1429 réponses à ce sujet

[Sabriana]

David Gaider wrote...

AndreaDraco wrote...
But what about the poisoning of Arl Eamon through Jowan? Wasn't this decided and accomplished before Ostagar?

Yes, but this wasn't done in preparation for Ostagar. This was done in anticipation that Loghain and Cailan would have a showdown, and Arl Eamon would always solidly be in Cailan's camp. Like I said, Loghain is the sort of man that will ensure his enemies are defeated before they're engaged.

I know this isn't spelled out, but Eamon was never supposed to actually die from the poison. It would keep him sick for a long time -- certainly long enough for Isolde to try all their options and send out knights looking for remedies -- and then, once the confrontation with Cailan was done, Eamon could be given the cure. The elf was sent to Redcliffe to keep an eye on things and watch for news of Eamon getting worse, and if that happened then Loghain could send the cure immediately. Or, at least, that was the intention. If Eamon died in the name of keeping Ferelden safe from Orlais, Loghain wouldn't shed too many tears over it.

And, while we're at it, I'm completely wrong in thinking that Loghain and - especially - Uldred had a say in the Tower of Ishal being swamped by darkspwan? I don't why, but it always strikes me as odd that Uldred proposed to use the mages for light the beacon and that the beacon was the signal Loghain was waiting to go away.

Either Loghain or Uldred wanted to be in control of the tower, so that they could make sure the beacon wouldn't be lit -- if it came to that. If the beacon wasn't lit, Loghain couldn't be blamed for not joining the battle in time. But, no, they had no control over the darkspawn and no way of ensuring that the tower was swamped. That was unexpected.

There's also this. D. Gaider had a lot to say about the subject, but many people can't be bothered to at least read the Biowarian input, even though it says "Bioware" in big, fat, blue letters under the thread title. Or, in some cases, they read with their eyes firmly closed because what the writer of the game has to say doesn't jibe with their own arguments.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xandurpein wrote...
But all we can do is assume. We are making a decision on whether Loghain should be allowed to become a Grey Warden or not. We are either assuming he will become a decent Grey Warden or not. Certainly what we assume to be the spirit of what the Grey Wardens truly are, must be a factor in this decision. We know Riordan thinks it's a reasonable decision and we know Alistair is strictly opposed to it. If I, lacking evidence, assume that what I know Duncan did to me and those who died during my joining indicates that his ideas are not far from Riordan's then this is of course something I might consider important to my decision.

It is sloppy to state it as a true fact that Duncan would do this or that, but if it seems to fit his general character, then surely it merits consideration.

True, I didn' say otherwise.

However, even if yo uassume you know to know the trus spirit of Grey Wardens, there is no law stating that you must follow it. For example, what if I want ot be better than your average Grey Warden? Why settle with being like X when you can be better than X (depending on what you consider better, naturally).

Even if I were to assume that a regular GW would spare Loghain, that still doesn't mean I must or should. I'm not a regular GW.

Both Rhiordan and Duncan are old and fit for the Deep Roars anyway, and with the Archdeamon screaming in their heads I question theri judgment. After all, that's why the old GW do undertake the Calling - because the taint is becoming too strong.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xandurpein wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Also, David said Al considered it his duty to keep Loghain out of the GW's

And what does Alistair consider to be his duty prove? Didn't Loghain consider it his duty to keep his promise to Maric more important than his oath to Cailan, and didn't you argue that this was still treason?

Ahh...finally. Yes, YEs. You're seing my point know.

People can have multiple duties or multiple oaths. Which ones take precendence? Who's to decide.

Note that I'm not absolving anyone of anything. My beef with Loghain is not so much that he betrayed Cailan, but more his demeanor and methods.

[Gimmemocha]

I dip my toe in to point out again that accepting Loghain and letting Alistair walk is largely a matter of meta-gaming. It's taking knowledge that the MC doesn't have at the time (such as Loghain's promise to Maric) and using that to influence your character's decision.



As far as my character's know, Loghain walked off the field, took his men, and left Cailan to die when Cailan's entire battle plan depended on him attacking whent he beacon was lit.



He was once a great general and was largely responsible for freeing Ferelden, yes, but he seems to have gone insane (even his daughter tells you this), seeing Orlesian occupation under every rock, placing the Orlesian "threat" over even the Blight.



In the end, I feel sorry for the twisted wreck of what Loghain has become from where he started, but if he lives he'll just start a rebellion in an attempt to 'save' Ferelden from all the wrong things. I have no time for civil war, and no room for sympathy. If you're all for killing Alistair to prevent a civil war from starting around him because of his bloodline, you should understand the practicality inherent in killing Loghain to prevent him from trying again to seize the throne.



Whatever he was, Loghain isn't that any longer, as far as the characters can tell. UNLESS you use knowledge your character can't possibly have -- like what he says as a companion after you spare him and take him in. Or what you read in the books, all the insights into his character you get from that. You need special knowledge to understand Loghain.



Now, if you went with Loghain just 'cause you got pissed that Alistair made you choose, fine. But don't try to elevate your argument above that.



My only real irritation with this debate is coming from the person who continues to state as if it were a fact that Loghain is the better choice. Since your goal is accomplished either way, since you can end the Blight with Alistair or with Loghain, since we know from the epilogues that Alistair can make an excellent king, this is false. And yet...



Let's be clear: It DOES NOT MATTER to the Grey Wardens which one you pick. It doesn't matter. It's possible to pick up a recruit and increase your numbers, but by doing so you'll lose a Grey Warden so it all comes out in the wash. It only matters if you stop the Blight.



When all's said and done and the rest of the Grey Wardens look back on what happened, they'll shrug and say, "Welp, they killed the Archdemon and that's all that matters." They will not condemn you for not taking Loghain. They will not condemn you for letting Alistair walk. They will only nod at you and say "You did your job. You ended the Blight. Now, about all those Darkspawn still wandering Ferelden..."

[Xandurpein]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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.

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...

That is just lawyering. The gossip in the tavern will not tell you the truth, it tell you what people believe. If the a lot of people believe (falsely) that the Grey Wardens killed the King the barkeep will tell you so, and if people believe that it was a good thing that player spared Loghain, he will tell you so, so there is no contradiction at all.

It is certainly a strong indication that the majority of people in Denerim, regardless of what you might think yourself, DID want the player to spare Loghain.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 15 janvier 2010 - 11:53 .

[Xandurpein]

Gimmemocha wrote...

I dip my toe in to point out again that accepting Loghain and letting Alistair walk is largely a matter of meta-gaming. It's taking knowledge that the MC doesn't have at the time (such as Loghain's promise to Maric) and using that to influence your character's decision.

But you are metagaming yourself. It is perfectly possible for a character to believe that Alistair could be talked into accepting Loghain, even if he would be grumpy and hate it, as a Grey Warden. It is only by metagaming we KNOW that it is a trade, until Alistair has upped the ante and demanded you make him King, even if you decided Anora is a better choice. If you decide Anora is better on the throne than Alistair and then spare Loghain. Alistair will demand you kill Loghain AND make him King instead of Anora or you'll loose him. THAT is why I let Alistair go away on my first play.

Gimmemocha wrote...

He was once a great general and was largely responsible for freeing Ferelden, yes, but he seems to have gone insane (even his daughter tells you this), seeing Orlesian occupation under every rock, placing the Orlesian "threat" over even the Blight.

In the end, I feel sorry for the twisted wreck of what Loghain has become from where he started, but if he lives he'll just start a rebellion in an attempt to 'save' Ferelden from all the wrong things. I have no time for civil war, and no room for sympathy. If you're all for killing Alistair to prevent a civil war from starting around him because of his bloodline, you should understand the practicality inherent in killing Loghain to prevent him from trying again to seize the throne.

Whatever he was, Loghain isn't that any longer, as far as the characters can tell. UNLESS you use knowledge your character can't possibly have -- like what he says as a companion after you spare him and take him in. Or what you read in the books, all the insights into his character you get from that. You need special knowledge to understand Loghain.

You can get a lot of understanding of Loghain from reading the codex, which I take as knowledge you can pick up during the game, and even more so from talking to Anora prior to the Landsmeet. Anora will give you a pretty good idea of who Loghain is in fact. So it's not true that you have no knowledge of special knowledge of him. Anora herself also specifically begs you to find a way to spare him if you can.

Gimmemocha wrote...

Now, if you went with Loghain just 'cause you got pissed that Alistair made you choose, fine. But don't try to elevate your argument above that.

I resent that argument a lot. I do not appreciate people telling me what my motives for doing something are. I decided after some agonizing to spare Loghain in my first play, when I had no metagaming knowledge. I was genuinly sad when this forced Alistair away from me, but in retrospect I had doen what I thought best, with limited information. You are free to play however you like, but don't tell me why I play the way I do.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 15 janvier 2010 - 12:23 .

[Xandurpein]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Also, David said Al considered it his duty to keep Loghain out of the GW's

And what does Alistair consider to be his duty prove? Didn't Loghain consider it his duty to keep his promise to Maric more important than his oath to Cailan, and didn't you argue that this was still treason?

Ahh...finally. Yes, YEs. You're seing my point know.

People can have multiple duties or multiple oaths. Which ones take precendence? Who's to decide.

Note that I'm not absolving anyone of anything. My beef with Loghain is not so much that he betrayed Cailan, but more his demeanor and methods.

And my gripe with Alistair is not if he broke any oath, but that he didn't stick around to kill the Archdemon.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 15 janvier 2010 - 12:19 .

[Costin_Razvan]

I was genuinly sad when this forced Alistair away from me, but in retrospect I had done what I thought best, with limited information. You are free to play however you like, but don't tell me why I play the way I do.

Same here, I even had persuaded him and Anora to marry, for the betterment of Fereldan, or so I thought.

[Xandurpein]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

I was genuinly sad when this forced Alistair away from me, but in retrospect I had done what I thought best, with limited information. You are free to play however you like, but don't tell me why I play the way I do.

Same here, I even had persuaded him and Anora to marry, for the betterment of Fereldan, or so I thought.

I think this part is really important, because this is at the heart of why a lot of people choose to let Loghain live, even if they realized it was going to be trading Alistair for Loghain. It's not always just a choice between Alistair or Loghain, it's as much about the crown too. By the time I really knew I would loose Alistair if I let Loghain live, Alistair had already demanded to be handed the crown. I could have then decided to keep Alistair out of loyalty, or from a practical view decide that keeping Alistair who I knew reasonably well, would be better than betting on the relativly unknown factor Loghain. But that would also mean sacrificing the person I thought would do the best job on the throne for someone who up until then had not impressed me as a potential King. THAT is the heart of the matter for me, and a lot others who decided to go with Loghain I think.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 15 janvier 2010 - 12:37 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xandurpein wrote...
That is just lawyering. The gossip in the tavern will not tell you the truth, it tell you what people believe. If the a lot of people believe (falsely) that the Grey Wardens killed the King the barkeep will tell you so, and if people believe that it was a good thing that player spared Loghain, he will tell you so, so there is no contradiction at all.

It is certainly a strong indication that the majority of people in Denerim, regardless of what you might think yourself, DID want the player to spare Loghain.

Denerim is a small part of Ferelden. What would the people of Loithering say? Redcliffe? Highever?
Yes, there are plenty of those who still worship Loghain - mostly because they either don't know what he did or don't belive.But there's also plenty of those who hate Loghain. As time passes and the story of Loghains crimes spreads, less and less people will actually worship him.

Either way, it's nothing concrete.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xandurpein wrote...
But you are metagaming yourself. It is perfectly possible for a character to believe that Alistair could be talked into accepting Loghain, even if he would be grumpy and hate it, as a Grey Warden. It is only by metagaming we KNOW that it is a trade, until Alistair has upped the ante and demanded you make him King, even if you decided Anora is a better choice. If you decide Anora is better on the throne than Alistair and then spare Loghain. Alistair will demand you kill Loghain AND make him King instead of Anora or you'll loose him. THAT is why I let Alistair go away on my first play.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Alisteir strongly and repeteadly state that he will NOT stand for Loghain becoming a GW? I saw his fit coming a mile away. He tells you "no, no friggin way".
Even if by some miracle you belive he won't do something exreeme, it's pretty obvious talking Loghina will break your group cohesion.

And my gripe with Alistair is not if he broke any oath, but that he didn't stick around to kill the Archdemon.

All fine and dandy, but what has that to do with Loghain?

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 15 janvier 2010 - 12:47 .

[Sabriana]

Xandurpein wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...

I was genuinly sad when this forced Alistair away from me, but in retrospect I had done what I thought best, with limited information. You are free to play however you like, but don't tell me why I play the way I do.

Same here, I even had persuaded him and Anora to marry, for the betterment of Fereldan, or so I thought.

I think this part is really important, because this is at the heart of why a lot of people choose to let Loghain live, even if they realized it was going to be trading Alistair for Loghain. It's not always just a choice between Alistair or Loghain, it's as much about the crown too. By the time I really knew I would loose Alistair if I let Loghain live, Alistair had already demanded to be handed the crown. I could have then decided to keep Alistair out of loyalty, or from a practical view decide that keeping Alistair who I knew reasonably well, would be better than betting on the relativly unknown factor Loghain. But that would also mean sacrificing the person I thought would do the best job on the throne for someone who up until then had not impressed me as a potential King. THAT is the heart of the matter for me, and a lot others who decided to go with Loghain I think.

It is in my case. My mage (1st play-through, completely unspoiled) was taken aback by Riordan's suggestion, but it gave her pause. He was the most experienced GW after all. She was utterly shocked about Alistair's outburst, and remembered his comments at Flemeth's hut, and Duncan's words at Ostagar.

Something was amiss to her then, and Alistair demanding to be crowned was in contradiction to what he said through a large part of the game. Namely, that he'd make a bad king, he didn't want to be King, etc.

Alistair also showed no leadership qualities, and  had the tendency to get upset if he didn't get his way, even though the way he wanted things were bad overall. His statement that he'd rather be a follower also popped up in her mind. That, coupled with the fact that Anora, who has a bad character, but is otherwise a beloved and capable leader, and has plenty experience in the political arena was the far better candiate between the two.

My mage decided that out of two bad choices (Anora/Alistair), she'd better go with less bad choice, namely Anora. It was somewhat moot to her anyway, because if the archdemon was successfull all of this would be moot anyway. So Loghain lived, and of course, later on it became clear to my mage why Riordan suggested Loghain, and why he didn't interfere further after Alistair's outburst.

I was very sad when I saw neither hide nor hair of Alistair in the final battle. I did understand his leaving the PC and her group, but I never expected not to see him in the thick of things when it really mattered, when his country needed him so desperately.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
If you are not willing to take this seriously and actually think about an alternative, then don't condemn Loghain for selling elves or claim that there were better ways.
Finacing a war is never easy. Especially not for a country like Ferelden.

KoP, htere are plenty of ways to raise fund. History is ful lof examples.
MY own coutnry is one such example.

When the going gets tough YOU GET CREATIVE. Sell things you don't need(not people),sell art, melt down gold objects, steal from the enemy, scavange what you can, jury-rig, improvise. Contrary to popular belifs, $$ is not the main driving force behind warfare. Willpower is.

Sell art? To who? And what art? You think selling art can ever finance a war?
Melt down gold? You serious?
Steal from the darkspawn? Think.
Scavanging was already done, that rarely finances a war.

Please, in times of emergency, you don't have time to improvise, nor the luxury to be "creative". So come up with a thoughout, detailed alternative, instead of ridiculous vague ideas that no one in history has ever used to finance a full scale war or civil war.  

Lotion Soronnar wrote...But if your coutnry needed the money, and taking women off the streets, tying them and leading state-sponsored ****houses could generate you LOTS of money, you would do that? Because in that case it would be constructive? Even if it was basicly rape.

These kinds of projects never generate that much money anyhow and the benefits are lesser than the costs and consequences. I would much rather employ these women in the war effort, or take taxes from them. Furthermore, how can the men defend their country whle their wives are being treated that way. Too many ways for this plan of yours to backlash and not work at all. So no, I wouldn't support it.
Siphoning money out of these kinds of projects from other countries however, is another thing.  

[Gimmemocha]

Xandurpein wrote...

Gimmemocha wrote...

I dip my toe in to point out again that accepting Loghain and letting Alistair walk is largely a matter of meta-gaming. It's taking knowledge that the MC doesn't have at the time (such as Loghain's promise to Maric) and using that to influence your character's decision.

But you are metagaming yourself. It is perfectly possible for a character to believe that Alistair could be talked into accepting Loghain, even if he would be grumpy and hate it, as a Grey Warden. It is only by metagaming we KNOW that it is a trade, until Alistair has upped the ante and demanded you make him King, even if you decided Anora is a better choice. If you decide Anora is better on the throne than Alistair and then spare Loghain. Alistair will demand you kill Loghain AND make him King instead of Anora or you'll loose him. THAT is why I let Alistair go away on my first play.

I don't think it is.  I think Alistair was very plain that he wouldn't accept Loghain as a Grey Warden.  It was always clear to me, anyway.

Xandurpein wrote...

Gimmemocha wrote...

Now, if you went with Loghain just 'cause you got pissed that Alistair made you choose, fine. But don't try to elevate your argument above that.

I resent that argument a lot. I do not appreciate people telling me what my motives for doing something are. I decided after some agonizing to spare Loghain in my first play, when I had no metagaming knowledge. I was genuinly sad when this forced Alistair away from me, but in retrospect I had doen what I thought best, with limited information. You are free to play however you like, but don't tell me why I play the way I do.

I didn't try to tell you why you played the way you do.  I said IF you went with Loghain because you're mad at Alistair, then it's fine.  But say so, don't try to cloak it.  If you didn't, then you didn't and you have no reason to resent it.

[Lotion Soronarr]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Please, in times of emergency, you don't have time to improvise, nor the luxury to be "creative". So come up with a thoughout, detailed alternative, instead of ridiculous vague ideas that no one in history has ever used to finance a full scale war or civil war. 

B U L L S H I T.
That is all.
Civil war was Loghains fault. Let him see sell his daughter into slavery. Why didn't he sell himself. I bet he would fetch a nice price and would be doing a great favor to everyone.

These kinds of projects never generate that much money anyhow and the benefits are lesser than the costs and consequences. I would much rather employ these women in the war effort, or take taxes from them. Furthermore, how can the men defend their country whle their wives are being treated that way. Too many ways for this plan of yours to backlash and not work at all. So no, I wouldn't support it.
Siphoning money out of these kinds of projects from other countries however, is another thing. 

You wisling out of an aswer. I said IF. Apparently, slavery can generate a lot of mony...but forced prostitution (slavery + rape) can't? Really?
You said yourself you'd accept whatever was effective.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Please, in times of emergency, you don't have time to improvise, nor the luxury to be "creative". So come up with a thoughout, detailed alternative, instead of ridiculous vague ideas that no one in history has ever used to finance a full scale war or civil war. 

B U L L S H I T.
That is all.
Civil war was Loghains fault. Let him see sell his daughter into slavery. Why didn't he sell himself. I bet he would fetch a nice price and would be doing a great favor to everyone.

Yep, just as I thought. I didn't expect any real retort.

These kinds of projects never generate that much money anyhow and the benefits are lesser than the costs and consequences. I would much rather employ these women in the war effort, or take taxes from them. Furthermore, how can the men defend their country whle their wives are being treated that way. Too many ways for this plan of yours to backlash and not work at all. So no, I wouldn't support it.
Siphoning money out of these kinds of projects from other countries however, is another thing. 

You wisling out of an aswer. I said IF. Apparently, slavery can generate a lot of mony...but forced prostitution (slavery + rape) can't? Really?
You said yourself you'd accept whatever was effective.

Sex slavery does not generate as much waelth as "normal" slavery. Sex slavery is good for private slavers, but no it never generates that much wealth and no real State or Kingdom based its wealth upon such a practise. "What ifs" are irrelevent.
Now what the slavers decide to do with the slaves they bought, is another thing. They might take the women for their own private vices. That would be unfortunate, but it wouldn't change my position on the slavery issue. The blame will lie on the one who buys the slave and not the one who sells (as long as he isn't in the sex traffic business).  

[Xandurpein]

Gimmemocha wrote...

I don't think it is.  I think Alistair was very plain that he wouldn't accept Loghain as a Grey Warden.  It was always clear to me, anyway.

Well... I am stating now that this is what I honestly believed when I played the game, and I have seen others who thought the same. Whether you yourself saw this as inevitable or not, you can either believe me when I say I thought I had time to reason with him, maybe even argue some more, and then give in. I absolutely did not see it coming that he would up the ante by demanding to be made King, even if he had showed no inclination at all before it. You can either believe me on this or not as you see fit.

[Zemore]

my general opinions of Loghain would be that his actions are influenced by a huge number of variables most of all Arl howeand its literally impossible for us to get in to the mindset of a fictional character that has gone through so much that we could never experience. In the first post its true what was stated that loghain was not responsible for the Cousland Murders however he did know about them after Ostagar and preceeded to allow Howe to do as he pleased allowing him to take not only highever castle but the Denerim Estate and in turn he wasent responsible but he is definetly an accessory to multiple murders not even including Ostagar and trying to kill off the wardens several times.

no matter what Justification anyone can give about Loghain he did many many wrongs he is as the old saying goes only human i think more or less he got in to a situation where he made some descions that turned back on him and seemed right at the time this snowballed and got worse and trying to dig himself out of the hole just dug him deeper.



in the end i think the only real fitting end for Loghain is for him to use his life to slay the Archdemon it doesnt make his crimes any less well Criminal but it at least allows him to die with Dignity and not waste any more lives because of his arrogance and ignorance.



Morrigans deal is a good way too but it would be an awkward thing having Loghain and Alistair walking around scowling at each other!(if alistair is hardened and married to anora) not that i wouldent mind seeing it Al cracking bad taste jokes at how Loghains a mass murdering psychopath would be worth it

[Xandurpein]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sex slavery does not generate as much waelth as "normal" slavery. Sex slavery is good for private slavers, but no it never generates that much wealth and no real State or Kingdom based its wealth upon such a practise. "What ifs" are irrelevent.
Now what the slavers decide to do with the slaves they bought, is another thing. They might take the women for their own private vices. That would be unfortunate, but it wouldn't change my position on the slavery issue. The blame will lie on the one who buys the slave and not the one who sells (as long as he isn't in the sex traffic business).  

Slavery was deemed bad in Ferelden, that much is clear. It would serve no purpose whatsoever to try and force prostitution or normal slvary in Ferelden as it would immediatly cost the support he had, as witnessed by the voting in Landsmeet. The only way Loghain could get any money out of slavery was by selling the slaves secretly to another country in which it was legal. What the buyers did with the slaves was apparently not something Loghain would spare many thoughts, as long as he got his money quickly. And the quick money is in selling slaves as a commodity, not renting their services.

That said I do find the fact that Loghain did retort to selling elves as slaves far more reprihensible than his actions at Ostagar, even if Ostagar probably cost more lives.

/Edit. Most of the suggestions made how Loghain colud increase his income all required years to pay off. He needed money quickly for his next campaign. There was no way to start a business and wait to reap the benefits. Quick money means selling things, stealing things or possibly getting a loan.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 15 janvier 2010 - 01:30 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xandurpein wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sex slavery does not generate as much waelth as "normal" slavery. Sex slavery is good for private slavers, but no it never generates that much wealth and no real State or Kingdom based its wealth upon such a practise. "What ifs" are irrelevent.
Now what the slavers decide to do with the slaves they bought, is another thing. They might take the women for their own private vices. That would be unfortunate, but it wouldn't change my position on the slavery issue. The blame will lie on the one who buys the slave and not the one who sells (as long as he isn't in the sex traffic business).  

Slavery was deemed bad in Ferelden, that much is clear. It would serve no purpose whatsoever to try and force prostitution or normal slvary in Ferelden as it would immediatly cost the support he had, as witnessed by the voting in Landsmeet. The only way Loghain could get any money out of slavery was by selling the slaves secretly to another country in which it was legal. What the buyers did with the slaves was apparently not something Loghain would spare many thoughts, as long as he got his money quickly. And the quick money is in selling slaves as a commodity, not renting their services.

That said I do find the fact that Loghain did retort to selling elves as slaves far more reprihensible than his actions at Ostagar, even if Ostagar probably cost more lives.

He was doing it secretly.
And while the hypocritical nobility might dislike the idea, the fact that he is engaged in slavery does not necessarily result in the Landsmeet siding against Loghain. It's only one factor. Loghain can still gain the support of the Landsmeet even after they know what he is doing. So it's not a farcry from the acceptable.

[Zemore]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


Sex slavery does not generate as much waelth as "normal" slavery. Sex slavery is good for private slavers, but no it never generates that much wealth and no real State or Kingdom based its wealth upon such a practise. "What ifs" are irrelevent.
Now what the slavers decide to do with the slaves they bought, is another thing. They might take the women for their own private vices. That would be unfortunate, but it wouldn't change my position on the slavery issue. The blame will lie on the one who buys the slave and not the one who sells (as long as he isn't in the sex traffic business).  

that doesnt make any sense you see to sell slaves you must Enslave them how is what Loghain did any different to what Orlais did to Ferelden ... hes a gaint nutty Hypocrit

i think its said best after the Brood mother " the greatest sin wasent that it happend but that it was allowed to happen"
You cannot justify either side of the slave trade both are equally guilty and both consider lives worth only what gold you give or get for them both disgust me.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Zemore wrote...
that doesnt make any sense you see to sell slaves you must Enslave them how is what Loghain did any different to what Orlais did to Ferelden ... hes a gaint nutty Hypocrit

i think its said best after the Brood mother " the greatest sin wasent that it happend but that it was allowed to happen"
You cannot justify either side of the slave trade both are equally guilty and both consider lives worth only what gold you give or get for them both disgust me.

Orlais mistreated, exploited and enslaved the whole of Ferelden. Loghain is selling an already disliked and ignored minority that have little use, in the service of Ferelden. Two different things.
And yes, I can justify either side and in this instance, I am justifying the side of the seller who urgently needs money to protect the kingdom. Need, urgency and intentions, amongst other things, play a vital role in how I judge an act.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 janvier 2010 - 01:42 .

[robertthebard]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...
But you are metagaming yourself. It is perfectly possible for a character to believe that Alistair could be talked into accepting Loghain, even if he would be grumpy and hate it, as a Grey Warden. It is only by metagaming we KNOW that it is a trade, until Alistair has upped the ante and demanded you make him King, even if you decided Anora is a better choice. If you decide Anora is better on the throne than Alistair and then spare Loghain. Alistair will demand you kill Loghain AND make him King instead of Anora or you'll loose him. THAT is why I let Alistair go away on my first play.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Alisteir strongly and repeteadly state that he will NOT stand for Loghain becoming a GW? I saw his fit coming a mile away. He tells you "no, no friggin way".
Even if by some miracle you belive he won't do something exreeme, it's pretty obvious talking Loghina will break your group cohesion.

And my gripe with Alistair is not if he broke any oath, but that he didn't stick around to kill the Archdemon.

All fine and dandy, but what has that to do with Loghain?

My groups are pretty cohesive, with Alistair babysitting the fire.  Whether I spare Loghain or not, Alistair is not key to anything I do.  He showed up at Redcliffe, as my last stop, with all treaties done, in the same armor he was wearing at Ostagar.  Alistair, like Loghain, is not required for anything but his little plot lines.  BTW, you are wrong.  Alistair says at Flemeth's hut that Loghain must be brought to justice.  He only says no to him becoming a GW once it becomes an issue.  He really can't object to it any time before then, now can he?

You mentioned earlier that you had been in many arguements on the internet.  Based on your track record here, I'm pretty sure I know how that worked out for you.  When you absolutely can't make everyone see things your way, it's time for Godwin's Law?  You see, you have the black and white view in a grey world.  Nobody cares how you want to play your game.  If you'll notice, my posts in this thread are in contention with the topic.  Yet, once again, I find myself embarrassed to be in a discussion in which I have to have a position any where close to yours.

[Zemore]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Zemore wrote...
that doesnt make any sense you see to sell slaves you must Enslave them how is what Loghain did any different to what Orlais did to Ferelden ... hes a gaint nutty Hypocrit

i think its said best after the Brood mother " the greatest sin wasent that it happend but that it was allowed to happen"
You cannot justify either side of the slave trade both are equally guilty and both consider lives worth only what gold you give or get for them both disgust me.

Orlais mistreated, exploited and enslaved the whole of Ferelden. Loghain is selling an already disliked and ignored minority that have little use, in the service of Ferelden. Two different things.
And yes, I can justify either side and in this instance, I am justifying the side of the seller who urgently needs money to protect the kingdom. Need, urgency and intentions, amongst other things, play a vital role in how I judge an act.

the elves were still free he TOOK thier freedom away Orlais TOOK Fereldens freedom away its the same damn thing ,it doesnt matter if they dident like the elves it doesnt change the parralels of what was done its one large e power assuming that they own a smaller weaker group.

Loghain needed money for Ferelden? no Loghain needed money because his cival war cost him too much theres plenty money around Arl howe for example all the other nobles for another? what about thier money id assume they still have buttloads lying around. (when u raid the denerim estate i know i left with a bunch)

Money isnt justification its just plain ignorance its saying lives have a monetary value they dont no life does.

Modifié par Zemore, 15 janvier 2010 - 01:55 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Zemore wrote...
the elves were still free he TOOK thier freedom away Orlais TOOK Fereldens freedom away its the same damn thing ,it doesnt matter if they dident like the elves it doesnt change the parralels of what was done its one large e power assuming that they own a smaller weaker group.

A weak comparision. A country being invaded and robbed of its sovereignity and independence  is one thing. Weak elves being sold to slavery by the government in order to protect the kigndom is an entirely different thing all together.
It doesn't take a political scientist to see the difference.

Loghain couldn't take the money he needed from the nobility, lest they withdraw their support. Which would have been disastrous for him.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 janvier 2010 - 01:56 .