain say the error of his ways when he realized your character was stronger than he assumed. "a child wanting to play in the game of war" or how ever he put it. lol. I understand he pushed the brink of insanity due to his growing paranoia of the Orlesians invading but he did so many more good things for Ferelden than bad. He made mistakes but at heart he is a good man. He has a short temper & sometimes starts fights he really shouldn't but he was always good to his people & his country. his heart was just temporarily corrupted by fear.

[Bullets McDeath]

God damn, will this never end? Loghain's men shut down the Tower of Ishal so the beacon would never be lit. That's why he objects to sending the Grey Warden there, and he set into motion the murder of the Couslands literally weeks before Ostagar which meant he had all of this deliberately planned. I'm not going to waste my time disproving you point by point but I cannot belieeeeeeeeeve people get fooled and think he is just misunderstood. He's a complex man with more than one motivation, but he's also evil, selfish, power-hungry and blind to reason.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

Dragon Age1103 wrote...
your perspective makes sense to me. Loghain say the error of his ways when he realized your character was stronger than he assumed. "a child wanting to play in the game of war" or how ever he put it. lol. I understand he pushed the brink of insanity due to his growing paranoia of the Orlesians invading but he did so many more good things for Ferelden than bad. He made mistakes but at heart he is a good man. He has a short temper & sometimes starts fights he really shouldn't but he was always good to his people & his country. his heart was just temporarily corrupted by fear.

Corrupted by fear and a weasel named Howe.

I actually have to wonder whether Howe was still in cahoots with the Orlesians and actually had the blight gone as he probably planned, would've got them back in again after seeing off Loghain.

To quote his dying words..

"I... deserved.... more!"

@Outlaw everyone is entitled to their opinion, if you can't accept that, stay out of a debate.

Modifié par Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien, 10 janvier 2010 - 05:32 .

[Dragon Age1103]

Asylumer wrote...



The defense re-opens to respond to the few decent points, or at least points that should be addressed.

Fleshsucker wrote...



The prosecution calls its first witness...Ser Cauthrien..(As she walks in with tearful eyes avoiding Logans gaze) I won't tell you about this (don't want to spoil) but its before the Landsmeet and she broke and told everything...A damming testimony towards Logan...

Does Ser Cauthrien have a strategic mind? Does her concern for the King change if Loghain is betraying Cailan or not?



The answer is obviously no, on both counts. She's Loghain's second because of her loyalty (and ridiculous swordarm), not because she's a brilliant commander. She's very confused, sees Loghain doing terrible things, and can be convinced he was going mad at the Landsmeet -- but her beliefs are not proof, and don't corroborate any evidence. They're just opinions.

Chas1024 wrote...



So Loghain is perfectly sane but somehow beleives the Warden's have a plan to kill the King that involves the sacrifice of all their forces in Ferelden.

Why not believe it was a high-risk mission? He knew more Orlesians were coming in. If their "plot" would remove the King and most of the army, wouldn't that be worth it?



Loghain came to a bad conclusion because of his paranoia, but it wasn't completely out there, given what he thought he knew. And because people keep bringing it up... no, paranoid doesn't necessarily mean crazy. Loghain was looking for reasons to be suspicious, but he was given rather good ones. It's not as ridiculous a leap as "ZOMG Cailan brought in Orlais, DIE!!!"

melkathi wrote...



Nowhere do we see him surveying the battlefield as you suggest. He looks at the signal and, without ever taking his gaze from the tower of Ishal, commands Ser Cauthrien to sound the retreat.

So if he had made an informed decission to retreat without having previously planned to do so, he must have done so before the signal was lit. And for that we have no proof. Speculation on both sides.

With all the ruins and trees it is not even certain that he had a good enough view of the battlefield to have a clear picture of how the battle went.

I myself checked the cut-scene before writing my post. Just because he's looking (rather darkly) at the tower when you see him, doesn't mean that he wasn't looking elsewhere before that. And again, why would Wynne not push Loghain if she knew he couldn't see the battle from there? They both seemed to accept that there was a rather large amount of Darkspawn between Loghain and the King.

You go to greta lengths to make clear that there is no proof that Loghain was involved or even aware of Howe's crimes. You are right, there isn't. But now you are involving Howe in Loghain's crimes when there is no proof or even the slightest indication of Howe's involvement.

You make some fair points in your OP, but you are also falling in the same trap as the people you are arguing against.

I made a point to say where we knew Howe was involved, and the places we can only suspect. We know he brought the assassins to Loghain. We do not know if he was involved with the poisoning or the slaves.



I decided to include points where Howe might be involved because Gaider was getting at some influence from the guy. They're possible, but like you noticed, I went out of my way to show which were more likely and which we had no clue on. If I were trying to use the assumption to strengthen my case I wouldn't have pointed out the difference, and nothing is built ontop of them.

Gipp3r wrote...



Even if Loghain had legitimate reasons to retreat from the Ostagar battle, he still left the king to die.



he had an army at his back, could've in theory, swooped in and saved Cailan, yes, suffering huge loses.



But when you have a King, his life is more important than ten thousand men, Loghains job, as a Teyrn and general would be to protect the king at all costs, but he didn't, he left the field, and left the king of Ferelden die.

Oh Loghain certainly may have not been giving it his all there. If he believed an Orlesian threat was on the way he'd be more inclined to ditch Cailan if he worried for Ferelden's liberty. But he didn't betray Cailan intentionally. If you think he should die for that, well, that's up to you.



But you also have no way of knowing whether he'd save Cailan or not. Another poster said that the beacon only lit when Duncan looked up. I can't confirm if that's true right now, but if it is, then it was far too late for Loghain to do anything.



Anybody want to pipe up about that? I myself don't know when the beacon was lit.





Oh, and there's another good response (from Dragon Age1103) that I'm not sure about right now: Why would Loghain decide on a plan that could go wrong so easily? That does give me pause. The only reason I can speculate on at the moment is that Loghain's plan was the first of many that Cailan accepted. From his tone I got the idea that he wasn't too happy with this plan and it was the result of compromise with Cailan's wishes.



It's probably a better line of inquiry to pursue than suspecting that Loghain alerted the hivemind Darkspawn of the tower beforehand... Just saying.

Why didn't you address my point that completely destroyed your argument? It was not in his character to leave Calin to die. Some part of him must of felt it necessary to leave Calin to die in order to take up power to save Ferelden from the blight. There may have not even been reason to it, just fear, paranoia & probably close to insanity. He did kill Calin either for power or was too cowardice to save him. Something stopped him though & it was his fault. The battle was not lost, Loghain was lost in fear or a quest for power.



I'm sorry but it is a lot more interesting discussing other points that developed from your thread with the others on here than you. You just seem way past denial in defending loghain. Ignoring tons of evidence. I understand questioning some things or even everything but the people of Ferelden are not fools. It's not as simple as "what if" The facts ARE Loghain failed to protect Calin, he failed to give reasons why he felt the battle was lost, he also failed to prove the Grey Warden's were working with the Orlesians or planning anything else he suspected.

Point being you're looking into it too much, you have no proof at all. The only you have is a bunch of illogical desperate conclusions with no facts or supporting evidence. If he was so confident the battle was hopeless he would of pointed out why. Loghain by nature is extremely stubborn & will rarely turn down a fight. If he does it is not b/c he feels the odds are against him but b/c he is restrained for some reason. The books clearly reveals many aspects of his personality.

Your poorly put together case doesn't reveal anything except that you think loghain is innocent of crimes he clearly committed. I'm not arguing the points like the guard, the mage, Arl Eamon, none of that just that he did kill Calin out of fear or for power he is responsible.

[Dragon Age1103]

outlaworacle wrote...

God damn, will this never end? Loghain's men shut down the Tower of Ishal so the beacon would never be lit. That's why he objects to sending the Grey Warden there, and he set into motion the murder of the Couslands literally weeks before Ostagar which meant he had all of this deliberately planned. I'm not going to waste my time disproving you point by point but I cannot belieeeeeeeeeve people get fooled and think he is just misunderstood. He's a complex man with more than one motivation, but he's also evil, selfish, power-hungry and blind to reason.

    I would like proof please?! I'm not saying he didn't plan any of this or that he did but i am curious of your proof if you'd be so kind to answer. Loghain is not evil. He is angry, short tempered, probably still heart broken over the death of his father but not evil. He was power hungry & paranoid beyond belief but not evil, I am sorry but I can not agree at all. Forgive me if I am asking stupid questiosn but I would really like to know your points or facts. I'm lacking a lot of sleep so maybe I'm asking for stupid obvious facts but please indulge me!!!!

[Dragon Age1103]

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien wrote...

Dragon Age1103 wrote...
your perspective makes sense to me. Loghain say the error of his ways when he realized your character was stronger than he assumed. "a child wanting to play in the game of war" or how ever he put it. lol. I understand he pushed the brink of insanity due to his growing paranoia of the Orlesians invading but he did so many more good things for Ferelden than bad. He made mistakes but at heart he is a good man. He has a short temper & sometimes starts fights he really shouldn't but he was always good to his people & his country. his heart was just temporarily corrupted by fear.

Corrupted by fear and a weasel named Howe.

I actually have to wonder whether Howe was still in cahoots with the Orlesians and actually had the blight gone as he probably planned, would've got them back in again after seeing off Loghain.

To quote his dying words..

"I... deserved.... more!"

@Outlaw everyone is entitled to their opinion, if you can't accept that, stay out of a debate.

very ture both points you made. It's sad really b/c I mean I've only read The Stolen Throne...haven't started the calling yet but Loghain is so strong & just by far one of my favorite characters but in Game he is a giant paranoid, power hungry, douche!!!! I still love that they matched his personality...he has an angry toned voice..snaps all the time....the onlyodd part was him wearing heavy or massive armor but that makes sense with power & his title going to his head along with the spreading fear of the Orlesians taking over Ferelden.
  Sorry i was rambling!!! haha.