1429 réponses à ce sujet

[Realmzmaster]

Interesting words from DG,



So Eamon was poisoned before Ostgar. Which means it must have been done after Duncan talked to Eamon. Because he mentions to Callin that his uncle send his regards and that his uncle's troops can be in Ostgar within the week. So as the PC and Duncan were traveling to Ostgar Eamon was poisoned.

DG says the intention was for Eamon not to die but be incapacitated. Still Eamon could have died from the poison. Connor's deal with the desire demon made sure that did not happen or slowed the process. But once the demon or Connor is killed the poison starts to take its course. The cure from Loghain may or may not save Eamon life given the toll on his body. It would neutralize the poison, but it may not not heal the damage done. Mage healing may have healed the other damage or not. The ashes on the other hand are reported to have miraclous healing power. (whether you believe in the Maker or not does not matter.) It is your only hope since the cure is not offered to the PC.

If Eamon had died Loghain would be guilty of murder, but with no way to tie him to the crime. If Connor/demon kills everyone in the castle.

Connor's deal upset the plan. Connor's depth of love for his father and the fact he had magical powers draw the demon like a moth to flame.

Still Loghain plan to poison the arl set everything in Redcliffe into motion. So Loghain would be guilty of attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder.

What does this showdown that DG hint at entail? Does Loghain plan to usurp the throne. That would be high treason since Callin was selected by the Landsmeet. So Loghain was planning treachery from the start.

He was not involved in the Cousland treachery, but he certainly benfitted from it. I doubt the Couslands would have bended to Loghain will and would have posed an outright threat to any attempt by Loghain to gain the throne.

There is evidence of a Blight at the beginning of the game and not just from Duncan. Note that the Kin's men have had several battles with the darkspawn and there numbers keep growing. By the lore the darkspawn only become a untified force when an ArchDemon is in control and exerting influence otherwise the darkspawn warlord and generals actually fight among themselves and other groups. They basically become small bands with cohension only in the immediate group. The groups fight each other!

So the fact the numbers are increasing gives evidence to an over arching control by a very powerful presence.

DG has told us that Loghain and Uldred never intended for the beacon to be lit. So this is treachery. We now know why Duncan look up and knew they had been betrayed. The wardens had suceeded in lighting the beacon and help never came. Which is why Ser Cauthrien is so surprised by the call for retreat. Loghain keep the army there so they could witnesses to the fact the signal never came. When the becaon was lit, Loghain now had to make a decision. He decide to blazes with the Grey Wardens, the King and his army. Every event after that was done to cover up the truth including the elimination of any surviving Grey Wardens or any one who could link him to the crimes. He simply let Howe do the cleanup.

[Tirigon]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Tirigon wrote...
I can´t understand how you could let someone like that live. If you experienced suppression on your own, I understand it only even less.

I would not see it as fun, though. It´s justice. If you simply like killing people you are truly not better than him.

A crime is to be paid with another crime? How charming. Come back and tell me what you think AFTER you saw people die on a battlefield.

I agree that it is not exactly good. But, please tell me, do you really think a mass murderer should not be punished for his crimes?
I think you´re picking the lesser evil when you punish him. The alternative would be to allow every crime, as punishing it would be a crime too and therefore despiceable.

[ReubenLiew]

Tirigon wrote...

ReubenLiew wrote...

I don't think Tirigon is nearly old enough to actually be intimate with the ins and outs of german laws on murder.

I know qute a bit. Definitely more than you who are not even German.

Thats not even the point we're trying to make.
You're telling me that in germany killing a person means everyone gets the same sentence.
Which you just managed to disprove yourself.
So no, I know a bit about the justice system and whilst I don't know the German one I know for a fact that INTENT is important to show whether or not it was murder or manslaughter or self defence.

[Tirigon]

eschilde wrote...

@Tirigon
Okay.. if you didn't get the essence of what I was trying to explain to you from spending all that time looking stuff up on the internet, I give up.

Actually, I was eating. I did not have to look this up. But believe whatever you want. Go ahead. Be a prove to the common prejudice that Americans are the most stupid people on earth.

[Tirigon]

ReubenLiew wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

ReubenLiew wrote...

I don't think Tirigon is nearly old enough to actually be intimate with the ins and outs of german laws on murder.

I know qute a bit. Definitely more than you who are not even German.

Thats not even the point we're trying to make.
You're telling me that in germany killing a person means everyone gets the same sentence.
Which you just managed to disprove yourself.
So no, I know a bit about the justice system and whilst I don't know the German one I know for a fact that INTENT is important to show whether or not it was murder or manslaughter or self defence.

Did you read my explanation? If not, please do so before you talk like that.
If yes, tell me, what´s not to understand about it?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Tirigon wrote...

eschilde wrote...

@Tirigon
Okay.. if you didn't get the essence of what I was trying to explain to you from spending all that time looking stuff up on the internet, I give up.

Actually, I was eating. I did not have to look this up. But believe whatever you want. Go ahead. Be a prove to the common prejudice that Americans are the most stupid people on earth.

Sorry, but now you completely destroyed your entire argument by saying that.

[eschilde]

Klystron wrote...

Yes, including murdering the son of a king. 

Murder isn't the same as negligence or manslaughter or killing in self-defense, none of which even apply to what Loghain did to Cailan.

Hear those news reports about those mountaineers who put themselves in a dangerous situation recently? They had to call off the search because one of the doctors died, so those mountaineers are assumed dead. Did the rescuers murder the mountaineers? How about firefighters who stop their search and rescue because the house they're trying to save people from is too dangerous to run into?

Loghain isn't wrong when he said Cailin's death was his own doing. Could he have done more to prevent Cailan's death? Maybe. But did he willfully murder Cailan? Uh. No. Would he have eventually murdered Cailan? Now that's something debatable, but it didn't happen at Ostagar.

[eschilde]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

eschilde wrote...

@Tirigon
Okay.. if you didn't get the essence of what I was trying to explain to you from spending all that time looking stuff up on the internet, I give up.

Actually, I was eating. I did not have to look this up. But believe whatever you want. Go ahead. Be a prove to the common prejudice that Americans are the most stupid people on earth.

Sorry, but now you completely destroyed your entire argument by saying that.

Better put your flamesuit on ^^

[ReubenLiew]

*sigh*

Did YOU read MY explanation then?

You said that killing a person deserves the same sentence.

Killing a person is not the same as murder.

Killing a person might be accidental, it might be self defence, it might be murder, it might be manslaughter, it can be many things and each one of them has their own punishments.

The difference is that YOU are not reading what WE are saying, instead you are trying to defennd yourself so violently you're beginning to look like an ass doing it.



There is a difference when a man kills another man, whether it was by accident or design.

If you are arguing that one murderer is the same as another murderer, then fine, whatever. But if a general sends his soldiers to die, it doesn't make him the same as a man who stabs another man in the gut.

[Realmzmaster]

Once Eamon regain his health, I am sure word was sent to Loghain. Loghain and Howe knew a Landsmeet would be called by Eamon. Howe with Loghain approval went about finding ways to control certain nobles. Making sure they vote the proper way

[Costin_Razvan]

Tirigon wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Tirigon wrote...
I can´t understand how you could let someone like that live. If you experienced suppression on your own, I understand it only even less.

I would not see it as fun, though. It´s justice. If you simply like killing people you are truly not better than him.

A crime is to be paid with another crime? How charming. Come back and tell me what you think AFTER you saw people die on a battlefield.

I agree that it is not exactly good. But, please tell me, do you really think a mass murderer should not be punished for his crimes?
I think you´re picking the lesser evil when you punish him. The alternative would be to allow every crime, as punishing it would be a crime too and therefore despiceable.

Loghain is NOT a mass murderer, at worst you can make him a traitor for leaving Cailan to die and enslaving the elves, but you are really going into extremes

Also joining the grey wardens means he either dies in 2-3 years ( if you go through the ritual ) or you sacrifice his soul to kill the archdemon. What I am picking is allowing him to realize that he made the wrong choices after Ostagar ( his choices before and at Ostagar I agree with )

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Like Mr Gaider says, it will depend on the player. I understand those who wish to execute Loghain, when they explain and justify it in a rational way, not the typical justification of "He is evilz, diez!!" or "I just hate him" or "Cause cute Alistair said so".
I personally felt he doesn't deserve death, but that's my opinion. Howe on the otherhand did.
I have a respect of people of genius. A once great person, imo, should be given the chance to right his sins. A scum should not.

Yup I totally agree and I still think Howe played a big part in Loghain's decline into paranoia. Case in point when he finds out that some wardens are still alive, he didn't go to Loghain first of all, no instead he calls in the Antivan Crows and then goes to Loghain. In that scene you can clearly see Loghain is troubled by the depths he has sunk to, but as Mr Gaider has pointed out, by that point the dice was cast and he had to follow it through or fall on his sword and there is no way Loghain would do that without justifiable reason (The Warden showing they have the strength of a good leader).

Still isn't going to stop my "Anti-human male" city elf executing him :crying:

[KnightofPhoenix]

Realmzmaster wrote...
DG has told us that Loghain and Uldred never intended for the beacon to be lit. So this is treachery.

You didn't read what Mr. Gaider said. He said they wouldn't have lit the beacon, had it come to it. As in, if it became necessary.

[Klystron]

eschilde wrote...

Klystron wrote...

Yes, including murdering the son of a king. 

Murder isn't the same as negligence or manslaughter or killing in self-defense, none of which even apply to what Loghain did to Cailan.

Hear those news reports about those mountaineers who put themselves in a dangerous situation recently? They had to call off the search because one of the doctors died, so those mountaineers are assumed dead. Did the rescuers murder the mountaineers? How about firefighters who stop their search and rescue because the house they're trying to save people from is too dangerous to run into?

Loghain isn't wrong when he said Cailin's death was his own doing. Could he have done more to prevent Cailan's death? Maybe. But did he willfully murder Cailan? Uh. No. Would he have eventually murdered Cailan? Now that's something debatable, but it didn't happen at Ostagar.

I was speaking of Alistair, not Cailan.  Loghain knew who he was. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien wrote...
Still isn't going to stop my "Anti-human male" city elf executing him :crying:

That won't stop my Dwarven noble either. He plans to be the chancellor to a stupid king (aka Alistair), in other words the real ruler. So both Anora and Loghain have to go.

[tallon1982]

Just to be a PITA ... I will play the violin for those who worship Loghain *grin*



Anyway continue with your debate I am very amused.

[AndreaRhaegar]

The crime of Loghain is not murder nor manslaughter; it's High Treason, that's far more worst ;-)

[ReubenLiew]

High Treason is only treason if you lose

[Jaldecir]

That fits into Loghain's ruthless personality. He's willing to ally with a scumbag like Howe to get a supporter he'll need in the war(s) to come.



If Loghain is subtle he'd bring the charges against Howe after he had no more need for him.

It fits his ruthless personality, but it contradicts his supposed-to-be-smart personality. Punishing Howe would actually GAIN Loghain some support. Surely those nobles would like to see someone responsible for what happened at Highever to the Cousland being punished. But yet, the truth was left as secret between Loghain and Howe, serving nothing but to gain Howe's support.

[eschilde]

@Klystron

Oh yeah!

Well, we don't know that for a fact, but it's pretty likely that Loghain knew who Alistair was, since Anora and Cailan definitely knew. Okay, you are right, but that one's pretty easy to justify in Loghain's mind.

I just realized Loghain is the embodiment of Stay the Course :S

[AndreaRhaegar]

ReubenLiew wrote...

High Treason is only treason if you lose

True, indeed Loghain lost 

Modifié par AndreaRhaegar, 11 janvier 2010 - 09:16 .

[Ulicus]

eschilde wrote...

@Klystron
Oh yeah!
Well, we don't know that for a fact

If you ask Loghain why Maric didn't recognise Alistair, he tells you that he very nearly did but in the end it was decided that Eamon should raise the boy away from court.

[Ariella]

Xandurpein wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

Yes. Certain people simply deserve to die. One has to take responibility for his actions. Loghain decided to enslave people, to kill innocents, to try to kill you more than once. I can´t understand how you could let someone like that live. If you experienced suppression on your own, I understand it only even less.

I would not see it as fun, though. It´s justice. If you simply like killing people you are truly not better than him.

Cultural context does matter. 

If cultural context does matter, then Loghain violated the mores of his society when he walked away... in violating his oath.

And you also forget that this just wasn't slavery abolihed by some writ. It was slavery abolished by ANDRASTE.

[Realmzmaster]

Intent is the basic point behind any death. This is why there are degrees of intent. Example, in certain parts of the US during the winter months in hillarea the road get covered in ice. A car is coming down the road, the driver loses control do to the icy conditions and plows into another car killing the person inside. Is the driver guilty of murder? Of course not. It is ruled an accident. caused by and Act of God.

Now I am the driver of a car and I run over my business partner because he cheated me out of millions. Murder? Yes! But now we come to intent. Is it an act of passion? Or premeditated murder? If the partner just got out my car after telling me he bilked me out of millions and I run over him it may be seen as a crime of passion. Crimes of passion are not considered first degree murder. But if I laid in wait until the partner cam out of his house and ran over him that is premeditated and is first degree murder. Intent plays a big part in the decision.

[eschilde]

@AndreaRhaegar
I think we've spent a good portion of this thread trying to prove that Loghain didn't have treasonous intent >.>

@Klystron
Oh yeah, also, Alistair wasn't an acknowledged heir or anything at that point so I'm not sure it's treasonous. It is certainly a betrayal of Maric, though. I'm wondering whether or not Loghain thought of Alistair as a threat to the throne, considering that Eamon was still out of the way at that point, there was no proof of his heritage, and how likely Alistair would be to put forward a claim. I had the impression that the Crows were sent to get rid of people in a position to garner support for letting in Orlesian Wardens, rather than securing his regency.

Edit:
@Ulicus
I stand corrected.

Modifié par eschilde, 11 janvier 2010 - 09:23 .