120 réponses à ce sujet

[cJohnOne]

Had to google Cannae. What's a double envelopment?

[Fuggyt]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



Bear in mind Cailan actually ruined the plan by charging out of the defensible position.

See here for some of my detailed explanations on Ostagar and why it was unwinnable, also dealing with Cailan's mindset during the battle.

I would just post it here, but I have to head out to work for the next five hours

I respect your opinion but I don't find it persuasive.  We could go around and around the responsibility for what went wrong at Ostagar for about as long as they've been having the same discussion about Gettysburg, I suppose (I blame Lee).  But I notice this argument, based as it is on a fair amount of presumption and supposition, does not address a lot of in-game content from NPCs like Teagon, Eamon, even Cathrian, and especially Anora.  It does not address why Loghain felt compelled the blame the Grey Wardens, nor why he so swiftly named himself regent, nor why he sent Jowan to poison Eamon.  Care to take those issues on, Ethereal?

And I'm not so sure Cailan ruined the plan by charging out.  Perhaps that was the plan, to force the darkspawn to commit, to lure them irrevocably into the trap that never sprung.  It looks like a mistake to me, too, when I see the cut scene, but case for Loghain is not strictly based on what we see in the cut scene, is it?  It's based on inferring his motives and his true tactical judgment, which is merely begging the question.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Fuggyt wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...



Bear in mind Cailan actually ruined the plan by charging out of the defensible position.

See here for some of my detailed explanations on Ostagar and why it was unwinnable, also dealing with Cailan's mindset during the battle.

I would just post it here, but I have to head out to work for the next five hours

I respect your opinion but I don't find it persuasive.  We could go around and around the responsibility for what went wrong at Ostagar for about as long as they've been having the same discussion about Gettysburg, I suppose (I blame Lee).  But I notice this argument, based as it is on a fair amount of presumption and supposition, does not address a lot of in-game content from NPCs like Teagon, Eamon, even Cathrian, and especially Anora.  It does not address why Loghain felt compelled the blame the Grey Wardens, nor why he so swiftly named himself regent, nor why he sent Jowan to poison Eamon.  Care to take those issues on, Ethereal?

He probably does, but why wait?

These presumptions, as far as I remember are backed by David Gaider. Here, specifically.

As for the NPCs, they're fallible and have their own agendas. As it should be: they're supposed to be human. More specifically, Eamon and Teagan weren't there. They didn't see the darkspawn rushing into the valley, or the several mile long column. Besides which, they value the sanctity of the royal line above practical concerns, as seen with Eamon's reaction to Anora ruling. Cauthrien, IIRC, stated that Loghain was destroying everything he used to love, which could as easily have meant the Civil War and slavery. Flemeth, you didn't mention, but since you could have, we are given no reason to trust her. We have no way of knowing whether she is telling the truth.

Gaider's post I mentioned above explains Jowan, and as for naming himself Regent, it just makes sense from what he can see. The natural successor is Anora, who is a peacetime queen and knows she has no idea what to do. Loghain's main claim to fame is that he helped win a war. He thinks he knows what to do.

As for blaming the Wardens, it's not that hard to see. Loghain knows that the signal was lit at the wrong time. He knows that the only men in that Tower he can't personally vouch for are the Warden recruits. Blaming them for that was easy.

He also blames them for Cailan fighting on the front, which is illogical but also not hard to see. Cailan could not see any outcome except his own survival and finding glory among the Grey Wardens. Loghain sees this, sees Duncan tactfully not trying to budge him on this, and connects it with the PC's perceived betrayal. Part of his motivation is that he'd rather believe Duncan led him into this than that Cailan's just a moron.

As for Anora, I don't think she'd decided. From the cutscene, and from Erlina's description of her capture, it sounds like she was more at the "asking pointed questions" stage. Afterwards, either Howe's unique brand of evil stupidity convinced her something was wrong, or she pretended for the sake of getting along with her newly politically-convenient killing machine.

And I'm not so sure Cailan ruined the plan by charging out.  Perhaps that was the plan, to force the darkspawn to commit, to lure them irrevocably into the trap that never sprung.

The darkspawn charge before Cailan's line does. He should have stayed behind that improvised wall.

Either way, the fact remains that the spawn were still pouring into the valley. I don't think you've really answered this point; if I understand correctly, the cited precedent for flanking a larger army didn't have reinforcements pouring in to flank the flankers.

It looks like a mistake to me, too, when I see the cut scene, but case for Loghain is not strictly based on what we see in the cut scene, is it?  It's based on inferring his motives and his true tactical judgment, which is merely begging the question.

"Complete Defense Of Loghain Mac Tir." It's the post linked to above.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 26 mars 2013 - 12:58 .

[TEWR]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

He probably does, but why wait?

I lol'd.

But I notice this argument, based as it is on a fair amount of presumption and supposition,

Actually, it's based on facts, both historical for Thedas and recent.

does not address a lot of in-game content from NPCs like Teagon, Eamon, even Cathrian, and especially Anora. It does not address why Loghain felt compelled the blame the Grey Wardens, nor why he so swiftly named himself regent, nor why he sent Jowan to poison Eamon. Care to take those issues on, Ethereal?

I will indeed.

We see firsthand in Ostagar how Cailan is only in it for the glory. He finds strategy sessions boring, avoids Loghain when he (Loghain) wants to talk strategy, goes on and on about glory, and many other things that lend themselves to him indeed being a glory-hounding fool that didn't care one ounce for tactics. These are all things we hear, either from Cailan's mouth or from the mouths of other soldiers.

As for Teagan and Eamon, just because they choose not to believe what Loghain says does not mean Loghain is lying. Cailan is a glory-hounding fool. There is no doubt about that.

Cailan even repeatedly refused the aid of his uncle's forces who are closer to Ostagar then Orlais, yet we're supposed to believe he'd wait for Orlesian men to arrive when they have to send all of their men through a narrow mountain pass?

No, Cailan was a fool and he would not wait for Orlesian reinforcements if he couldn't even wait for Redcliffe's troops. He only brings that up to bait Loghain into commencing with the battle that, as we're told, he wants to be a single grand battle "the bards will sing of for centuries".

Also, neither Teagan nor Eamon were actually at Ostagar, so who are they to pass judgement on Loghain's actions? They did not see the horde. Loghain did. Loghain is the general of the armies. Neither Teagan nor Eamon are.

And Cauthrien's comments do not mean that Ostagar was winnable. You can see from the bridge how the Darkspawn horde stretches to the ass end of the visible Wilds and possibly beyond that, into the very bowels of the forest. Not everyone is going to be certain of Ostagar's nature in Thedas, but that does not mean that objectively it was winnable. We the players have the pleasure of having a myriad of other information to work off of to form an objective analysis that the NPCs of Thedas do not.

It does not address why Loghain felt compelled the blame the Grey Wardens, nor why he so swiftly named himself regent, nor why he sent Jowan to poison Eamon.

Actually, all of what I linked you to did address these things. I urge you to reread all of it, but one should also note that the Grey Wardens historically did help Orlais and the Chantry -- and the Chantry has seen fit to help out their buddy Orlais.

During the Blights, Orlais would often swoop in to "save" weakened nations and then never leave, oppressing the native population and forcing them to rebel in order to see an independent nation. Hell, it's not even restricted to the Blights, as they did the same thing to Kirkwall and Ferelden. The list of places Orlais conquered in its expansionism are Nevarra, Kirkwall, Ferelden, and the Anderfels IIRC.

The Grey Wardens would often help the Orlesians before they signed a Treaty of Neutrality in the Third Blight. Loghain's fear is that the Grey Wardens have rescinded the oath they swore to remain neutral and are once again helping Orlais by way of keeping Cailan a glory-hounding fool so that when he died in battle, Ferelden would be sucked up by a power vacuum -- as the death of a king often does -- and destroy itself from within, thus making it ripe for "saving".

Which is why after Ostagar, Loghain stresses that the Darkspawn must be dealt with swiftly by a united Ferelden so as to not seem weak in the eyes of their neighbors (Orlais). Admittedly, he poorly phrased what he wanted -- he's not a politician, that much is not in contention -- and his comments screamed to the Bannorn Orlesian undertones, even though they're still different from Orlais' demands during the occupation.

Now, for the Regency, bear in mind that while Anora is trained in warfare and military strategy, she's not a proven commander. She has the theoretical knowledge, but Loghain's fought in a war before. So he declared himself Regent, something to which Anora was okay with. And bear in mind this wasn't something many people liked about Loghain, though I find it hard not to label them traitors all for going against something the Queen of Ferelden was content with at first. The woman that was known by almost all of Ferelden's important people to have ruled Ferelden from behind the scenes for five years.

Personally, I believe the reason why Loghain didn't rely on Anora for political insight as he should've done was because of two things: seeing Anora as his little girl always and Howe's manipulative nature. DG confirmed Howe was a manipulative weasel who did a great many things without Loghain's knowledge or approval -- the purge of the Alienage, for instancee -- and I like to believe that Loghain initially thought Anora would be too grief-stricken and conflicted over Cailan's death to be able to properly rule since the two did care for each other, Anora more so since Cailan was a womanizer. And I believe that Howe only made those thoughts about Anora's capability worse by manipulating Loghain.

And then when Anora goes "Did you kill Cailan?", Howe ends up saying afterwards "See my lord? She is unfit to bear the burdens of rule at this time."

Think Grima Wormtongue and King Theoden, only without magic. And bear in mind that Howe is a power-hungry **** who would never be satisfied, evidenced by his usurpation of Highever and Denerim.

And I'm not so sure Cailan ruined the plan by charging out.  Perhaps that was the plan, to force the darkspawn to commit, to lure them irrevocably into the trap that never sprung.

The plan was for Cailan's group to lure the Darkspawn to be in the valley. The key word is "lure". Nowhere in Loghain's battle plan did he tell Cailan to meet them in the open field, where their left, right, and frontal flanks were so openly exposed and where it would eventually lead to them getting swallowed up by the Darkspawn.

The Darkspawn charged first. The logical course of action is to remain in the back, with the walls of Ostagar protecting the left and right flanks, while working to take out the Darkspawn. Preferably with a phalanx formation for a ways back and behind them rows of archers firing into the horde continuously.

Cailan ordered one volley, sent his Mabari out as fodder troops, and then charged out into the open field exposing all flanks to assault. And this is something Loghain himself brings up if the Warden brings up Ostagar. How the Wardens goaded him into making the charge, strategy and consequence be hanged.

The goading, in this case, was by the way the Wardens failed to offer any true insight into the Darkspawn, or how Cailan was being reckless, or even on why they were truly necessary. Their silence was damning, both for the Order and for Cailan. 

What's worse is that the entire Tower of Ishal sequence, from Loghain's perspective, is damning of the Wardens as well because it seems that they deliberately held off on lighting the beacon until the king's army was breaking down. And that they hoped that Loghain would charge after he just saw the beacon and die in the battle, where Ferelden would lose not only its king but also its greatest general and then possibly lose itself to civil war.

And Orlais would swoop right on in to "save the day", but in reality would just conquer Ferelden again. And we all know that swooping is bad.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 mars 2013 - 05:40 .

[Monica21]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Thoughtful argument

+1,000,000

[Warden Commander David]

Loghain's withdraw from the battle was nothing more than an opportunity to take power.

Loghain knew what the strategy was for the battle.

You can't have it both ways.

If you want to say that he did the right thing and withdrew his men to save them...then you're assuming that he did not need the beacon to tell him when the perfect time to flank would be...he could see how the battle was going.

This means...that even though the beacon was not lit...he should have known the best time to charge...since he "claims" it wouldn't have been a good time to charge when the beacon was lit.

In my opinion...he waited for the beacon to further his blame on the wardens.

There were holes in his plan that he quickly tried to fix...so that no one could say anything to counter his claims.

This is why he left men at Lothering to kill Alistair and the Warden. He gave them their exact description because he knew they were the only two Wardens not in the battle...and could have possibly survived. So he needed them killed. Not brought in...captured...but killed...so that they couldn't say anything. 

He handed out sketches of them in Denerim for his guards to attack.

When he found out that they definitely did survive...he sent an assassin to kill them.

Modifié par Warden Commander David, 26 mars 2013 - 04:45 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

cJohnOne wrote...

Had to google Cannae. What's a double envelopment?

When you surround an enemy army completely. 

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Warden Commander David wrote...

Loghain's withdraw from the battle was nothing more than an opportunity to take power.

Loghain knew what the strategy was for the battle.

You can't have it both ways.

If you want to say that he did the right thing and withdrew his men to save them...then you're assuming that he did not need the beacon to tell him when the perfect time to flank would be...he could see how the battle was going.

This means...that even though the beacon was not lit...he should have known the best time to charge...since he "claims" it wouldn't have been a good time to charge when the beacon was lit.

I think the idea was that Loghain could only see just enough to know that there were darkspawn that hadn't committed. The beacon was because he couldn't neccessarily see that they weren't, which is obviated when it is lit at an obvious wrong time.

In my opinion...he waited for the beacon to further his blame on the wardens.

It's not the one the head writer had in his head at the time of production, and while there are still some weird bits this interpretation of Loghain makes more sense than him just being a cackling villain; if he was that he'd have struck at some other, less potentially disastrous time, or instead of trying to talk Cailan out of fighting on the front lines would have told him "real men fight naked." 

This is why he left men at Lothering to kill Alistair and the Warden. He gave them their exact description because he knew they were the only two Wardens not in the battle...and could have possibly survived. So he needed them killed. Not brought in...captured...but killed...so that they couldn't say anything. 

He handed out sketches of them in Denerim for his guards to attack.

When he found out that they definitely did survive...he sent an assassin to kill them.

Those actions aren't evidence either way. Yes, they're what you'd expect to see if you're right, but they're also what you'd expect to see if we're right. Killing them summarily is extreme, true, but justified given just how powerful the average Warden is; the stuff you do in-game isn't just main character superpowers.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 30 mars 2013 - 05:24 .

[TEWR]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

cJohnOne wrote...

Had to google Cannae. What's a double envelopment?

When you surround an enemy army completely. 

Huh, I didn't even realize there was a term for that concept. Regardless, that's precisely what Cailan's idiotic charge into the valley led to and certainly what would've happened had Loghain charged.

[Fuggyt]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

He probably does, but why wait?

I lol'd.

But I notice this argument, based as it is on a fair amount of presumption and supposition,

Actually, it's based on facts, both historical for Thedas and recent.

does not address a lot of in-game content from NPCs like Teagon, Eamon, even Cathrian, and especially Anora. It does not address why Loghain felt compelled the blame the Grey Wardens, nor why he so swiftly named himself regent, nor why he sent Jowan to poison Eamon. Care to take those issues on, Ethereal?

I will indeed.

We see firsthand in Ostagar how Cailan is only in it for the glory. He finds strategy sessions boring, avoids Loghain when he (Loghain) wants to talk strategy, goes on and on about glory, and many other things that lend themselves to him indeed being a glory-hounding fool that didn't care one ounce for tactics. These are all things we hear, either from Cailan's mouth or from the mouths of other soldiers.

As for Teagan and Eamon, just because they choose not to believe what Loghain says does not mean Loghain is lying. Cailan is a glory-hounding fool. There is no doubt about that.

Of course there's doubt about that.  That may be Loghain's view, but Duncan certainly thinks there's more to him than that.  

Cailan even repeatedly refused the aid of his uncle's forces who are closer to Ostagar then Orlais, yet we're supposed to believe he'd wait for Orlesian men to arrive when they have to send all of their men through a narrow mountain pass?

No, Cailan was a fool and he would not wait for Orlesian reinforcements if he couldn't even wait for Redcliffe's troops. He only brings that up to bait Loghain into commencing with the battle that, as we're told, he wants to be a single grand battle "the bards will sing of for centuries".

You're guessing at his motives.

Also, neither Teagan nor Eamon were actually at Ostagar, so who are they to pass judgement on Loghain's actions? They did not see the horde. Loghain did. Loghain is the general of the armies. Neither Teagan nor Eamon are.

But Alistair, the Warden, and Flemeth were, and all three blame the loss on Loghain.   You may now proceed to demolish their testimony, if you wish, but they saw what I saw. 

And Cauthrien's comments do not mean that Ostagar was winnable. You can see from the bridge how the Darkspawn horde stretches to the ass end of the visible Wilds and possibly beyond that, into the very bowels of the forest. Not everyone is going to be certain of Ostagar's nature in Thedas, but that does not mean that objectively it was winnable. We the players have the pleasure of having a myriad of other information to work off of to form an objective analysis that the NPCs of Thedas do not.

And here's the flimsiest part of the argument, in my opinion--guesstimating the relative size of the horde.  "The very bowels of the forest," is it?  Where'd you get that metaphor from, a proctologic tree surgeon?  Yes, I saw all the fires receding in the distance, which I also saw behind Loghain's troops as they marched away.  I saw a pretty large crowd of darkspawn marching out of the forest, but I also Cathrian lead a pretty large crowd of troops off stage left.  If the darkspawn were so numerous the flank attack was futile, why didn't they just overrun Ferelden from there?  Certainly their army at Denerim had to be considerably larger, did it not?  So Cathrien's comments outside the Landsmeet chamber certainly do not mean Ostagar was UNwinnable either, do they?  Loghain says that, but he would, wouldn't he?

It does not address why Loghain felt compelled the blame the Grey Wardens, nor why he so swiftly named himself regent, nor why he sent Jowan to poison Eamon.

Actually, all of what I linked you to did address these things. I urge you to reread all of it, but one should also note that the Grey Wardens historically did help Orlais and the Chantry -- and the Chantry has seen fit to help out their buddy Orlais.

During the Blights, Orlais would often swoop in to "save" weakened nations and then never leave, oppressing the native population and forcing them to rebel in order to see an independent nation. Hell, it's not even restricted to the Blights, as they did the same thing to Kirkwall and Ferelden. The list of places Orlais conquered in its expansionism are Nevarra, Kirkwall, Ferelden, and the Anderfels IIRC.

The Grey Wardens would often help the Orlesians before they signed a Treaty of Neutrality in the Third Blight. Loghain's fear is that the Grey Wardens have rescinded the oath they swore to remain neutral and are once again helping Orlais by way of keeping Cailan a glory-hounding fool so that when he died in battle, Ferelden would be sucked up by a power vacuum -- as the death of a king often does -- and destroy itself from within, thus making it ripe for "saving".

Which is why after Ostagar, Loghain stresses that the Darkspawn must be dealt with swiftly by a united Ferelden so as to not seem weak in the eyes of their neighbors (Orlais). Admittedly, he poorly phrased what he wanted -- he's not a politician, that much is not in contention -- and his comments screamed to the Bannorn Orlesian undertones, even though they're still different from Orlais' demands during the occupation.

Of course.  That's Loghain's pretext for his betrayal.  That's why he left Cailan, Duncan, and all the others to die.  But he was wrong, wasn't he?

Now, for the Regency, bear in mind that while Anora is trained in warfare and military strategy, she's not a proven commander. She has the theoretical knowledge, but Loghain's fought in a war before. So he declared himself Regent, something to which Anora was okay with. And bear in mind this wasn't something many people liked about Loghain, though I find it hard not to label them traitors all for going against something the Queen of Ferelden was content with at first. The woman that was known by almost all of Ferelden's important people to have ruled Ferelden from behind the scenes for five years.

Personally, I believe the reason why Loghain didn't rely on Anora for political insight as he should've done was because of two things: seeing Anora as his little girl always and Howe's manipulative nature. DG confirmed Howe was a manipulative weasel who did a great many things without Loghain's knowledge or approval -- the purge of the Alienage, for instancee -- and I like to believe that Loghain initially thought Anora would be too grief-stricken and conflicted over Cailan's death to be able to properly rule since the two did care for each other, Anora more so since Cailan was a womanizer. And I believe that Howe only made those thoughts about Anora's capability worse by manipulating Loghain.

So your argument for Loghain boils down to, "He's not evil, he's just wrong about everything and easily manipulated by transparent mustache-twirling nefarios like Rendon Howe"

And then when Anora goes "Did you kill Cailan?", Howe ends up saying afterwards "See my lord? She is unfit to bear the burdens of rule at this time."

First, of course, Loghain answers that Cailan's death was his own fault, and his manner is so lame and unconvincing that Anora clearly doesn't believe him.  And Howe's remark can be interpreted as incriminatory, since it implies Anora can't take the burden of the truth about Cailan's abandonment and the harsh decisions a monarch must make.

Think Grima Wormtongue and King Theoden, only without magic. And bear in mind that Howe is a power-hungry **** who would never be satisfied, evidenced by his usurpation of Highever and Denerim.

And I'm not so sure Cailan ruined the plan by charging out.  Perhaps that was the plan, to force the darkspawn to commit, to lure them irrevocably into the trap that never sprung.

The plan was for Cailan's group to lure the Darkspawn to be in the valley. The key word is "lure". Nowhere in Loghain's battle plan did he tell Cailan to meet them in the open field, where their left, right, and frontal flanks were so openly exposed and where it would eventually lead to them getting swallowed up by the Darkspawn.

The Darkspawn charged first. The logical course of action is to remain in the back, with the walls of Ostagar protecting the left and right flanks, while working to take out the Darkspawn. Preferably with a phalanx formation for a ways back and behind them rows of archers firing into the horde continuously.

Cailan ordered one volley, sent his Mabari out as fodder troops, and then charged out into the open field exposing all flanks to assault. And this is something Loghain himself brings up if the Warden brings up Ostagar. How the Wardens goaded him into making the charge, strategy and consequence be hanged.

The goading, in this case, was by the way the Wardens failed to offer any true insight into the Darkspawn, or how Cailan was being reckless, or even on why they were truly necessary. Their silence was damning, both for the Order and for Cailan. 

What's worse is that the entire Tower of Ishal sequence, from Loghain's perspective, is damning of the Wardens as well because it seems that they deliberately held off on lighting the beacon until the king's army was breaking down. And that they hoped that Loghain would charge after he just saw the beacon and die in the battle, where Ferelden would lose not only its king but also its greatest general and then possibly lose itself to civil war.

And Orlais would swoop right on in to "save the day", but in reality would just conquer Ferelden again. And we all know that swooping is bad.

All of this is just Loghain's paranoia about Orlais and has no bearing about whether Ostagar might have been won if he had committed his troops at the proper time.  I understand there's a case to be made for Loghain.  I understand that, unlike Howe, Loghain might even actually believe he's doing right.  But on the preponderance of the evidence, I still find for the plaintiff.  Ostagar didn't have to happen.

Modifié par Fuggyt, 27 mars 2013 - 02:16 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

[quote]Fuggyt wrote...

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

He probably does, but why wait?[/quote]

I lol'd.

[quote]But I notice this argument, based as it is on a fair amount of presumption and supposition,[/quote]

Actually, it's based on facts, both historical for Thedas and recent.

[quote] does not address a lot of in-game content from NPCs like Teagon, Eamon, even Cathrian, and especially Anora. It does not address why Loghain felt compelled the blame the Grey Wardens, nor why he so swiftly named himself regent, nor why he sent Jowan to poison Eamon. Care to take those issues on, Ethereal?[/quote]

I will indeed.

We see firsthand in Ostagar how Cailan is only in it for the glory. He finds strategy sessions boring, avoids Loghain when he (Loghain) wants to talk strategy, goes on and on about glory, and many other things that lend themselves to him indeed being a glory-hounding fool that didn't care one ounce for tactics. These are all things we hear, either from Cailan's mouth or from the mouths of other soldiers.

As for Teagan and Eamon, just because they choose not to believe what Loghain says does not mean Loghain is lying. Cailan is a glory-hounding fool. There is no doubt about that.

Of course there's doubt about that.  That may be Loghain's view, but Duncan certainly thinks there's more to him than that.  

Cailan even repeatedly refused the aid of his uncle's forces who are closer to Ostagar then Orlais, yet we're supposed to believe he'd wait for Orlesian men to arrive when they have to send all of their men through a narrow mountain pass?

No, Cailan was a fool and he would not wait for Orlesian reinforcements if he couldn't even wait for Redcliffe's troops. He only brings that up to bait Loghain into commencing with the battle that, as we're told, he wants to be a single grand battle "the bards will sing of for centuries".

You're guessing at his motives.

Also, neither Teagan nor Eamon were actually at Ostagar, so who are they to pass judgement on Loghain's actions? They did not see the horde. Loghain did. Loghain is the general of the armies. Neither Teagan nor Eamon are.

But Alistair, the Warden, and Flemeth were, and all three blame the loss on Loghain.   You may now proceed to demolish their testimony, if you wish, but they saw what I saw.  [/quote]

Flemeth is established as being untrustworthy, and Alistair and the Warden don't bother looking outside to see whether the darkspawn are still pouring into the field.

[quote]
And Cauthrien's comments do not mean that Ostagar was winnable. You can see from the bridge how the Darkspawn horde stretches to the ass end of the visible Wilds and possibly beyond that, into the very bowels of the forest. Not everyone is going to be certain of Ostagar's nature in Thedas, but that does not mean that objectively it was winnable. We the players have the pleasure of having a myriad of other information to work off of to form an objective analysis that the NPCs of Thedas do not.

And here's the flimsiest part of the argument, in my opinion--guesstimating the relative size of the horde.  "The very bowels of the forest," is it?  Where'd you get that metaphor from, a proctologic tree surgeon?  Yes, I saw all the fires receding in the distance, which I also saw behind Loghain's troops as they marched away.  I saw a pretty large crowd of darkspawn marching out of the forest, but I also Cathrian lead a pretty large crowd of troops off stage left.  If the darkspawn were so numerous the flank attack was futile, why didn't they just overrun Ferelden from there?  Certainly their army at Denerim had to be considerably larger, did it not?  So Cathrien's comments outside the Landsmeet chamber certainly do not mean Ostagar was UNwinnable either, do they?  Loghain says that, but he would, wouldn't he? [/quote][/quote]

Yeah, well, we don't see a horde of human soldiers several miles long. Nor are you adjusting for the fact that, according to the lore at least, a single human is unlikely to win against a single genlock. Nor are you adjusting for the ogres.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote] It does not address why Loghain felt compelled the blame the Grey Wardens, nor why he so swiftly named himself regent, nor why he sent Jowan to poison Eamon. [/quote]

Actually, all of what I linked you to did address these things. I urge you to reread all of it, but one should also note that the Grey Wardens historically did help Orlais and the Chantry -- and the Chantry has seen fit to help out their buddy Orlais.

During the Blights, Orlais would often swoop in to "save" weakened nations and then never leave, oppressing the native population and forcing them to rebel in order to see an independent nation. Hell, it's not even restricted to the Blights, as they did the same thing to Kirkwall and Ferelden. The list of places Orlais conquered in its expansionism are Nevarra, Kirkwall, Ferelden, and the Anderfels IIRC.

The Grey Wardens would often help the Orlesians before they signed a Treaty of Neutrality in the Third Blight. Loghain's fear is that the Grey Wardens have rescinded the oath they swore to remain neutral and are once again helping Orlais by way of keeping Cailan a glory-hounding fool so that when he died in battle, Ferelden would be sucked up by a power vacuum -- as the death of a king often does -- and destroy itself from within, thus making it ripe for "saving".

Which is why after Ostagar, Loghain stresses that the Darkspawn must be dealt with swiftly by a united Ferelden so as to not seem weak in the eyes of their neighbors (Orlais). Admittedly, he poorly phrased what he wanted -- he's not a politician, that much is not in contention -- and his comments screamed to the Bannorn Orlesian undertones, even though they're still different from Orlais' demands during the occupation.

Of course.  That's Loghain's pretext for his betrayal.  That's why he left Cailan, Duncan, and all the others to die.  But he was wrong, wasn't he? [/quote][/quote]

If he's using a pretext (and you haven't responded to our Word Of Gaider quotes that he's not) that pretext is that he would have died otherwise. Nor is TEWR disputing that Loghain was wrong about Orlais. But that's not the same thing about being wrong about his choice at Ostagar. It is important to note that even when he repents most of the choices he's made all game, essentially admitting that he was one walking disaster, he still stands by that one choice.

[quote]
[quote]
Now, for the Regency, bear in mind that while Anora is trained in warfare and military strategy, she's not a proven commander. She has the theoretical knowledge, but Loghain's fought in a war before. So he declared himself Regent, something to which Anora was okay with. And bear in mind this wasn't something many people liked about Loghain, though I find it hard not to label them traitors all for going against something the Queen of Ferelden was content with at first. The woman that was known by almost all of Ferelden's important people to have ruled Ferelden from behind the scenes for five years.

Personally, I believe the reason why Loghain didn't rely on Anora for political insight as he should've done was because of two things: seeing Anora as his little girl always and Howe's manipulative nature. DG confirmed Howe was a manipulative weasel who did a great many things without Loghain's knowledge or approval -- the purge of the Alienage, for instancee -- and I like to believe that Loghain initially thought Anora would be too grief-stricken and conflicted over Cailan's death to be able to properly rule since the two did care for each other, Anora more so since Cailan was a womanizer. And I believe that Howe only made those thoughts about Anora's capability worse by manipulating Loghain.

So your argument for Loghain boils down to, "He's not evil, he's just wrong about everything and easily manipulated by transparent mustache-twirling nefarios like Rendon Howe"
[/quote][/quote]

Yes. Otherwise, why would he join the party as willingly as he does after the duel? His manner after you win at the Landsmeet is more easily reconciled with our view of him than with yours.

[quote][quote]
And then when Anora goes "Did you kill Cailan?", Howe ends up saying afterwards "See my lord? She is unfit to bear the burdens of rule at this time."

First, of course, Loghain answers that Cailan's death was his own fault, and his manner is so lame and unconvincing that Anora clearly doesn't believe him.  And Howe's remark can be interpreted as incriminatory, since it implies Anora can't take the burden of the truth about Cailan's abandonment and the harsh decisions a monarch must make. [/quote][/quote]

He seemed pretty sincere to me.

[quote][/quote]
[quote]And I'm not so sure Cailan ruined the plan by charging out.  Perhaps that was the plan, to force the darkspawn to commit, to lure them irrevocably into the trap that never sprung.[/quote]

The plan was for Cailan's group to lure the Darkspawn to be in the valley. The key word is "lure". Nowhere in Loghain's battle plan did he tell Cailan to meet them in the open field, where their left, right, and frontal flanks were so openly exposed and where it would eventually lead to them getting swallowed up by the Darkspawn.

The Darkspawn charged first. The logical course of action is to remain in the back, with the walls of Ostagar protecting the left and right flanks, while working to take out the Darkspawn. Preferably with a phalanx formation for a ways back and behind them rows of archers firing into the horde continuously.

Cailan ordered one volley, sent his Mabari out as fodder troops, and then charged out into the open field exposing all flanks to assault. And this is something Loghain himself brings up if the Warden brings up Ostagar. How the Wardens goaded him into making the charge, strategy and consequence be hanged.

The goading, in this case, was by the way the Wardens failed to offer any true insight into the Darkspawn, or how Cailan was being reckless, or even on why they were truly necessary. Their silence was damning, both for the Order and for Cailan. 

What's worse is that the entire Tower of Ishal sequence, from Loghain's perspective, is damning of the Wardens as well because it seems that they deliberately held off on lighting the beacon until the king's army was breaking down. And that they hoped that Loghain would charge after he just saw the beacon and die in the battle, where Ferelden would lose not only its king but also its greatest general and then possibly lose itself to civil war.

And Orlais would swoop right on in to "save the day", but in reality would just conquer Ferelden again. And we all know that swooping is bad.

[/quote]

All of this is just Loghain's paranoia about Orlais and has no bearing about whether Ostagar might have been won if he had committed his troops at the proper time.  I understand there's a case to be made for Loghain.  I understand that, unlike Howe, Loghain might even actually believe he's doing right.  But on the preponderance of the evidence, I still find for the plaintiff.  Ostagar didn't have to happen.

[/quote]

Actually, it's not all that. He mentions Loghain's tactical reasons for retreat two paragraphs above yours.

[Warden Commander David]

I think you have to stretch too much to make Loghain's actions be anything more than an opportunity to take power.

I mean...to each their own I guess...but I just will never be able to see it as anything other than that.

Modifié par Warden Commander David, 27 mars 2013 - 08:04 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

What you're saying is that it's less of a stretch that he'd abandon half his army to die in the middle of a potential disaster, when it'd be simpler to just sneak Jowan into the capital after solving the problem if he wanted what you think he did.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 27 mars 2013 - 08:10 .

[Warden Commander David]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

What you're saying is that it's less of a stretch that he'd abandon half his army to die in the middle of a potential disaster, when it'd be simpler to just sneak Jowan into the capital after solving the problem if he wanted what you think he did.

If you want to believe that he's the hero of the story...then by all means do so.

In my opinion...he saw an opportunity to take out two big powers in ferelden with one stone...and he took it. He let the darkspawn slaughter the king and the grey wardens. Then he slandered the grey wardens by accusing them of killing the king.

He then tried to take out the third power that could oppose him by poisoning the arl.

All he wanted was power.

He instigated civil war just so that he could have the power.

Anyways...I agree to disagree.

Modifié par Warden Commander David, 27 mars 2013 - 08:17 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Warden Commander David wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

What you're saying is that it's less of a stretch that he'd abandon half his army to die in the middle of a potential disaster, when it'd be simpler to just sneak Jowan into the capital after solving the problem if he wanted what you think he did.

If you want to believe that he's the hero of the story...then by all means do so.

That's not what I said. We all know full well who the hero of the story is, even if with some of my Wardens the term is a little loose in the use.

In my opinion...he saw an opportunity to take out two big powers in ferelden with one stone...and he took it. He let the darkspawn slaughter the king and the grey wardens. Then he slandered the grey wardens by accusing them of killing the king.

Your interpretation is that he knowingly fought two wars at once: the Bannorn and the darkspawn. Bioware isn't really as good as their word on how great a general he is even in my interpretation, but yours just makes him a complete moron.

He then tried to take out the third power that could oppose him by poisoning the arl.

That was done before that, before Loghain knew for a fact that he'd have a chance to kill Cailan. (As is your interpretation of his mindset, at least.)

All he wanted was power.

He already had that. The cost benefit ratio favored staying the teryn, main general, and father-in-law of the king.

He instigated civil war just so that he could have the power.

Anyways...I agree to disagree.

If that's what'll happen, that's what'll happen. But it seems to me you're just throwing out that phrase to avoid considering everything we're saying. (Which is fine, but where's the fun in that? Most of the entertainment to be had here is arguing. Or at least that's been true since that DA:I thread about what we'll do if the castle system is everything we want it to be died.)

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 27 mars 2013 - 09:26 .

[TEWR]

Of course there's doubt about that. That may be Loghain's view, but Duncan certainly thinks there's more to him than that.

Duncan actually says "I'll take the King's support, whatever his reasons for doing so." or something similar which says that all he cares about is that the King responded, but he acknowledges that the King's reasons are not very intelligent.

Even Alistair, Cailan's half-brother, doesn't really think much of him other then that he was a good man -- which no one, not even Loghain, denies. Loghain may think him a fool, but he understands where his heart is.

You're guessing at his motives.

Right, explain to me how Cailan is going to wait for Orlesian reinforcements that will take longer to arrive at Ostagar when he repeatedly refused the support of his uncle's forces?

FACT: The only way for Orlesian forces to come into Ferelden is through a narrow mountain pass in the Frostbacks or by ship. And it will take them weeks if not months to make that entire journey from their homeland to Ostagar.

FACT: Eamon's forces were less then a week away and Cailan had repeatedly refused the man's aid.

Answer: Cailan was not going to wait for Orlesian reinforcements, but was rather just baiting Loghain to go through with the battle. In Return to Ostagar, even, you find that Cailan and Eamon had a falling out, which adds another reason to why he doesn't want Eamon there.

Either way, the man's a damned fool for refusing the aid of people near the fortress out of some petty argument he had with the man a year ago. Cailan refused to stay out of the battle, but apparently knew full well that the battle couldn't have been won even had Loghain charged (Return to Ostagar).

He knew the battle was ****ed with or without Loghain, yet he repeatedly refused the aid of Eamon's forces. Funnily enough, he says the "arguments" with the Orlesians are a thing of the past -- when labeling them as arguments is a vast understatement to what Orlais did to Ferelden -- yet cannot even get over the argument he and Eamon had.

What if Eamon's men would've helped turn the tide? The more men that Loghain would've had under his command would have meant a different strategy employed, possibly.

But Alistair, the Warden, and Flemeth were, and all three blame the loss on Loghain. You may now proceed to demolish their testimony, if you wish, but they saw what I saw.

Alistair says that they've surely missed the signal to light the beacon and wants to light it immediately, without even caring to see if the Darkspawn are fully committed to the battle. Then he's incapable of seeing the battle as anything other then a failure that Loghain had to retreat from.

The Warden's views on the matter can fluctuate. My DN Warden saw enough evidence during the entire Ostagar sequence and from his studies of relevant information -- that the game provided, that is -- to believe Ostagar was unwinnable.

And also, Word of God says the battle was unwinnable.

And Flemeth's just... out there. She doesn't even talk about the battle being winnable. What she says about Loghain is that "men's hearts hold shadows darker then any tainted creature", which doesn't necessarily mean he's just a power-hungry traitor.

It seems more likely that the "shadows" are just how deeply scarred his being is after the war with Orlais.

And here's the flimsiest part of the argument, in my opinion--guesstimating the relative size of the horde.

Well, DG said that the Darkspawn horde was far larger then anyone had anticipated, and even in the opening cinematic you can see part of the horde, where even Duncan fears it's too late to stop them.

Then, Duncan says the horde now outnumbers the soldiers, and that's on what he and everyone else is anticipating their strength to be for the next battle. It was actually far larger.

Furthermore, at least 2 soldiers remark upon the dangers of the horde because of firsthand experience.

And, of course, each average Hurlock is easily a match for a dozen soldiers. Factor in the Alphas which are more powerful, and things get even harder. Throw in the Emissaries, of which there are hundreds upon hundreds in the Darkspawn horde -- of which Duncan is rightly concerned about trying to balance out with Circle Mages -- and you can't honestly expect the soldiers to fare well against such forces.

Look at the cinematic part where they're charging. You'll see Darkspawn Mages all throughout the horde

The average soldier is no match for magic. Being cooked alive in your armor, or frozen solid, or whatever else... no, they can't stand against such things easily. If Ostagar had the majority of the Circle's might on its side -- Templars and Mages -- then things would be different, because such added forces would necessitate a new battle plan to make the best use of all of them.

That's not even taking into account how Genlocks, the most numerous of the horde, are out there and how they have their own Mages. Or how Ogres can crush the life out of a person easily, gore them with their horns, and even regenerate after a time if not killed properly.

Yes, I saw all the fires receding in the distance, which I also saw behind Loghain's troops as they marched away. I saw a pretty large crowd of darkspawn marching out of the forest, but I also Cathrian lead a pretty large crowd of troops off stage left.

You're failing to take into account how Broodmothers, of which there are who knows how many in the Deep Roads, can birth thousands of Darkspawn in a lifetime. And the Darkspawn have had four centuries to build up their numbers.

You're failing to take into account how, when the Archdemon rises, all the Darkspawn unify and move out to fight. As opposed to how for human societies you have politics and people not all being capable of fighting. Every Darkspawn is part of the Archdemon's army. The same is not true for Thedosian society.

If the darkspawn were so numerous the flank attack was futile, why didn't they just overrun Ferelden from there?

A few reasons:

1) They're busy looking for survivors and dragging them underground.
2) The Archdemon is using the peoples' sentiment of how it's not a true Blight to send out bands of Darkspawn throughout the countryside to seem as if they're not truly unified -- thus making the country believe it further -- but in truth they're weakening various areas so as to make them easier to conquer.
3) The Archdemon may want the Civil War to take its course as well so as to weaken the nation further. Why move out immediately to conquer your enemies if they're just going to make the job easier for you?

Nor is TEWR disputing that Loghain was wrong about Orlais.

Well, I'm not quite certain what to think. Cailan and Loghain were both told four legions of Chevaliers were on their way along with the Wardens from Orlais, but Riordan says two dozen divisions of cavalry were on their way alongside all the Wardens.

And a division is a larger military unit then a legion, historically, and I see no reason to not apply real world military terms to Thedas considering Loghain's devised plan at Ostagar -- that Cailan ruined -- was the Hammer&Anvil strategy.

So Orlais lied about how many men they were sending.

Furthermore, in the DAII Collector's Edition Guide, Empress Celene is described as having an expansionist's mindset like her ancestor Drakon I. Even DAO has her show a personality that has a low opinion of most Fereldans.

And RtO implies that she was trying to woo Cailan to marrying her, which would reduce Ferelden to an Orlesian vassal state with a Theirin on the throne to satisfy Fereldan traditionalist/nationalist sentiments -- while at the same time, Cailan would truly just be a puppet king.

But in the game version of DAII, it describes Empress Celene as some peace-loving saint. Which just makes Bioware seem very wishy-washy about their whole portrayal of her.

Doesn't help that half of Orlais now wants to reconquer Ferelden because it's weakened, which is exactly what Loghain feared they'd try to do and what he wanted to have Ferelden avoid appearing like in the eyes of Orlais.

So one could argue he unintentionally helped Orlais have an edge by trying to prevent them from having an edge, but that doesn't mean he was wrong in his beliefs. He was right about them. He just went about trying to prevent them horribly, ultimately stemming from his poor grasp of politics and how he had to turn to Howe for aid.

So, I'm not sure what to think. Personally, I detest Orlais and I actually don't think Loghain was wrong.

So your argument for Loghain boils down to, "He's not evil, he's just wrong about everything and easily manipulated by transparent mustache-twirling nefarios like Rendon Howe"

Yes. Word of God says that Loghain detested Howe and thought himself above Howe's manipulations, but he eventually came to be manipulated by Howe. Indeed, much of what Loghain does can either directly or indirectly be traced back to Howe.

The slavery issue, for instance, seems like it stemmed from Howe. Howe shows utter contempt and disdain for Elves, labeling them as "beasts that need to be put down when they go rabid" or something to a City Elf Warden.

It doesn't help that his first act when coming to Denerim was to enact a purge of the Alienage to such a degree that the Veil was sundered and Demons poured through.

Anora even comments that the Warden saved Eamon from a plan that originated in Howe's mind when talking of how important the Warden is, which can be traced to two things. I'm unsure just which one it is, but both are likely.

The poisoning of Arl Eamon, as in-game evidence points to this having happened after Ostagar and Berwick was supposed to report to a man in Howe's employ....

...or the kidnapping of Anora and the idea to murder her and pin the blame on Eamon, which Loghain says was Howe's idea -- and he also says that he refused Howe's idea immediately.

Frankly, I say both are what Anora's referring to.

First, of course, Loghain answers that Cailan's death was his own fault, and his manner is so lame and unconvincing that Anora clearly doesn't believe him. And Howe's remark can be interpreted as incriminatory, since it implies Anora can't take the burden of the truth about Cailan's abandonment and the harsh decisions a monarch must make.

I believe you misunderstood my post. What I was talking about in that particular section is how I think Howe was manipulating Loghain to not turn to Anora for aid, as it may have happened off-screen.

All I said in that portion that was seen in-game is the whole "Did you kill Cailan" bit. The rest is my headcanon based off of what in-game evidence there is to support it.

And Loghain was sincere.

All of this is just Loghain's paranoia about Orlais and has no bearing about whether Ostagar might have been won if he had committed his troops at the proper time. I understand there's a case to be made for Loghain. I understand that, unlike Howe, Loghain might even actually believe he's doing right. But on the preponderance of the evidence, I still find for the plaintiff. Ostagar didn't have to happen.

I've repeatedly gone over the tactical considerations of Ostagar. You seem to be ignoring them. Thus, there doesn't seem to be anything that can be gained from continuing such a line of discussion.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 27 mars 2013 - 10:56 .

[cJohnOne]

From the game it pretty clear that they were following Loghain's battle plan. Not something that King Cailan came up with at Ostagar.

Modifié par cJohnOne, 29 mars 2013 - 12:06 .

[TEWR]

From the game it pretty clear that they were following Loghain's battle plan. Not something that King Cailan came up with at Ostagar.

Assuming this is directed towards me...

Actually, the game makes it very clear that Cailan ruined Loghain's battle plan, which has always been my position. I've never said Cailan came up with the plan, only that he ruined the plan.

Loghain told Cailan to draw the Darkspawn into the valley so that his forces could act as the anvil. That means staying in position, preferably with the walls of Ostagar protecting the left and right flanks so as to avoid being surrounded on three sides -- which would eventually lead to the aforementioned double envelopment.

With rows of soldiers forming a wall of sorts against the Darkspawn -- with spears and shields, ideally, but meh... -- archers in the back could fire volleys continuously into the horde without fear of hitting any of their men.

Cailan does not do this. He does not follow Loghain's plan. He does not draw the Darkspawn towards him the correct way. When they charge at him, he has his men charge out into the valley -- something you can see in the Ostagar cinematic.

Prior to that, he used only one volley of arrows and wasted the Mabari troops as being little more then fodder. So only one volley of arrows, wasting Mabari troops that actually are better when they fight alongside people (if the Ash Warriors are anything to go by), and charging out into the open valley to meet the Darkspawn head-on wherein the left, right, and frontal flanks are exposed entirely.

It's easy to see that Cailan ruined the battle plan.

[Bhryaen]

lol Is this a contest for "new players" then? I'd rather they just make up their own minds and enjoy the game however they wish rather than slot into some false dichotomy of villain apologists or villian supporters.

As Gaider puts it, "In my mind, Loghain still wasn't certain that he would walk away -- and if he thought that riding into the valley could have won the battle, he probably would have done so. Whether his belief that this couldn't happen was the truth or just his twisted perception of it is something you can decide for yourself. Certainly the darkspawn horde at the last battle was far bigger than anyone had anticipated."

The key point is this line: "you can decide for yourself." Also note that Gaider's "word" is actually not decisive. He says "in my mind." He doesn't say, "This is how it was" or "This is how you should see it." He just gives one hindsight perspective onto the finished work. And it isn't 100% decisive in itself. And you have to recognize that the game's writing (by a relatively large team, mind you) wasn't perfectly consistent.

I still struggle to determine whether Ostagar was winnable myself- not decided- Cailan's advisor's testimony being the most damning for Cailan, as if Logain was forced to engage the darkspawn in a way he knew from the start would lose and then decided in advance to pull out. But then why not have out his battle with Cailan right there: "I'm not going through with this! You'll get us all killed!" He doesn't. Coward much? Oh, he'd been arguing with Cailan, sure. But if he thought it was so dire, why not refuse to be a part of it? Cailan did appear to be in a stupor of overconfidence. Shake him out of it. Anything but acquiescence. Lives were at stake, as was the outcome of the engagement.

Instead Loghain devises a plan that gets Cailan killed. (Flanking maneuvers aren't genius, btw. Nor were they fighting geniuses, even if they had ogres and emissaries. And even if it was really the writers' inexperience with war tactics, it made Cailan look very, erm, rookie to say, "Oh, right, flank them!") If Logain cared about the soldiers and the outcome of the battle, he'd have made it more clear to Cailan than he did. If Loghain were such a great strategist, what about some counter maneuver? Great generals make all sorts of creative decisions that turn the tide. They don't usually sit where they can't assess the field and then just "sound the retreat." Hell, even his sychophantic side-kick questioned him (for once).

As to Cailan charging the field, the video makes it pretty clear that the darkspawn were already on them. They just ran out to engage. Would you instead allow the darkspawn able to reach all the way to the archers and gate? Hm. The mabari sacrifice was pretty lame- and again this appears Cailan's inexperience, but really the entire battle was just a rework of "Braveheart"'s battle scenes- i.e., the cinematography being more a product of movie research than battle research. Not a terrible thing, just looks... awkward... at least to anyone with any sense of actual battles. Loghain's quitting the field was also a "Braveheart" theme. (Lighting oil in the field was reserved for Redcliffe. *snicker*) I don't mind the plagiarism, looks ok, just leaves a lot of questions open. Likely if the same writers made Loghain at least begin their flanking maneuver, Loghain's battle capabilities would be in question too. If he were a master tactician, he certainly didn't impress me with his armed take-over of the Landsmeet. Every time he does it's fairly immediately a rout for him- even in my first playthrough. We'll say he made Cailan's mistake and underestimated my Warden...

Another cinematography error is the over-the-top scenes. They do show the darkspawn horde looking huge- like the goblins swarming up out of the depths in LotR's movie- just way too many. That should've been enough to wipe out Ferelden right then and there. So if that's going to be countered, you'll need at least something similar. So I look at the horde of Loghain troops being marched away- stretches also "to the horizon." I'm just not convinced victory was unthinkable.

Also waiting seems odd. Was it really an option? The horde wasn't going to wait at their doorstep. Wasn't it a matter of either engage now or make a strategic retreat and stage a different battle with larger forces? Or whatever? Maybe they could hold them down in the valley for the days required for Eamon's troops or more Wardens, but... really?

[FreakyBigGuy]

Howe (Loghain's dirty man) dispatched the Couslands (only other Teyrnir family beside Loghain's) before battle of Ostagar.

Conveniently king Cailan (aware of Howe's betrayal) dies at Ostagar.

Eamon gets poisoned almost at the same time. Cailan's uncle and real power in Ferelden.

Loghain sends assassins after surviving Grey Wardens.

It just doesn't look very good for Loghain's I'm the good guy theory.

[CDR David Shepard]

FreakyBigGuy wrote...

Howe (Loghain's dirty man) dispatched the Couslands (only other Teyrnir family beside Loghain's) before battle of Ostagar.

Conveniently king Cailan (aware of Howe's betrayal) dies at Ostagar.

Eamon gets poisoned almost at the same time. Cailan's uncle and real power in Ferelden.

Loghain sends assassins after surviving Grey Wardens.

It just doesn't look very good for Loghain's I'm the good guy theory.

Yeah...people are just reaching too far in effort to make Loghain this tragic hero character.

I understand it's a game...but I just do not understand why they are trying so hard to defend him.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

FreakyBigGuy wrote...

Howe (Loghain's dirty man) dispatched the Couslands (only other Teyrnir family beside Loghain's) before battle of Ostagar.

Which we have from Gaider that Loghain did not permit. Whether or not this is valid, however, is somewhat open to question. As for in-game evidence, I don't think there is any apart from the circumstantial evidence that Howe wasn't punished. (Which can be explained as Loghain not wanting to tick off a noble with two fiefs, since he was already fighting the darkspawn, the Bannorn, and in this interpretation he actually thinks the Orlesians are planning to try something.)

Ultimately, I think that deciding with any degree of certainty whether or not Loghain was involved in this except as an after-the-fact accessory requires answering the question of whether or not Loghain is actually evil. Of course, this means neither side can use it as evidence, since the answer to it depends on the conclusion reached.

Conveniently king Cailan (aware of Howe's betrayal) dies at Ostagar.

The original point of the thread was to determine whether or not there's an alternate explanation for this. This has been answered in depth, and the answer is yes. The horde was way too big for the plan to work.

Eamon gets poisoned almost at the same time. Cailan's uncle and real power in Ferelden.

This one looks shady, and even Gaider's alternate explanation is kind of below-board. But Eamon was poisoned before Ostagar. Even if Loghain was planning to betray the king, this happened before Loghain would have known that the king would set himself up for the betrayal. (Suspected, yes, but doing this on a suspicion would be an insane gamble.) There's no way this could have been part of the plan you're putting forth. Notwithstanding that Gaider's interpretation (Loghain thought Cailan was going to do something stupid, and poisoned Eamon to put him aside for the moment) is more complicated, I think it better explains this action.

Loghain sends assassins after surviving Grey Wardens.

This isn't evidence either way. Like I said, it's a good idea if Loghain is evil, or if he thinks the Wardens are evil. Or did you think he should try to take them alive? The Warden is powerful enough to make that a bad idea, and Loghain knows or should suspect this because The Warden is not atypical of the Order in that regard.

It just doesn't look very good for Loghain's I'm the good guy theory.

My impression is that Gaider did that on purpose. The thing about his interpretation of Loghain as a "tragic hero," however, is that it makes more sense in context of his deferring to you the second the duel is over. If one were somehow to recruit the openly villainous Howe, that wouldn't have worked as well. Much less would (or did, since this argument notwithstanding I usually kill him for some in-character reason or another) Howe gracefully arch his neck for the Warden's blade.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 01 avril 2013 - 09:12 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

CDR David Shepard wrote...

Yeah...people are just reaching too far in effort to make Loghain this tragic hero character.

He is at least as heroic as Macbeth. Besides, is our argument less credible than that Loghain would decide to sacrifice half his army in the middle of a disaster?And that he would make a plan to sacrifice Cailan and then repeatedly (from the tone of Cailan's voice right before the strategy meeting) beg Cailan not to do the one thing that the plan hinges on him doing? He's supposed to be a great general here. He doesn't show that off well even in our interpretation, but the one you're supporting, he's worse. 

I understand it's a game...but I just do not understand why they are trying so hard to defend him.

Boredom.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 01 avril 2013 - 09:00 .