I am very surprised by the number of people who see Alistair as a bland or self-righteous character, a successor to the tradition of boring paladin-type characters. He seems to be very nuanced and well-written. He’s not perfect, but the strength of Dragon Age: Origins is that the character’s flaws are explicable—and to my mind, forgivable—by their circumstances.
Consider his upbringing. He’s a bastard, an embarrassment to his father. Arl Emon takes him on as a favor to his father, then effectively gets rid of him by sending him to the Templars. If you think about how Eamon’s wife viewed sending Conor to the Circle, you get some idea of just how much they valued Alistair. Like Morrigan, he was unloved as a child. It’s not that surprising that when he was chosen by Duncan, he developed a huge man-crush—someone who he actually valued him for who he was, rather than as a potential bargaining chip in a power game. Suddenly, he was part of an organization that gave him a purpose to his life that he could believe in, unlike the Templars. Is it really so surprising that the destruction of that organization and the death of a man who was like a surrogate father to him was devastating? It’s not like he has a few months mourning period to get over it; he’s thrust back into the action. And yet, rather than decide that Ferelden is a lost cause and go off in search of Grey Wardens elsewhere, he soldiers on with another Grey Warden even more junior than himself.
And sure, Ferelden needs a king but it’s very far from clear that that king needs to be him. First of all, bastards weren’t normally considered in succession lines. In the cases that I am familiar with (William the Conqueror) that bastards inherited, they were acknowledged by their fathers during life and designated as heirs. I am not aware of any cases of a bastard surfacing after the father’s death and being accepted as ruler. I’m not saying it never happened in human history, but I’m sure it was rare. And if it did happen, I’m guessing it happened because he was backed by someone who had the political clout to force him to be recognized and he was more figurehead than ruler. His claim on the throne is not really that strong.
Furthermore, unlike someone like William the Conqueror, he’s completely unprepared for rule. He has no experience of the royal court and was never trained in statesmanship or leadership. Is it really so unreasonable for him to doubt his ability to rule? Almost any first-born noble son in the kingdom would be better qualified by life experiences. Is it so terrible for him to think somebody who was trained as a leader and ruler from birth (even if expected to inherit on a much smaller scale) would be better on the throne? It’s not that he doesn’t wish to serve Ferelden, it’s that he wishes to serve Ferelden competently. He thinks he’s more competent to fight monsters under somebody’s else’s command than to rule a kingdom.
Sometimes he is self-righteous, but what do you expect of someone who was raised by the chantry? I think Morrigan is just as judgemental, in her own way.
Alistair is sweet, funny, insecure, immature, and yes, lovable.
WOAD69, it seems that with Loghaine, you’re taking his own self-justifying words as truth. Practically every tyrant in human history claims to have the interests of the nation at stake. No doubt Stalin would have said the same thing. Loghaine lies to us (and maybe to himself), to rationalize his own treachery and naked power grab.