1429 réponses à ce sujet

[Woman Warden 118]

Xandurpein wrote...

I think that regardless of what we may feel ourselves, it can be empiriacally proven that in Ferelden it was considered a bad thing to sell people into slavery. Whenever you use that claim at the Landsmeet you gain votes. I would think that this prves that selling elves into slavery seems to go against the moral code of the majority of Ferelden's nobles, so he is doing something immoral in the eyes of his peers, that much should be obvious.

EXACTELY! this person is EXACTELY right!

[Carodej]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Carodej wrote...
Oh, and @KnightofPhoenix, based on what appears to be your belief that slavery is OK because it can produce something beneficial to society, would you consider rape "good" if it was used as a punishment and therefore made women more productive members of society? I wouldn't, but what your wrote earlier seems to indicate you would - especially if someone had a historical example of this

There are better, faster and more efficient forms of punishments than rape. Rape is never productive and has no purpose or aim except to satisfy the rapist. So no, rape is, under all circumstances, bad. Unfortunately, eliminating it completely from war has proven to be very difficult. 
But imo a rapist should suffer the death penalty immediately.  

Glad we agree on that anyway.

But now I get the impression that efficiency is part of your reasoning as well as a practical use.  Since advanced modern civilizations don't use slavery, doesn't that indicate there are more efficient ways of doing things?  And wouldn't this make slavery less justifiable to you?  Or is technological level, or some other factor, important to your reasoning?

[robertthebard]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Thomas9321 wrote...
Excellent.

Increase taxation? He is the regent. He could create new titles, confiscate lands from his enemies and give them to his friends, it was a common occurance in the Middle Ages. Hell, he could have said to Howe "Yes, you may become Arl of Denerim, but for 10,000 soverreigns!". I also saw very little evidence of the crown being poor, no one in game mentioned it. I find his justification highly inadequate - what did it achieve? Very little at the end of the day as it just furthered the destructive civil war. Surely it would have been better to conscript the elves into his army? I don't think his slavery was justified here. It produced no productive results, which is what you consider to make slavery acceptable, and was immoral, which I consider to make it unacceptable.

There is a problem with increasing taxation. Assuming that he didn't do tha already (which I doubt), if most of the population is drafted into the army, there is few people left to pay those taxes. Furthermnore, add the fact that alot of Banns and the Arl of Redcliff were rebelling, which will severly reduce taxe income. It's a feudal society, so it's the Banns that recieve taxes from the people. Even the Arl of Redcliff wasn't rich enough to properly equip his army, as his sergeant in our camp says. So it's not that easy.
Second, selling titles was rarely used to finance a war in our real life. Plus, we don't know if it's acceptable to do so. From what we have seen, lands are heavily linked to families. You should re-read about the unification of Ferelden into a Kingdom. It took compromise from the King vis a vis the banns, Arls and especially Teryns. So I doubt the king or regent could aritifically create titles in Ferelden.

All codexes mention Ferelden being poor compared to the other kingdoms, especially Orlais. There is no signs of great riches. No real source of richness either.

The elves were weak and not numerous, they would add very little to the army if drafted. Selling them offers better benefits. And it did produce results. That's until we put it out of business. But it was generating money. And it was only set in place for a short period of time, I will remind you. So it wasn't counter-productive. And no body knew of it. That's until the Warden shows up. 

So all things considered, Ferelden lacked any real alternative to generate money that is urgently needed. Selling elves into slavery is, imo, an accetpable strategy, both morally and pragmatically.

EDIT: yes Loghain emptied the treasury to fight the civil war, which is why he needs cash urgently, which is through selling elves. That was the only way to generate money fast. But that's certainly not a proof that slavery wasn't working.

The simpler solution would have been to defer to Anora, and just be the General that he was famous for being.  He can control Anora, so he's doing everything he needs to do behind the scenes, instead of coming out and trying to be King.  No civil war means he's not depleting the coffers to fight it. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Carodej wrote...
Glad we agree on that anyway.

But now I get the impression that efficiency is part of your reasoning as well as a practical use.  Since advanced modern civilizations don't use slavery, doesn't that indicate there are more efficient ways of doing things?  And wouldn't this make slavery less justifiable to you?  Or is technological level, or some other factor, important to your reasoning?

Slavery is not really gone from this world. One can argue that paying Asian kids 1$ a day to produce goods so that companies can sell them at 10 to 20 times the cost as a modern form of slavery.
But obviously, technology, capacity, necessity, urgency. All of those factors play a role in how I see and judge an act. I judge each and every action in its own context and with all the factors surrounding it, or at least I try to with the best of my ability (I am a biased person afterall, like everyone else). In many instances, I can see slavery as completely unnecessary and counter-productive or even excessive. In other examples, I might not. 

In today's world, I would find insitutionalised slavery to be unnecessary. But I am not blind to what the world order is.  It's built on the suffering of the few. It always was.

[KnightofPhoenix]

robertthebard wrote...
The simpler solution would have been to defer to Anora, and just be the General that he was famous for being.  He can control Anora, so he's doing everything he needs to do behind the scenes, instead of coming out and trying to be King.  No civil war means he's not depleting the coffers to fight it. 

He never wanted to be king. He says so himself after the landsmeet and I believe he is honest. Anora was afraid that he would, but it was not his intention. In Loghain's mind, Anora was Queen and he was the general. But Anora, afraid she would lose her power as Loghain isn't Cailan, potrayed herself as the victim.

The civil war was not solely Loghain's doing, althought he was a big reason. The bannorn shares blame as well.
 

[robertthebard]

Then there was no need to claim regency, and force the civil war. He could have had Anora call for replacement troops from the Bannorn in his speech. They rebelled because he was taking the throne for himself, not because they wanted it for themselves. His enemies preferred Anora on the throne to him, all he had to do was step aside, and give the appearance. He did not, he declared himself regent, and demanded assistance from the Bannorn, who rebelled because he was pretending to be King. He claims he did it to secure Ferelden's independence, but I'm sure Lothering didn't feel all that independant.

[KnightofPhoenix]

robertthebard wrote...

Then there was no need to claim regency, and force the civil war. He could have had Anora call for replacement troops from the Bannorn in his speech. They rebelled because he was taking the throne for himself, not because they wanted it for themselves. His enemies preferred Anora on the throne to him, all he had to do was step aside, and give the appearance. He did not, he declared himself regent, and demanded assistance from the Bannorn, who rebelled because he was pretending to be King. He claims he did it to secure Ferelden's independence, but I'm sure Lothering didn't feel all that independant.

Yes his aggressive bid to become regent was a big mistake that I think he could have avoided. But that's not uncommon. Military men often think they should be in charge in periods of war. But I found it very unlike him. He seemed to have alot of political insight, to the point where many thought he was actually ruling and not Maric. I do not see why he would do such a thing.
But yes, that's the one mistake Loghain made that I cannot justify, nor understand. But it doesn't make me think he deserves death. but that's just me.

But the bannorn is not blameless. They have always fought each other and they needed an iron grip to keep them in line. So it's a little too easy to blame Loghain for the civil war. As experience proves, civil wars are seldom caused by solely one party.

[robertthebard]

If he's uniting them under Anora's banner, I could cede your point. He is, however, attempting what they can only see as a coup, with the corpse of the King barely cold. Is it any wonder they rebel? When taken in context with what they know of Ostagar, it certainly looks more damning than it might be.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Let's assume that he did in fact plan a coup. It wasn't the perfect time to start a civil war while the darkspawn are invading. They could have waited after the crisis has abaited.

[Woman Warden 118]

robertthebard wrote...

If he's uniting them under Anora's banner, I could cede your point. He is, however, attempting what they can only see as a coup, with the corpse of the King barely cold. Is it any wonder they rebel? When taken in context with what they know of Ostagar, it certainly looks more damning than it might be.

robertthebard is right

[robertthebard]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Let's assume that he did in fact plan a coup. It wasn't the perfect time to start a civil war while the darkspawn are invading. They could have waited after the crisis has abaited.

I think they feared a repeat of how he became a noble in the first place, maybe?  I can't say about their motivations, but perhaps they figured if they let him get comfortable on the throne he'd just stay, if there was anything for him to stay on, anyway.

[Urazz]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Let's assume that he did in fact plan a coup. It wasn't the perfect time to start a civil war while the darkspawn are invading. They could have waited after the crisis has abaited.

I think he was trying to do it without much bloodshed but failed miserably because he treats politics as a war in my opinion.

robertthebard wrote...

Then there was no need to claim regency, and force the civil war. He could have had Anora call for replacement troops from the Bannorn in his speech. They rebelled because he was taking the throne for himself, not because they wanted it for themselves. His enemies preferred Anora on the throne to him, all he had to do was step aside, and give the appearance. He did not, he declared himself regent, and demanded assistance from the Bannorn, who rebelled because he was pretending to be King. He claims he did it to secure Ferelden's independence, but I'm sure Lothering didn't feel all that independant.

Exactly, if he didn't clame regency and let Anora do most of the leading publicly while he played General, he would've been fine and wouldn't have had that civil war happen.  He wouldn't have had to worry about selling elves to slavery  for money because there would have not been a civil war or it would've been a much weaker one.  Hell, he would've been in a much better position to be in control if he hadn't poisoned Eamon or allied with Uldred as well.

I think Loghain's problem, asides from his paranoia about Orlais invading again, was that he treated taking over as a military campaign where he had to defeat his enemies completely.   If he hadnt' done any of those things he would've been in great position and the Grey Wardens (all two of them) would've been forced to join him if they truly wanted to get rid of the blight.

Actually, that would be a good fanfiction idea.  Shame I don't really write fanfiction.

Modifié par Urazz, 15 janvier 2010 - 01:00 .

[Carodej]

robertthebard wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Let's assume that he did in fact plan a coup. It wasn't the perfect time to start a civil war while the darkspawn are invading. They could have waited after the crisis has abaited.

I think they feared a repeat of how he became a noble in the first place, maybe?  I can't say about their motivations, but perhaps they figured if they let him get comfortable on the throne he'd just stay, if there was anything for him to stay on, anyway.

I'd go further and say any of the smarter bannorn would have known that waiting was about the same as accepting Loghain as a permanent ruler.  It should have been obvious by which forces were lost and which survived at Ostagar that in an army the troops that were from the various lords that didn't support Loghain would no dobut have the highest casualties.

[Duncan Hills Coffee]

Urazz wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Let's assume that he did in fact plan a coup. It wasn't the perfect time to start a civil war while the darkspawn are invading. They could have waited after the crisis has abaited.

I think he was trying to do it without much bloodshed but failed miserably because he treats politics as a war in my opinion.

robertthebard wrote...

Then there was no need to claim regency, and force the civil war. He could have had Anora call for replacement troops from the Bannorn in his speech. They rebelled because he was taking the throne for himself, not because they wanted it for themselves. His enemies preferred Anora on the throne to him, all he had to do was step aside, and give the appearance. He did not, he declared himself regent, and demanded assistance from the Bannorn, who rebelled because he was pretending to be King. He claims he did it to secure Ferelden's independence, but I'm sure Lothering didn't feel all that independant.

Exactly, if he didn't clame regency and let Anora do most of the leading publicly while he played General, he would've been fine and wouldn't have had that civil war happen.  He wouldn't have had to worry about selling elves to slavery  for money because there would have not been a civil war or it would've been a much weaker one.  Hell, he would've been in a much better position to be in control if he hadn't poisoned Eamon or allied with Uldred as well.

I think Loghain's problem, asides from his paranoia about Orlais invading again, was that he treated taking over as a military campaign where he had to defeat his enemies completely.   If he hadnt' done any of those things he would've been in great position and the Grey Wardens (all two of them) would've been forced to join him if they truly wanted to get rid of the blight.

Actually, that would be a good fanfiction idea.  Shame I don't really write fanfiction.

that is why he needs to be made a warden. he is a lousy regent. treats polotics like a war game. if his enemies were blood thirstie darkspawn insted of bloated poloticians he might not have done such damning things. i do not defend him, for it is not my duty. i conscript him, for it is my duty to stop the blight, not to execute war criminals.

[Costin_Razvan]

despite what you said earlier about a military court laughing off this sort of thing, I personally doubt a US military court would deal kindly with a general that took that sort of action - especially if the general did it shortly before he tried a military coup to take over the government. In fact I think very few people would consider this sort of thing acceptable behavior.

You think about it, you do not know for sure and you assume you are right.

I do not assume. I KNOW I am right. History shows me this. This isn't Sadam we are talking about ( who btw killed tens of thousands of his people just for his ego ), this is completly different.

So you're not a soldier, and have no concept of what combat is, but
claim to have a better perspective than anyone else?  As a former
soldier....

I might not have been to Iraq or Afghanistan, but I certainly know very well first hand what combat is ( 1989, was conscripted, and fought in a revolution ), thank you for the insult. I asked my opinnion of other sldiers from my country as well. So ye, believe what you will.

I am curios if you have been in a real combat situation, not some training or lounging on a carrier or same base after a war.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 15 janvier 2010 - 04:27 .

[Urazz]

Duncan Hills Coffee wrote...

that is why he needs to be made a warden. he is a lousy regent. treats polotics like a war game. if his enemies were blood thirstie darkspawn insted of bloated poloticians he might not have done such damning things. i do not defend him, for it is not my duty. i conscript him, for it is my duty to stop the blight, not to execute war criminals.

True when Riordin brought up the option of turning him into a Grey Warden in my first play through, it did cause me to stop and think about if it would be a good thing or not.

Thing is, that I felt it really wasn't worth it because I thought he wouldn't be able to really command the armies in the battle full time as a Grey Warden.  He would have to be in the thick of things with me since there are so few Grey Wardens left in Feralden.  Nothing wrong with that but generally I figured it would turn into something like how the final battle turned out, with me and my party hunting down the Archdemon while the army keeps the darkspawn horde occupied.

[Xandurpein]

Urazz wrote...

I think Loghain's problem, asides from his paranoia about Orlais invading again, was that he treated taking over as a military campaign where he had to defeat his enemies completely.   If he hadnt' done any of those things he would've been in great position and the Grey Wardens (all two of them) would've been forced to join him if they truly wanted to get rid of the blight.

Actually, that would be a good fanfiction idea.  Shame I don't really write fanfiction.

I think you are quite right about this. Loghain was born a peasant and that means he has not had the schooling or upbringing that would teach him about politics. He was brought up as a warrior and leader in a brutal civil war. History is full of examples of generals and guerilla leaders that wins the war and becomes bad political leaders because they keep thinking of it as leading a military campaign.

In a very real sense the trial of Loghain Mact Tir and the sentence he ought to get is simply a matter of personal choice. You can argue forever about what a "correct" or "historical" verdict of his action would be, but the truth is that the "historical" result is that, because of a number of circumstances, the nobles of Ferelden decided to let one person pass the setence on him - you. So whatever you think is right - that is the correct historical decision in your game. Simple as that.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 15 janvier 2010 - 07:46 .

[Xandurpein]

Urazz wrote...

Duncan Hills Coffee wrote...

that is why he needs to be made a warden. he is a lousy regent. treats polotics like a war game. if his enemies were blood thirstie darkspawn insted of bloated poloticians he might not have done such damning things. i do not defend him, for it is not my duty. i conscript him, for it is my duty to stop the blight, not to execute war criminals.

True when Riordin brought up the option of turning him into a Grey Warden in my first play through, it did cause me to stop and think about if it would be a good thing or not.

Thing is, that I felt it really wasn't worth it because I thought he wouldn't be able to really command the armies in the battle full time as a Grey Warden.  He would have to be in the thick of things with me since there are so few Grey Wardens left in Feralden.  Nothing wrong with that but generally I figured it would turn into something like how the final battle turned out, with me and my party hunting down the Archdemon while the army keeps the darkspawn horde occupied.

There is nothing wrong with your reasoning, but I might add that there is lot more to being a general than just directing troops in battle. Loghain would have had vast experience on how to organize an army. Just force marching the whole army from Redcliff to Denerim,making sure supplies was sufficient, and let the army arrive in fighting shape would be a logistical nightmare worthy of a great General.

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]Costin_Razvan wrote...
Go the tavern and ask for rumors after sparring or killing Loghain. If you spare him he will say most people are relieved he didn't die, if you kill him he says most people are angry.[/quote]

Because rumpors from a single barkeep are concrete evidence?
Wasn't there a rumor going around earlier how the GW's killed the king? Must be true then...



[quote]
And which of those Fereldan Generals beat a Legion of Chevaliers with nothing but a few Legionnaires of the dead and badly armed farmers? Loghain did that. Which General almost won a civil war against heavy odds? Loghain. True you are the general, but lossing a tactical advantage like him is downright foolish.[7quote]

Nope, since he as much of a disadvantage as he is an advantage.
And his tactical genius? Where was it at Ostagar?



[quote]
Is he now? Did you ever spare him? He seems quite reasonable in what he says as companion, he realizes what he did quite well and even regrets it.
[/quote]

In Davids own words - Loghian is really adpet and not seeing what he doesnt' want to see. Simply put, he is a security risk. A big one. This is a fact and not a fabrication.
Now, if oyu willing to have a unstable man with a sword who tried to kill you multiple time watching your back - fine. You're free to take that risk. But don't dare to tell me that that is wise.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

You know what. I am going to issue a challenge to all thse anti-Loghain people.

Pick up a Total War Game ( any of them ) and lead your nation past turn 60, then come back and post your feelings about Loghain.

Played all of Total War games. As a just and honourable type and beat the s**** out of everyone. I won in 10:1 scenarios...You're point?

Its not metagaming if you consider the choices laid to you at the time.
Rirordan has a reason and by refusing to do it you are going against
what the Grey Wardens are ( the only reason he doesn't try more is he
knows Alistair will leave no matter what ). Alistair doesn't betray
you, he betrays the Grey Wardens, and what Duncan believed in. As if
what the order is doesn't matter anything to him, even though he is
trying to do this to claim vengeance for the wardens.

Duncan would stop Alistair from leaving, he would force him to stay.

I disagree.
Rhiodan isn't the embodiment of Grey Wardens. It's funny how some people created a image in their head of what a GW is and they fanaticly belive EVERY single GW HAS to be like that.

Let me put this clearly -  I could kill Loghain a kazillion times and not be any less a GW than anyone else.

Also, unless you're psychic, you dont' know what Duncan would have done. You ASSUME. Doesn't matter how many time someoen mentiones this non-argument. It's not an argument and it only deseves to be ignored.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Tirigon wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote..
Sadly, people need to feel like they are paladins in order to enjoy the game.

I´m a PALADIN!!!!!!!!!

I got a bubble that makes me INVULNERABLE!!!!!!!!

I ROCK!!!!!!!

MAY TEH FIRE PURIFY YOU ALL, DIRTY HEATHENS!!!!!!!  I AM TEH DIVINE FLAME OF JUSTICE, I SHALL PURGE YOU FOR YOUR SINS!!!!!!!
PURIFICATION!
HOLYNESS!!!!!!!!
FOR LORDAERON!!!!  (EHM, I MEAN, FOR FERELDEN AND TEH MAKER!!!!!)


That´s it. Paladins are ftl.

Sadly, some people need to act like morons to enjoy themselves.

Any specific reason why you call everyone who palys a paladin-type character a loser?

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 15 janvier 2010 - 08:13 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Duncan was a thief from Orlais when got recruited, Genevieve didn't care about his crimes, she only cared that she had a strong rogue on her side. Did you know what was the first thing Duncan did when he got to Denerim? try and steal a purse, he even got caught and the Commander of the Wardens didn't care.

The only origin in which Duncan recruits a person who cannot be in any way a criminal at the start is the Human Noble one and the Dalish Elf one. the dwarf commoner makes you a criminal in every way, as does the dwarf noble one ( if you choose to kill Trian ) The City Elf allows you to let a human lord rape your cousin and the magi one allows you to help a blood mage, yet he still recruits you, without caring of what you did.

So yes, you are going against what the Grey Wardens are by refusing to recruit Loghain. Whether you kill him out of vengeance or simply because you don't think he is an accomplished warrior ( which btw he is ) it still goes against the Grey Wardens.

P.S. I play my char like a blood elf paladin of World of Warcraft, whatever it takes to win a war I will do it.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 15 janvier 2010 - 08:21 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Sabriana wrote...
Yes, there are others who could be conscripted, but there are also many reasons why that should not be. I wouldn't want to subject any of my companions to the ritual and risk their death. Aside from liking many of them, the odds that my PC would lose an able fighter are too high.

And sicne when does what you would liek or not suddenly matter? A TRUE Grey Warden, by the logic of half the people posting here, would conscript everyone and anything.

So it's OK to swallow your feelings and conscript Loghain, but it's NOT ok to swallow your feeling and conscript others, because you might actualy lcare abotu the others a lot?

EDIT: I do belvie david said it that Alistair considers it his DUTY to keep Loghian OUT of the Wardens.

Costin_Razvan wrote
If you can't take this discusion seriously and bring something usefull then the usual anti-Loghain rant then seriously : SHUT UP

I
take the choices of RPG games quite seriously, cause the ones you make
reflect on what kind of person you are. Even not carring about them and
saying its just a game does reflect quite a lot about you.

You need to get out more man....
Telling peopel to shut up on the forums? Not very effective.

[Apophis2412]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Duncan was a thief from Orlais when got recruited, Genevieve didn't care about his crimes, she only cared that she had a strong rogue on her side. Did you know what was the first thing Duncan did when he got to Denerim? try and steal a purse, he even got caught and the Commander of the Wardens didn't care.

The only origin in which Duncan recruits a person who cannot be in any way a criminal at the start is the Human Noble one and the Dalish Elf one. the dwarf commoner makes you a criminal in every way, as does the dwarf noble one ( if you choose to kill Trian ) The City Elf allows you to let a human lord rape your cousin and the magi one allows you to help a blood mage, yet he still recruits you, without caring of what you did.

So yes, you are going against what the Grey Wardens are by refusing to recruit Loghain. Whether you kill him out of vengeance or simply because you don't think he is an accomplished warrior ( which btw he is ) it still goes against the Grey Wardens.

P.S. I play my char like a blood elf paladin of World of Warcraft, whatever it takes to win a war I will do it.

Didn't Duncan kill Genevieve's fiancee? Or was that someone else?

[Lotion Soronarr]

Sabriana wrote...

Shavon wrote...

If only Loghain could have gotten through to Cailan in another way. . .sadly, I don't think that would have been possible.

It wouldn't have been possible. Loghain says so, and it's affirmed by Wynne of all people. Wynne hates Loghain's guts and has no problem telling him and showing him. But she does agree with Loghain on that point. Wynne is one person who has no reason whatsoever to lie for Loghain.

Bollocks. Nothing but justifications. If Loghian was too stupid to find another way, that's his problem.
I can undersant or appreciate his motivations and goals. But his methids? NEVER.