1429 réponses à ce sujet

[Tirigon]

Zemore wrote...

i said toilet paper not german poop porn

As a German I refuse such ideas about our porn preferences.

[Zemore]

Tirigon wrote...

You know, that´s all nice and good, but it really has nothing to do with wether Loghain is a douchebag who deserves to die or not.

i think in real life yes yes he does ... but the point this is a game with multiple choices and outcomes based on said choices ... and that varies depending on HOW you play your char doesnt it? so you cant get a definate answer unless you take Loggy out of the game and in to our world.

Tirigon wrote...

Zemore wrote...

i said toilet paper not german poop porn

As a German I refuse such ideas about our porn preferences.

i never said you prefer it

Modifié par Zemore, 15 janvier 2010 - 03:14 .

[robertthebard]

Zemore wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

They have Kleenex, because I invented them for Alistair, hence the sig.  It has to be self replenishing, however, as if they aren't, he'd be gone before he gets to Lothering.

you dident answer what they use for toilet paper I DEMAND ANSWERS!! im thinking wolf pelts

AL is a bit weepy but i did like him overall as a char i burst in to laughter evertime i tell the dog hes full of rubbish and he goes HEY! just the way he says it makes me laugh =)

Gimmemocha wrote...

Zemore wrote...
and do they even have Kleenexes? ... or even toilet paper? if not what do they use?

Convenient city elves, I suspect.

i said toilet paper not german poop porn

I think they use the three hole method for toilet paper.  I won't go into details.

[Gimmemocha]

Tirigon wrote..

You know, that´s all nice and good, but it really has nothing to do with wether Loghain is a douchebag who deserves to die or not.

I disagree, too.  Sabriana's posts have been some of the ones I've enjoyed the most in this thread, despite the fact that we take different views on the Loghain/Alistair question.  And our approaches to the City Elf are emblematic of that difference.

The point being that in both cases there are in-character justifications for the way the characters behave and the choices they make.  I think that's one of the reasons I've liked Sabriana's posts the best; she generally sticks to the characters and their approaches and their reasonings.  That's always interesting to me.

[Tirigon]

robertthebard wrote...

I think they use the three hole method for toilet paper.  I won't go into details.

Why not? I don´t know this method. And maybe we could understand Loghain better if we knew how he cleans his ass....:mellow:

[Zemore]

Tirigon wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I think they use the three hole method for toilet paper.  I won't go into details.

Why not? I don´t know this method. And maybe we could understand Loghain better if we knew how he cleans his ass....:mellow:

true it could be the reason he acts so angry!

[Sabriana]

@ Tirigon

I know that this thread is huge, and there's a lot to read. This has to do with Alistair not being any kind of deciding factor in letting Loghain live (or die). In my game.

It also has to do with individual choices.

Modifié par Sabriana, 15 janvier 2010 - 03:29 .

[robertthebard]

Tirigon wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I think they use the three hole method for toilet paper.  I won't go into details.

Why not? I don´t know this method. And maybe we could understand Loghain better if we knew how he cleans his ass....:mellow:

Ok, because you asked for it:

You go into the outhouse, assuming we have one, and take care of your business, you use your hand to clean up after, and then stick your fingers into the three holes provided, which have nails sticking out, pointy side out, so you poke your fingers when inserted...

[Tirigon]

robertthebard wrote...

You go into the outhouse, assuming we have one, and take care of your business, you use your hand to clean up after, and then stick your fingers into the three holes provided, which have nails sticking out, pointy side out, so you poke your fingers when inserted...

Ehm... I can´t really imagine, but I think this is just the better...:sick::sick:



@ Sabriana: I think your character is of few importance because from a role-playing POV you can OF COURSE excuse Loghain, there is no point in arguing about that. After all, you could as well Roleplay a Noble who likes Loghain´s way of thinking and does practically the same, just more successful. But that doesn´t mean Loghain is good, it simply means you are roleplaying an evil char.

[Costin_Razvan]

Uhm? What? How did the discussion get here?!

But that doesn´t mean Loghain is good, it simply means you are roleplaying an evil char.

War is cruel, no matter how you take it there no way honest and good way you can wage war, in the end you are still killing thousands of people. Justifyable by the fact those people were against you? or did not have the same morals as you, or did evil things? I don't think so.

People consider the Anvil of the Void evil, despite the fact it would save the lives of countless dwarves in the long run, People consider Bhelen evil, when in fact he is determined to save the lives of his people, and better the ones of the lower caste.

People consider Anora evil, because she is willing to do whatever it takes to ensure stability for her kindgom.

I think evil can only be classified on people who's only goal was to do harm or for their own selfish needs. Only Howe in the entire game has that kind of goal. Loghain did what was necesary to try and secure his kingdom, for the betterment of ALL his people ( so he sold elves from a Alienage, things would have been much more worse had the bannorn won ), is that evil? Doubtfull.

Killing a man in cold blood when he surrenders to you, for vengeance, to keep your idiotic friend by your side and other things, is what I would consider evil.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 15 janvier 2010 - 03:47 .

[Zemore]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Uhm? What? How did the discussion get here?!

on the internet most discussions end in the toilet why should here be different?

[Tirigon]

Zemore wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Uhm? What? How did the discussion get here?!

on the internet most discussions end in the toilet why should here be different?

No lol. Most end with everyone flaming all the other dumbasses.



Ooops I did it again...B)B)B)B)

[Zemore]

Tirigon wrote...

Zemore wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Uhm? What? How did the discussion get here?!

on the internet most discussions end in the toilet why should here be different?

No lol. Most end with everyone flaming all the other dumbasses.



Ooops I did it again...B)B)B)B)

all i heard was flaming poo you damn dirty ape!!

[LOST_PriNcEsS_]

Okay, I guess I'll bring this back on topic:



@OP -- I'm sorry, I didn't read all 47 pages of this thread since now everyone's talking about toilet paper, but I did just finish reading the two Dragon Age novels and they completely changed my feelings towards Loghain.



Originally I thought he was just an ambitious bastard (and a plot device or antagonist) who wanted the throne for himself who was willing to kill Cailan, Anora, Alistair, and Eamon just to get there. However, after reading the books I realized that Loghain never really wanted the throne -- he just doing what he felt was necessary to keep Fereldan from going back to Orlesian control.



OP, I would STRONGLY suggest you read the novels, especially the Stolen Throne. I don't want to ruin it, but Loghain has a personal vendetta against Orlais. Maybe he was being callous by retreating at Ostagar, or you could argue he knew what was at stake and he knew if he and Cailan died, (since in the novels it seems Loghain was to become Cailan's regent if Cailan was too young to take the throne in the event of Maric's death) no strong individual could take Fereldan's throne and it could possible fall under Orlesian occupation yet again.



The novels completely changed my justification towards Loghain as a character. Still, I do not plan on ever letting him live past a Landsmeet because he is still "guilty" in MY eyes for leaving King Cailan and not supporting him and possibly dying at Ostagar, but it will be interesting for me to play another playthrough with this new knowledge of Loghain's backstory.

[Costin_Razvan]

LOST_PriNcEsS_ : Click the blue Bioware button underneath the thread title, you will be surprised at what David Gaider said in this thread. Also know that in Return to ostagar it is shown that the battle could not have been won, loghain or no.

[Tirigon]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Uhm? What? How did the discussion get here?!

But that doesn´t mean Loghain is good, it simply means you are roleplaying an evil char.

War is cruel, no matter how you take it there no way honest and good way you can wage war, in the end you are still killing thousands of people. Justifyable by the fact those people were against you? or did not have the same morals as you, or did evil things? I don't think so.

People consider the Anvil of the Void evil, despite the fact it would save the lives of countless dwarves in the long run, People consider Bhelen evil, when in fact he is determined to save the lives of his people, and better the ones of the lower caste.

The anvil isn´t evil, it´s a tool and has no morales. Forcing people into becoming golems, however, is evil. Not because they become golems, but because they are forced. And Bhelen is evil because he is a dictator. Every dictator is evil, unless it´s you yourself, of course.

People consider Anora evil, because she is willing to do whatever it takes to ensure stability for her kindgom.

I think evil can only be classified on people who's only goal was to do harm or for their own selfish needs. Only Howe in the entire game has that kind of goal. Loghain did what was necesary to try and secure his kingdom, for the betterment of ALL his people ( so he sold elves from a Alienage, things would have been much more worse had the bannorn won ), is that evil? Doubtfull.

Killing a man in cold blood when he surrenders to you, for vengeance, to keep your idiotic friend by your side and other things, is what I would consider evil.

It all depends....

Killing a man who surrenders is evil. Killing a man who deserves death is not - even more if you duelled for life or death.
However, selling people as slaves is evil, even if you excuse it with the betterment of all.
"ALL" don´t matter. What matters is only the individual. Doing things for others is an illusion. Ultimately, you do things for YOU, and for no-one else.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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

That's cause there's no retort that's more appropriate.
Your inability to acknowledge other solutions makes other kinds of argument pointless.

Provide me with other solutions, with a detailed and thoughout plan, so that I may consider it. But just crying "But there are other wayz" without actually prodiving one, is utterly useless.

Sex slavery does not generate as much waelth as "normal" slavery.  

Got statistics to prove that?

No need for statistics. Just because "normal" slavery was more common than sex slavery, it means it's more beneficial. What's more beneficial? 10 people working on your farm or building something for you, or 10 people you screw?
Common sense.

[Costin_Razvan]

Tirigon: You are a selfish little ****, did you know that?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

KnightofPhoenix
So selling elves is justifiable to try and end the civil war.

Everything is justifiable by the insane and corrupt. EVERYTHING.
I could torture and kill you and find a way to justify it.  You'd disagree of course, but your agrrement isn't necessary.

I didn't say justifiable. I said justified because of the reasons provided.
You may feel it's not justified. I feel it is justified. You may think I am corrupt and insane. I couldn't care less.

[Sabriana]

You know, of all the things that really vex me in this thread, nothing does a better job than people not reading the input of the writer of this game. Yet, it is so easy.

Note: This was not in any way meant toward any individual poster, just a general observation.



@ Tirigon

No, I don't have to play an evil character to let Loghain live. Other than that, this is now turning to form a circle, and I'm done discussion this with you for the moment. We can pick it up when you have something constructive to say, and stop being all defensive because my point of view is different than yours.

My character is the only important thing in my game. Nothing you say, do, or post will change the way I view my right to my choice.

[Tirigon]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Tirigon: You are a selfish little ****, did you know that?

Aaaah, finally the Flaming! I missed it so much! Just when I thought you were capable of discussing politely...


Well, to answer your question: No I´m not. Unlike the usual ****** egoist (= average human) I am able to see that it is sometimes useful for you to do things for others, and that you rech your goals more easily if others like you.

But, it´s a fact: Everyone claiming NOT to think primarily of himself is a Liar.

[Gimmemocha]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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

That's cause there's no retort that's more appropriate.
Your inability to acknowledge other solutions makes other kinds of argument pointless.

Provide me with other solutions, with a detailed and thoughout plan, so that I may consider it. But just crying "But there are other wayz" without actually prodiving one, is utterly useless.

Mostly I've stayed out of this argument because I find it inherently inane, but wouldn't the fact that people have held and won civil wars without resorting to slavery mean that there are other ways? 

Also bear in mind that this IS a fictional universe.  Whether slavery is or is not the only way is largely a function of the writers inventing things that we may not have seen in the storyline. Besides, Loghain had a crown made (or two, if you count the bug...) so I say he's flinging money around!  Shame, Loghain!

[KnightofPhoenix]

Gimmemocha wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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

That's cause there's no retort that's more appropriate.
Your inability to acknowledge other solutions makes other kinds of argument pointless.

Provide me with other solutions, with a detailed and thoughout plan, so that I may consider it. But just crying "But there are other wayz" without actually prodiving one, is utterly useless.

Mostly I've stayed out of this argument because I find it inherently inane, but wouldn't the fact that people have held and won civil wars without resorting to slavery mean that there are other ways? 

Also bear in mind that this IS a fictional universe.  Whether slavery is or is not the only way is largely a function of the writers inventing things that we may not have seen in the storyline. Besides, Loghain had a crown made (or two, if you count the bug...) so I say he's flinging money around!  Shame, Loghain!

Civil war counting the fact that it's a feudal Monarchy, a weak and poor one, with an invasion from the south and an army moblising on the northern frontier. We should take all that into consideration.

I am aware this is a fictional universe. But people who keep complaining about other ways should at least think about it and try to put themselves in Loghain's shoes. It's always easy to say what leaders should do. That's until we actually get into their shoes. I could always claim that with me in charge, I could end poverty. And we have seen what happens with idealists such as this who gain power. They are confronted with reality and how inevitably atrocious it is.
Best example is Maximilien Robespierre, to those who know about him.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 janvier 2010 - 04:09 .

[Tirigon]

Sabriana wrote...

You know, of all the things that really vex me in this thread, nothing does a better job than people not reading the input of the writer of this game. Yet, it is so easy.
Note: This was not in any way meant toward any individual poster, just a general observation.

It matters not what he says. David said himself that only the things implemented in the books and the game are important.

@ Tirigon
No, I don't have to play an evil character to let Loghain live. Other than that, this is now turning to form a circle, and I'm done discussion this with you for the moment. We can pick it up when you have something constructive to say, and stop being all defensive because my point of view is different than yours.
My character is the only important thing in my game. Nothing you say, do, or post will change the way I view my right to my choice.

A perfectly valid point. A point, however, that makes me wonder WHY you bother to discuss this matter at all. If you think like that you should consider to stay out of this thread. It´s impolite to annoy people who want to discuss with stories of your playthrough. I honestly couldn´t care less for how you play your game.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Tirigon wrote...
A perfectly valid point. A point, however, that makes me wonder WHY you bother to discuss this matter at all. If you think like that you should consider to stay out of this thread. It´s impolite to annoy people who want to discuss with stories of your playthrough. I honestly couldn´t care less for how you play your game.

This thread has mostly become irrelevent and way beyond what the OP wanted (to refute cerrtain claims against Loghain).
And now we have people accusing others of being insane, decadant, evil and all kinds of nonsense. There is nothing left to discuss anymore. Rather, each states his subjective opinion on morality that some people disagree with.