615 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

Lazy Jer wrote...

Two questions: 1. How did we get on the subject of Loghain? and 2. How is there any doubt at all that Loghain is a traitor?

1) All threads inevitably discuss Loghain.
2) Because Ostagar was unwinnable, for a myriad of reasons, none of them being the fault of Loghain. Retreating from a battle that proves itself to be unwinnable does not make one a traitor.

[Lazy Jer]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

Two questions: 1. How did we get on the subject of Loghain? and 2. How is there any doubt at all that Loghain is a traitor?

1) All threads inevitably discuss Loghain.
2) Because Ostagar was unwinnable, for a myriad of reasons, none of them being the fault of Loghain. Retreating from a battle that proves itself to be unwinnable does not make one a traitor.

1) I thought that was Anders all threads eventually bring up.  That or cookies.

2) Telling your king that you're going to do the flanking charge and then not doing it, and then lying about the Grey Wardens being responsible does.  Plus the battle being unwinnable was just as much his fault as Cailin's.  He could have waited for back up from the Grey Wardens of Orlais, but he wouldn't hear of it.  His inability to get past his hatred of Orlais, his dislike of the Wardens and his causing the entire army to rely on a flanking charge that he had no intention of allowing cause the deaths no just of Cailin and the Wardens, but of most of the army as well. 

[TEWR]

Lazy Jer wrote...

1) I thought that was Anders all threads eventually bring up.  That or cookies.

2) Telling your king that you're going to do the flanking charge and then not doing it, and then lying about the Grey Wardens being responsible does.  Plus the battle being unwinnable was just as much his fault as Cailin's.  He could have waited for back up from the Grey Wardens of Orlais, but he wouldn't hear of it.  His inability to get past his hatred of Orlais, his dislike of the Wardens and his causing the entire army to rely on a flanking charge that he had no intention of allowing cause the deaths no just of Cailin and the Wardens, but of most of the army as well. 

1) Not to the same level.

2) Except that plan was formulated with a base assumption of how large the horde would be, and in the battle the horde was far larger then anyone anticipated, including the Grey Wardens (per David Gaider). Furthermore, he had reasons to blame the Wardens for the deed. For one, they historically did help Orlais and the Chantry expand their borders during Blights and he feared they had gone back to such days. For another, Soldier's Peak, where the Wardens rebelled against the crown.

The truth about that story was not known to the general public. All that was known was that Sophia Dryden led the Wardens against the Fereldan crown.

Thirdly, the Wardens by their neglect to say anything meaningful to Cailan and Loghain inadvertently caused Loghain to suspect they were doing it deliberately. They didn't urge Cailan to stay behind the front lines, they didn't reveal why they were truly necessary, they didn't say "Your Majesty, for all our necessity we cannot turn the tides of battle by ourselves" and so on. All of that kept Cailan and Loghain in the dark, and for Cailan it only made his glory-hounding worse.

Fourth, from Loghain's point of view they not only delayed when the beacon was lit -- as Alistair lit it at the wrong time, the signal had already been sent -- but lit it at the wrong moment as well. It was supposed to be lit when ALL the Darkspawn were committed in the field, which they weren't. Cailan's men were cracking under pressure (due in large part to Cailan's idiotic charge and use of men in the cinematic) while the Darkspawn army was still pouring through the Wilds, something Loghain could see just enough of. And it's something the Warden can see from the bridge.

Fifth, Cailan refused Eamon's reinforcements who were less then one week away yet we're supposed to believe he'd wait for Orlesian reinforcements? Reinforcements that would have to trek through Gherlen's Pass -- a narrow mountain road in the Frostbacks -- and would take weeks to reach Ostagar? No. Cailan simply brought up waiting for Orlais as bait for Loghain to go through with the battle, the battle Cailan wanted to satisfy his glory-hounding.

Cailan repeatedly refused Eamon's reminders of how long it would take him to muster his men and arrive at Ostagar.

And it's worth noting that Loghain and Cailan were told four legions of Chevaliers were on their way with the Wardens, but Riordan says that two dozen divisions of cavalry were at the border when they were turned away, alongside the two hundred Wardens accompanying them. And a division is a larger military unit then a legion.

Meaning Orlais lied.

[TEWR]

[quote]The people of Ferelden aren't city dwellers and the people of Kirkwall aren't recent descendents of warrior clans. The traditions and attitudes are different.[/quote]

Actually, the people of the Free Marches descend from barbarians as well. Sure, Kirkwall has become a trading hub with many people of the different nations in it, but the majority of Kirkwallers are descendants of barbarian clans.

[quote]I would believe joined is your key word. An army of commoners with few actual soldiers intermixed won't win anything.[/quote]

Again, you'd be surprised. The Battle of Agincourt had thousands of commoner archers. Granted, English law said that commoners were required to train with longbows daily for hours at a time from childhood incase war ever happened.

But they were only using their bows to hit still targets, maybe the occasional animal in hunting.

To say they "won't win anything" is just woefully inaccurate. It fails to take into account the strategic military value of Kirkwall and how one could make use of its defendable structure.

[quote]Meredith and her handful of Templars win more than one fight against sizable groups of Qunari. [/quote]

Considering Orsino managed to take the Qunari at the keep down on his own easily if Hawke argues for a distraction, I'm not convinced Meredith's Templars were the reason for the victory against the reinforcements.

Which, for what it's worth, could've just been one group. No numbers were given. 

And there were only 300 Qunari that landed with the Arishok -- per the Viscount -- and many were lost to deaths and defections.

And those defectors... well... Hawke killed them too.

Hawke faces nearly 70 before entering Hightown, with 30-40 more fought as he progresses. And if one chooses to storm the keep, it can reasonably be said that Hawke was the reason for that victory. Meredith on the other hand manages to just show up at a lucky moment, take down one Qunari, and understandably go searching for reinforcements.

But she does not make any mention of having to fight her way through the city herself. The Mages did fight, that much we know.

In fact, in a cutscene you see a Templar just standing by as a Qunari tells a noble to head to the keep. The very same scene Meredith appears in.

When Meredith herself is looking at all of this.

So, yay Templars.

[quote]They suck.[/quote]

Qunari. Are. Supersoldiers.

They can go weeks without food and still kick ass in battle. Sten tells us that, despite going 20 days at least without food or water he is still fit enough to fight. And he manages to kick ass.

These are the people that nearly conquered all of Thedas, and even when Thedas began to fight back with the Mages and truly united the Qunari were able to keep things at a standstill without their armies being affected too negatively.

That's how great they are.

Templars, Mages, Chevaliers, Magisters, Nevarrans, etc. All of them couldn't even make a dent in the Qunari war effort against these guys, and they were all united.

Anaan Esaam Qun.

[quote]So you advocate them killing the people?[/quote]

You do not coddle mobs. You do not give in to their demands. It empowers them, makes them grow bolder. We're seeing this happen today even, though the subject is controversial for these forums. Forbidden, actually.

When mobs form, you either get them to leave of their own accord without bloodshed -- though the threat of it is, in my view, necessary to keep them from trying again -- or you put it down violently. That's just how it is. But letting the citizens dictate your actions makes them think that you're trying to appease them. Which makes them think they're calling the shots.

Never mind the fact that Meredith quickly drops that as her reasoning during the RoA, or the fact that she's made no secret of flexing her authority forcefully -- despite peoples' protests -- and went so far as to actively oppress the people.

The loss of 300 citizens that tried to murder 2000 Mages, all of whom were kept under lock and key, is preferable to going through with the murder of said Mages just to appease the mob's whims. Is it unfortunate? Sure.

But they had it coming the moment they tried to murder innocent men, women, and children for the crime an apostate -- who surrendered himself to justice -- committed. 

Even Anora had to put down a riot from the Alienage, and that was out of necessity and not desire. She knows that you do not bow down to what a mob demands.

Besides, I doubt very much that people would immediately form a mob calling for the deaths of hundreds and hundreds of Mages that can roast you alive, freeze you, electrify you, and even blow you up. 

[quote]They're also heavily outnumbered. [/quote]

So now we're making assumptions as to how large this hypothetical mob would be? 

[quote]MLKs murder sparked six riots across the country. Rodney King's beating sparked the 1992 LA riots.[/quote]

You'd be better off finding examples of riots that actually hail from medieval times -- more so if they involve the death/murder of an important figure --, as that's probably more analogous to the situation. I mean, can we really use riots from recent times that are different then this Mage issue in comparison? Pro-Templar posters often say we can't use any real life examples of stuff to relate to Mages.

You don't need to tell me about MLK though. I lived in Wilmington, DE. My dad grew up in the time of the riots. His home was only kept from being burned down because he was friends with a black kid from the neighborhood -- good friends, actually, and they still are to this day.

Italians would sit on their rooftops with shotguns to defend their homes from the riots. That much I remember from my dad and other sources.

The National Guard was mobilized, 3500 strong, to stay entrenched in the city.

For reference. One photo shows a National Guardsman firing.

While the MLK incident has some similarities -- death of an outspoken and beloved person in a community -- there are also some differences as well.

I shall end this post here, just so I'm certain I don't lose it. I will edit it with the other parts of your post later, or reply to them separately.

[quote]I provided an example from Asunder-- the assassination attempt on the Divine-- an attempt-- sparked the tavern incident. All mages were collectively condemned.[/quote]

Well one, that happens after Kirkwall's RoA, which was no doubt whitewashed into being "Mages bad, Templars good".

For another, the tavern folk were acting against what... a couple of Mages? In Evangeline's care? Not only is 2 vastly different then 2000, but Evangeline actually did her duty and protected them from a mob.

[quote]You can believe that is the only purpose the Templars serve or should serve in Kirkwall but that does not make it true.[/quote]

Those are the very words that came out of Knight-Commander Guylian's mouth before he was forced to intervene by Divine Beatrix III, who was noted to be a friend of the Emperor of Orlais and thus in each other's pocket..

Those are the words Orsino echoes.

We have Irminric, a noble's son, who joined the Templars and forfeited his claims to the political spectrum.

Thrask says that he agrees with Orsino on how Templars were not meant to hold worldly power. Evangeline was given a choice: She could take her noble rights after her parents' death if she retired from the Order, or continue on as a Templar and forfeit her claim to it.

The Templars exist to protect society from Mages and Demons and Mages from mundanes. They are not meant to actually be in positions of power in terms of what Meredith did. 

That's illegal.

That does not mean I would not have thought her fit for the role, had she done it appropriately. But I wouldn't beat around the bush and try to sugarcoat what it really is. It'd still be illegal.

[quote]Meredith would not have the influence over Dumar she did if it were.[/quote]

Technically, that wasn't illegal. Not the purpose of the Order, but not illegal. Being the Woman Behind the Man is leagues different from being the Woman in the Viscount's Seat. The latter is illegal, the former merely unethical, reprehensible, a breach of what the Order stands for, and so on.

But it's a slippery slope.

[quote]Yes let the city burn down. Let people die. Let the Qunari Arishok advance on Thedas. On Kirkwall once more. Let them come raid the Gallows next. Let the brutal occupation begin again.[/quote]

Strawman.

I never said the Templars shouldn't have fought the Qunari. I said they shouldn't have stepped into the political spectrum after Dumar's death.

[quote]I understand why they resist but doing so is futile.[/quote]

Do you? You understand that if the city doesn't see any trace remnant of its self-autonomy anywhere in the city, they become mere shells of their former selves? Simple targets? 

So long as the City Guard exists, it serves as a reminder -- and more importantly, a beacon of hope -- for Kirkwall's autonomy over itself, the capability of the city to rule itself.

[quote]We've had this debate before. As I posted murder investigations are left to the City-Guard.

Emeric's investigation evolved beyond the scope of a finding a missing mage, and he has no substantial evidence to suspect Mharen's disappearance and Ninette's recent disappearence were connected. He simply has a "feeling". That's not much to go on. Had he informed Meredith that he felt a demonic presence in Lowtown-- her decision to end the investigation likely would have changed. She wouldn't have cause to believe Emeric was wasting his time on a wild goose chase. Emeric then reported his suspicions to the City Guard and they were slow to act. That is not Meredith's incompetenc[/quote]

Right...

Let's ignore the fact that Hawke can tell Emeric he:

1) Fought Demons and Shades
2) saw a man fleeing the scene of the crime long before said Demons showed up, with Fenris noting they were summoned.
3) found a person's remains in a placed riddled with magical evidence.

FACT: Mharen's phylactery ended at the Foundry, something Emeric says. The fact that the same place where Mharen's trail ended also had a man fleeing the scene, demons at its core, blood, and bones all over the place IS evidence to warrant the Templars.

Bolded words incoming.

Because of the Demons and the phylactery.

Emeric tells Meredith ALL of this, and she still passes it along to the City Guard. Aveline, who may have witnessed all of this, also ignores it.

The two of them are grossly incompetent at their job, and I'm partially blaming Bioware for Aveline's incompetence.

Had there been no demons and no phylactery trail ending, you'd have a point. Then it would just be Emeric's gut when he talked to Meredith. But Emeric's got strong evidence to warrant Templar involvement.

That's my point. Emeric was given enough evidence by Hawke, went to Meredith with it, and she refused to investigate.

"Demons in a foundry where a Mage's trail ended and a man fled the scene long before they showed up? Nah, not my problem Emeric. I have to go beat another Mage for fear of blood magic."

Christ, even Cullen is smart enough to admit the Templars are at fault for Quentin going so far.

[quote]So you'd still condemn Meredith for assuming the Viscount's chair but you'd give her brownie points had she let Aveline alone?[/quote]

I'd be okay with her assuming the Viscount's chair if she made an appropriate use of it, which she does not do.

If she wants to ensure the City Guard aren't a threat to her rule, then she needs to win them over to her side. They need to remain self-autonomous and reminders of Kirkwall's independence and she cannot and should not bully them to be under her thumb.

Work together with them, talk to Aveline one-on-one, and so on. In time, the City Guard will come to believe Meredith is fit for the role, at least for the moment. They won't be a threat to her rule.

It's one thing to win support. It's another to be a bully. That's why politicians need to be charismatic as much as be other things.

Meredith has no charisma, no charm. 

She's like a really bad rendition of Cersei Lannister. Bad in the sense that her writing is poor, and bad in the sense that what writing we have makes her not seem likable at all. She goes about politics worse then Cersei does, causes more problems then she solves worse then Cersei does, and has a more belligerent personality then Cersei in spades.

[quote]Loghain did the same making Arl Howe the Arl of Denerim. And stellar choice he made.[/quote]

Actually, Howe named himself the new Arl of Denerim by coming to "help" Vaughan with the riots, imprisoned the man, and then claimed Vaughan died in the riots. And then Howe purged the Alienage for fun after the riots were calmed down.

Loghain was not in a position to argue with the man, so he simply allowed him to stay there. At this point, Howe has control of the greater part of the Coastlands. To antagonize the man means that Loghain would be fighting a war on three fronts and not two -- as at this point, the Bannorn are gearing up for war, which is what Loghain wanted to avoid.

Howe would've fought against Loghain if he was antagonized. And Howe views any limitations on how much authority he can have as antagonizing. Loghain did that out of necessity, not out of a desire to.

[quote]Meredith has blood mages in her midsts.[/quote]

That she's been causing by her oppressive, anti-mage regime since her ascendance to Knight-Commander.

[quote]"It breaks my heart to do it." [/quote]

You mean when she goes from angry to sad back to angry again?

Yes, because radical mood swings at the drop of a hat are the mark of a rational person.

[quote]If Greagoir felt so strongly Cullen was unfit for service he should have kicked him out of the Order as Meredith kicked out Samson-- and she did so for a much lesser reason.  He instead sent Cullen to a place where he would be far more comfortable-- his views shared. Where he could flourish as a Templar-- reaching the rank of Knight-Captain in a very short span of time.[/quote]

He did so with the intent that Cullen would calm his views with time and could return (which I think is in line with my headcanon). Meredith decided to make it a permanent transition because Cullen shared her views and she eventually promoted him to that rank.

[quote]She is stonefaced throughout[/quote]

Really? I suppose when she's strutting into the Gallows Courtyard saying the only thing she'll accept is a surrender with a smile on her face, that's her being stonefaced.

I suppose since she wants to rebuild the Circle on the premise of fear and other things that are not the coernerstones of a new Circle, that's her being stonefaced.

Bah.

[quote]Should I say Loghain takes pleasure in abandoning the king because he does it so seemingly calm?[/quote]

He was shown to be consistently pained by that decision, even if he thought Cailan a fool. Meredith on the other hand has been oppressing the Mages for nigh on two decades and hasn't once stopped to consider if she's the problem. Hell, if Hawke tells her Orsino was blameless in the BSC rebellion she believes he's managed to make a blood thrall of the Champion.

Whereas Orsino is reasonable enough to admit that he was wrong to suspect Meredith was behind the rebellion as a means for him to self-incriminate himself.

[quote] Strike pregant women[/quote]

While abhorrent, it happened 20-30 years prior and he does not give off that vibe in-game.

[quote]Listen to another's word on the state of his Circle?[/quote]

The Templars do not own the Circles. The First Enchanters and Knight-Commander work together with one another because it's a joint effort.

See Hierarchy of the Circle. The Knight-Commanders and Templars exist merely to protect the Mages from themselves, from mundanes, and mundanes from all threats magical. They do not own the Circles. It is not theirs. The First Enchanter dictates the course the Circle will take and works with the Knight-Commander to make it so.

[quote]He has no steady conviction or ability to rule and that makes him worse.[/quote]

He can make friends. He knows where to draw the line, where even if he views Mages as not to be trusted like normal men he does not approve of abusing them. He knows the ideals of the Order and how best to live up to them, especially as he grows to see how extreme Kirkwall is. Extremism that he was advocating years prior.

He wavers, yes. But that is not necessarily a bad thing. To have doubts about what you're doing is, in my mind, a great trait for a leader. It shows that they don't think themselves infallible. 

And if his dialogue with Aveline during her Act 3 quest is any indication, he would not want anything to do with the politics of Kirkwall and would vacate the Viscount's Seat at the first opportunity. Which makes him better then Meredith. 

She has the power of her Templars and the Viscount's chair, yet she neglects to properly utiiize either effectively. She mismanages them and probably finds it hard to split time efficiently between the two.

[quote]Have you read Asunder?[/quote]

I have not. I know its plot and a lot of the details, but I have not actually read it. Which is why I asked for an explanation on why she seems like a Mary Sue.

I don't see anything Mary Sue about what you said, however.





 

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 17 juin 2013 - 03:42 .

[Hazegurl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Mages can be extremely useful, and if Duncan's suggestion to put a mage in every regiment was actually utilized, there may not have been a Fifth Blight to begin with.

I highly doubt this. Grey wardens stop Blights not mages (unless they are wardens).

Without Griffins, Grey Wardens don't have aerial capabilities anymore to deal with the winged Archdemons. What Riordian did to injure an Archdemon was a matter of luck. And the Archdemons lead the hordes of darkspawn, which could be hypothetically dealt with by mages - as Duncan notes to the mage protagonist when he explains why he wants a mage in every regiment (since Duncan acknowledges that a mage can deal with large groups of darkspawn with his or her powers).

Hazegurl wrote...

It was pretty obvious that Duncan and Co. were screwed the moment Loghain sent away his troops.  It's lack of support from an army, the lost of a King, and the death of a Warden commander that allowed the Fifth Blight to happen. Mages are useful but hardly indestructible.

I'd say it was obvious Cailan and his armies were screwed with or without Loghain and his troops given the number of darkspawn who were approaching them, which wasn't helped by Greagoir only permitting seven mages to help stop the darkspawn at Ostagar. 

Riordian, The Warden, Alistair or Lohgain proved that even without Griffons Grey Wardens will find a way to slay an Archdemon.  

I didn't claim the Grey Wardens couldn't deal with the Archdemons without griffins. My point was that the Grey Wardens don't have aerial capabilities anymore because griffins are extinct, which makes it more difficult to deal with the Archdemons, meaning that the Blights can last for years, or even decades (as they previously did in the past). In dealing with the Blight, large amounts of darkspawn are going to be an issue as long as the Archdemon is alive, giving them cunning intellect and making them all the more dangerous.

Hazegurl wrote...

Griffons are useful but not required for the job and neither are mages unless they are Grey Wardens. Mages cannot stop Blights, period.  Being able to handle a large amount of darkspawn is simply a convenience.

The Fifth Blight wasn't the norm but an exception, since it ended in such a short period of time. Typically, the Blights have taken years - or even decades - to end. As Silfren pointed out with her Duncan quote: "No Grey Warden has ever defeated a Blight without the armies of a half-dozen nations at his back."

That means that the amassed armies of darkspawn are going to be an issue while the Archdemon is alive. Mages can be an asset, but simply having seven mages isn't going to help turn the tide of the battle, especially when the darkspawn have their own magic at hand.

Regardless of the nature of the Fifth Blight only Wardens can stop it as they are the only ones who can slay an Archdemon. I have never once stated anything about them not needing help at all but mages alone are not essential to the extent you are claiming they are. They are only essential to ending the Blight if they too are Wardens. Correct me if I'm wrong but I am under the impression that you are comparing a one mage in every regiment tactic as having equal firepower to an entire army. I highly doubt that is what Duncan was implying and if anything his strategy would also include covering Lohgain's army as well. Even if Duncan received the right amount of mages they would dead without the support of Lohgain's troops.

Besides to say that Wardens need a half-dozen nations then turn around and dismiss the need for an entire army based soley on the presence of one group sort of contradicts that point. 

PS: Loghain actually isn't so bad when he's beaten like a dog. I loved having my evil warden noble taunt him at camp, and I kept him alive at the end to keep the torment going as I was marrying Anora

[Hazegurl]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

Two questions: 1. How did we get on the subject of Loghain? and 2. How is there any doubt at all that Loghain is a traitor?

1) All threads inevitably discuss Loghain.
2) Because Ostagar was unwinnable, for a myriad of reasons, none of them being the fault of Loghain. Retreating from a battle that proves itself to be unwinnable does not make one a traitor.

Nope just the delibrate act of pulling your troops out to ensure the King's death so you can unsurp his throne is.

[TEWR]

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

Then why does she cry to my Warden to come rescue her? She may not have been in danger of being killed but Anora certainly had no intention of relinquishing all power and authority to her father.[/quote]

Of course not. I'm just taking issue with this assumption that Loghain brow-beat his daughter or near enough into letting him be in control. That's not what he did.

He declared himself Regent, yes. I gave reasons for why he did that and what was going through his mind. 

Anora was fine with this, this much is undeniable. From a political standpoint, she had to be, but I also suspect some part of her felt that she had no reason to see her father as being unfit for the role immediately, much as she didn't like how she was relegated to being in the shadows once more.

I also suspect that she knew that she couldn't acquire the legal standing to rule in truth at this point in time. Given her persona, this is very likely. As the Landsmeet decrees who is king and Ferelden is just as much traditionalist/nationalist as they are supportive of her -- meaning "Theirins are awesome!" -- she couldn't actually gain enough support immediately after Ostagar to nail her the throne. So she bided her time, trying to rule from the shadows anyway. Howe was the main problem in this state of affairs, manipulating Loghain and playing on his beliefs.

So when the Warden amasses enough military and political might to ensure that he can be a means to securing her throne, she concocts a clever gambit that would allow her to gain the throne with proper support or, should that fail, allow her to easily retain Loghain on her side.

See this:

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...

With regards to Anora being captured by Howe.

The whole scenario is quite possibly the result of poor writing, as it’s contradictory on several levels and indeed if taken at first glance, makes Anora and Howe both look like complete idiots. However, there is one plausible explanation.

Anora said she heard Howe suggesting her death. Her going to Howe’s estate as such is foolish, except if she hatched a plan. It is very possible that Anora got herself captured on purpose, perhaps enticed Howe in some way (like say, lure the Warden into the lion’s den). This is corroborated by the fact that Anora’s servant was allowed to go out of the estate and went straight for Eamon. How the hell can she do that without Howe knowing? He has proven himself capable of making sure there were no witnesses to his actions (Cousland massacre, taking over Denerim and imprisoning Vaughn). Howe may lack foresight, but he is not that much of an idiot.

Here’s the political situation. Loghain has the military advantage, as we know from the rumors and hearsay, having defeated the bannorn in the field of battle. However, Eamon’s revival means that the once leaderless bannorn now have a strong leader with a claim to the throne if he wished. Add to that, Eamon is allied with the Warden who had amassed several armies under his / her command, thus equalizing the distribution of military power. AND, the Warden has Alistair.

Anora must have sensed that the balance was shifting to the Warden’s side, and wanted to test the waters. Loghain is indeed domineering in his regency and Anora now sees the opportunity to grab the throne fully, by siding against Loghain AND ensuring unity in the process (hence her not opposing Loghain before, which would have been foolish. There was no alternative). And Anora can’t simply go to Eamon without Loghain knowing, she can’t afford to do so as Loghain can either stop her, or in the event that an alliance with the Warden is impossible, would make siding with Loghain again very hard. It’s preferrable if she does it in secret (of course the warden can screw it all up by exposing Anora to Cauthrien HENCE Anora claiming the Warden is trying to capture her. Excellent save if I say so myself).

SO, she staged her own capture, lured the Warden in, and placed herself in Eamon’s estate without Loghain knowing what she was doing. AND got Howe killed in the process. She essentially, managed to test the waters and see if siding with the Warden is a good prospect. Indeed, she can break the alliance between Eamon and the Warden to her benefit, or do the next best thing and secure a union via marriage.

All this makes Anora a keen politician, who understands who is the decisive piece in the game (the Warden). That, in addition to her administrative abilities and vision, make her a very good queen. [/quote]

[quote]IIRC she tries to advise him regarding the Bannorn threatening civil war if he does not step down and he says they're doing things his way. She then asks if he killed Cailan didn't like his answer and left in fury. Resistance.[/quote]

In the scene you're talking about, civil war has already happened. The Bannorn struck the first blow, and now Loghain has to prioritize fighting the Banns to bring them to line and unite forcefully under his banner.

You cannot wage a war on multiple fronts and win easily. Against the Darkspawn, who aren't like normal armies -- they don't require food to sustain themselves and have an incredibly large army -- trying to fight a war on two fronts would be utterly disastrous. That's why he's prioritizing the Civil War after he was first intent on dealing with the Darkspawn with a united nation.

His intention was that Ferelden would unite under his cause after Cailan's demise -- that Cailan caused -- so as to not seem weak in the eyes of their neighboring nation Orlais, who historically would offer their "aid" to foreign nations too weak to survive the Blights and then never leave, with assistance from the Wardens. The sad thing is that the Bannorn caused Loghain's worst fears to come to fruition: By prioritizing politics, they sucked themselves into the vacuum of power Cailan's death left in its wake and weakened themselves.

He believes, at this point in time, that no Blight is truly at foot. The Darkspawn have large numbers, he does not deny this. And they must be dealt with immediately (that was his primary intention, before the Bannorn waged civil war and put politics above the Darkspawn) but he doesn't think they're not truly a Blight. Indeed, he has no reason to believe it. The Wardens never said why they're necessary or how they know it's a Blight other then that they have "strong feelings on the matter". They never gave evidence to convince people.

Numbers alone isn't indicative of a Blight's veracity.

Beyond that, the Archdemon is playing on the peoples' disbelief by sending out roving bands of Darkspawn that seemingly appear disunified. As a result, the peoples' disbelief of the Blight is exacerbated and strengthened, all while Archie is spreading a bit of chaos here and there and getting the lay of the land, making Ferelden easier to conquer.

Even more, the Archdemon is letting the civil war take its course so that Ferelden is easier to conquer. 


[quote]Either they created the massive hole in the floor to allow darkspawn to invade the tower-- slowing down the lighting of the signal so the battle would indeed be lost-- or he did not seal it off and warned no one.[/quote]

Or the friggin' Ogre -- a living siege engine for the Darkspawn -- tore straight through the doors and created that hole.

David Gaider confirmed that Ishal's exposure to the Darkspawn had nothing to do with Loghain.


[quote]Please. He should know his daughter better than that. Five minutes after meeting her I know her better than that. Five seconds after her father is dead she is quick to defend her throne from Alistair and Eamon at the Landsmeet.[/quote]

He actually doesn't know her as well as people think. If the Warden says "No one alive knows her better then you do" his response is a self-deprecating "You think so, do you?".

He loves her. He believes she'll be his little girl now and always. He believes that, since Anora and Cailan did care for one another (though Cailan cheated on Anora often, yet never sired any bastards) that Anora will be too grief-stricken to deal with ruling.

Is she a little girl in need of protection? No. Is she grief-stricken to the point where she can't rule? No.

But Loghain's thinking like a father. 

[quote]He has no legitmate claim to the throne and not even an army to boast to warrant stepping in as ruler.[/quote]

Other then Gwaren's army, and the support of Banns that threw their lot in with him who have their own forces and land.

Anora, the woman known by many Banns and Arls and even the Teyrns to have been the mind behind the throne, was okay with him declaring himself Regent. I repeat: the Queen of Ferelden wasn't opposing him. 

For reasons that it'd be unwise to do so at that point in time, but she was still saying out loud how she was fine with it.

And the Bann still took issue with it. He may not have blood claims to the throne, but his claim was backed by the woman noted by many people to be the brains behind the throne.

His claim has more standing then Meredith's. That does not mean it is a perfect claim. Just that it's better then Meredith's.

[quote]He thinks is judgment is the best and won't be challenged-- same as Meredith. I don't sense poor rhetoric. Had he tried at all he could have choosen softer words. He wants the Nobility to fall in line. [/quote]

It is poor rhetoric. To the Banns, how he was saying what he was saying -- demanding their allegiance -- had Orlesian undertones. Loghain wants them to unite under his banner, but his methods leave much to be desired. He said it poorly, and while he does not say he said such things poorly explicitly I don't need to be told as much to realize that his wording was ******-poor and that he's a ******-poor politician.

[quote]You elevate Loghain's character more than I believe is deserving and Bryce Cousland is not a traitor.[/quote]

Siding with Loghain does not make one a traitor.

[quote]The Couslands were stanch supporters of the Crown. Ardent Royalists. That is hammered in the Humon Noble Origin. Bryce was besties with King Maric. He would not turn on his son even if there was merit in doing so.[/quote]

Right, do you happen to have proof that Bryce Cousland knew about Alistair existing? How can you support the Theirins if you don't know if the line still exists?

Eamon and Teagan knew because they raised Alistair. Loghain, Anora, and Cailan knew. But do you have any evidence that Bryce Cousland knew of Alistair's existence?

If he did not -- and I say he didn't because it's not claimed in-game -- then siding with Loghain would be what he would do, as the nearest person he could be a royalist for in such an instance is Anora, wife of Cailan.

[quote]Bryce Cousland is an idiot anyhow. He was too trusting of Howe when everyone knows he is a slimeball[/quote]

Bryce Cousland was offered the throne over Cailan the Lackwit. That points to him having political capabilities. He's also popular and well respected. Howe, if successfully intimidated, remarks that the look the HN has in his/her eyes is the same one his parents had that held him back each and every time.



[quote]and who leaves their castle entirely defenseless? There is difference between faith and stupidity.[/quote]

It wasn't entirely defenseless. There were men still stationed at Highever for the HN to command.


[quote]
After asking if its wise to take all of Highever's men to Ostagar-- 
Human Noble (paraphrase)"What if you can't hold the darkspawn at Ostagar?"
Bryce (parapharse)-- "You'll do your best. I know it. But we shouldn't talk of such ominous things. We should assume all will go well and the Maker will watch over us."

-----[/quote]

And is there a reason why that's a bad thing? If you think things will go poorly, your mind won't be in the right place when you're trying to do something. For both Bryce and the HN, this would be true if they continued to dwell on the bad ****.

This is a proven mental effect.

Bryce acknowledges that they're going into something fraught with danger. He says that if the worst should happen, he trusts the HN to take care of things. But he doesn't want to dwell on it because that's actually NOT wise to do.

[quote]I readily conceed Meredith is harsh and arrogant and has a disdain for magic. Can you not admit Loghain's faults?[/quote]

I've never once said he has no faults.


[quote]And he didn't prevent the civil war when he could have by stepping down. Its his way or the highway. Arrogance.[/quote]

Yes, let's step down from the Regency because the people who believe you murdered their king said you should. It's not like you'd be arrested, imprisoned, stripped of all lands and titles, and if the worst should happen be executed.

Not only would that just result in Loghain's supporters fighting for him to be freed anyway -- and without Loghain at the helm, things might have gone even worse -- but Loghain believes himself to be the only one capable of saving Ferelden since he's a proven general. 

So stepping down was not only an option that was realistically impossible, but an option that Loghain couldn't fathom.

And he's not wrong. He's not right, because the reasons why he's refusing to do it are the wrong ones -- that he's the only one that can save the nation -- but in the end he can't step down.

[quote]Press gangs don't endear him to the people. Check out Orlais in Asunder. And the army shouldn't have been lost. Alistair comments they were winning.[/quote]

Alistair didn't even bother to look out on the friggin' field and he knows jack **** about warfare and strategy. All he knows is how to fight, but fighting is not the same as an intimate knowledge of warfare. Hmmm... who to trust... the general or Alistair. I'll go with the general.

But yes, let's say that Alistair is right simply because he voices an opinion and ignore all the facts at play, like how Cailan only used one volley of arrows, wasted the Mabari as fodder troops, and charged out into the open exposing all of his flanks -- which, again, was NOT what Loghain said. Loghain told Cailan to draw the Darkspawn in, to lure them in. He never told him to meet them out in the open and expose all of their flanks.

And it's not like people ever have conflicting thoughts on the same issue, where one side's thought is actually right.

The evidence of Ostagar supports Loghain making the right call.

Note: I may be getting a tad confrontational here, but it's not anything regarding you. It has more to do with how I've discussed this topic to death 1000 times at least, and I've heard all these arguments before. 

[quote]The darkspawn would be defeated had Loghain charged when he should have. The loss is his fault.[/quote]

Except DG said the horde was larger then anyone could have anticipated, and you can see how far it stretches back in-game from the bridge

[quote]Answered. She's the Queen who's been running the country for years and not a child. She can certainly handle responsibility. She makes every effort to take back what he took from her.[/quote]

So he thinks like a father. 

[quote]Or he would have realized Loghain is arrogant and despises Cailan and that he took advantage of the situation to elevate himself to King.[/quote]

Loghain does not despise Cailan. Loghain loved the boy as his own son, foolish as he was, and is deeply pained by what he had to leave Cailan to. The toolset notes even say that he loved Cailan as his son.

And he is not an ambitious person. He's actually relieved when he sees that the Warden is just as capable at saving the nation as he thought he was. If he was ambitious, he'd take issue with the Warden winning the duel. Or he'd be like Howe or Anora.

And he's not like either. He detests Howe and he's not a good politician like Anora.


[quote]Yes he did.[/quote]

No.

[quote]And Meredith has some paranoia greater than his? No. If there is a level of paranoia for either party it is the same.[/quote]

Considering Orlais lied about how many troops they were sending, he wasn't wrong about Orlais having designs on Ferelden.

[quote]
Because she understood he was a traitor. She don't like his kind. [/quote]

Wynne admits she was wrong about Loghain and Ostagar eventually. Plus she notes that she regrets even saying anything to the Circle, knowing what happened afterwards. So if she could do it over, she would've kept quiet and the Circle would've thrown their lot in with Loghain.

And....

[quote]
Sten: Why did you leave them? 
Loghain: I beg your pardon?
Sten: The men at Ostagar. They were your brothers-in-arms, were they not?
Loghain: They were.
Sten: Your place was on the field.
Loghain: Do Qunari soldiers never retreat, then?
Sten: We never need to.
Loghain: We do.
[/quote]


[quote]Howe is under his command. You have readily condemned Meredith for abuses commited by Templars under her leadership. I said that was unfair. You ignore me. /TwoCanPlayThatGame.[/quote]

Meredith authorized those people to do those things. David Gaider said Howe did a great many things without Loghain's knowledge or approval, especially when Loghain was out in the field commanding his troops -- which was often.

And there's no evidence that Loghain knew of Howe's torture of certain people. I am not saying he couldn't have known, only that it's not known if he knew.

There's a clear difference between the two. You can whittle them down to base similarities, but that is not appropriate. It'd be no different then saying because archetypes exist, all characters are the same -- which people have done in the past.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 13 avril 2013 - 08:55 .

[TEWR]

Hazegurl wrote..

Nope just the delibrate act of pulling your troops out to ensure the King's death so you can unsurp his throne is.

I don't wanna repeat myself. Read my other posts, please. And also consider everything Cailan did that was damning to the troops under his command, which I go into in my most recent one.

And factor in how Ishal's beacon was delayed, how Alistair didn't check the field to see if the signal should be lit -- instead choosing to go off of the "We must have missed the signal. Let's light it right away!" mindset. He doesn't see if the Darkspawn have been committed to the field, but assumes that it's so simply because an hour has passed which was how much time they had.

And also look at how far the horde stretches back from the bridge. And consider the strength of the army, where they have dozens upon dozens upon dozens of Darkspawn mages capable of decimating soldiers with ease -- as opposed to the army's negligible Templars and Mages there -- and how they have dozens of living siege engines (Ogres). That's not even accounting for the sheer size of the regular Hurlocks and Genlocks, or how berserking Hurlocks are a match for multiple opponents at once.

[Hazegurl]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Hazegurl wrote..

Nope just the delibrate act of pulling your troops out to ensure the King's death so you can unsurp his throne is.

I don't wanna repeat myself. Read my other posts, please. And also consider everything Cailan did that was damning to the troops under his command, which I go into in my most recent one.

I don't need to read your other posts to know I disagree with that sentence. No need to repeat yourself cause it would just go in an endless loop with us. Loghain know what he did, he pulled his men away silently at an opportune moment.

He may have had his reasons but leaving your King to die on a battlefield so you can take his throne...once again, regardless of the reasons behind it or what was going on during the war is in fact an act of treason. Lohgain better be lucky he isn't in ancient Rome or he and his troops would be up for a good ole round of Decimation.

[TEWR]

Hazegurl wrote...

He may have had his reasons but leaving your King to die on a battlefield so you can take his throne

Except he didn't abandon his king so he could take his throne.

What he did was take the throne after the king died in an unwinnable battle.

They are not the same thing. One is a deliberate plot to kill your king -- which word of god proves was not the case -- while the other is simply taking control in a chaotic situation following the aftermath of a battle that your king decided he should fight in against the repeated advice of two people: his general and his uncle.

[Hazegurl]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

He may have had his reasons but leaving your King to die on a battlefield so you can take his throne

Except he didn't abandon his king so he could take his throne.

What he did was take the throne after the king died in an unwinnable battle..

Yeah, that's why he lied about the events of that day. Because that's what people do when they make justified decisions based on proper tactics. They lie and frame other people for it then send assassins to kill them. 

[dragonflight288]

I need to quote Loghain at Ostagar here.

Loghain: The darkspawn Horde is too dangerous for you to be playing hero on the front line!

Loghain: How fortunate Maric didn't live to see his son ready to hand us over to the country that enslaved us for a century! (which turned out to be sort of true, and Orlais lied about the number of troops they were sending,and the Orlesians wanted their province back.)

Loghain: Maric would've understood that it takes more than glory and legends to win a battle....I'll not repeat that argument here. (That implies that he had been making it non-stop, and he continues to make it at the strategy meeting, and Cailan is too caught up on fighting side-by-side with the Wardens to focus on his own safety)

What we have here, is Loghain going out of his way to try and warn Cailan out of being an idiot. But the plan was a hammer and anvil one. Draw their lines into a defensible location, Loghain would flank the darkspawn with a much larger force. What happened instead, is that Cailan only fired one volley of arrows, sent out the mabari, then led a charge into the valley, exposing himself on all sides. At the moment Loghain retreats, and we see Cailan's force being slaughtered, during that overhead view, we see darkspawn are STILL coming out of the woods. Their numbers were just too many for Cailan and Loghain to deal with.

To quote Loghain a little later in the game, when talking to Anora. "Cailan's death was his own doing."

[jillabender]

Hazegurl wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

He may have had his reasons but leaving your King to die on a battlefield so you can take his throne

Except he didn't abandon his king so he could take his throne.

What he did was take the throne after the king died in an unwinnable battle..

Yeah, that's why he lied about the events of that day. Because that's what people do when they make justified decisions based on proper tactics. They lie and frame other people for it then send assassins to kill them. 

Well, David Gaider has said that in his mind, Loghain had prepared for the possibility that he might need to abandon the battlefield, but he probably would have committed his men to the battle if he had believed that he could possibly save Cailan - he abandoned the field because he was convinced the battle had already been lost. Of course, as David Gaider puts it, whether you believe that Loghain's perception was correct is up to you. Here's part of what he had to say:

David Gaider wrote...

The darkspawn forces were getting stronger with each engagement. Loghain knew that, and knew that it wasn't going to keep being so easy. I would say that he knew what might happen the minute Cailan made his strategy clear: rely on the Grey Wardens to win the day. 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.

I admit, though, that the first time I played the game, I got the strong impression that Loghain, after failing to convince Cailan to give up his plan for an alliance with Orlais, had reluctantly decided that Cailan needed to die because only he, Loghain, could save Ferelden. In short, I got the impression that he deliberately planned to use the battle as a way of getting rid of Cailan, and one of the things that tripped me up was the very thing you said: If Loghain really believed the battle had been lost, why did he feel the need to lie about his decision to retreat?

After thinking about it a bit more, though, it makes more sense to me - I think Loghain's motivation for framing the Grey Wardens (As his lackey puts it: "The Grey Wardens led the King to his death! The Teyrn could do nothing!") was simply that he wanted to ensure that he, and not the Grey Wardens, would be the one who led Ferelden against the Blight. If Loghain had simply told the truth, the nobles would probably have expected him to work with the Grey Wardens, and he certainly didn't want to allow Orlesian Grey Wardens into the country - that was the thing he wanted to avoid above all else.

So, as I think about it now, David Gaider's explanation for Loghain's motivations does actually fit with what we see in the game. I think the main thing that tripped me up was that the dialogue given to Alistair and the Warden at Flemeth's hut assumes that they believe Loghain could have won the battle but deliberately chose to betray Cailan (even Flemeth's dialogue tends in that direction), and once that idea was lodged in my head, it was hard to shake it.

Of course, it's understandable that Alistair and the Warden would assume Loghain deliberately chose to betray Cailan, because they didn't actually see what was happening on the battlefield when he gave the order to retreat. Still, I wish there had been an option to portray the Warden as not leaping to conclusions.

Modifié par jillabender, 13 avril 2013 - 04:14 .

[Vit246]

Since we're still talking about the damn Battle of ostagar, can we agree that Bioware on average sucks at portraying warfare?

Modifié par Vit246, 13 avril 2013 - 04:13 .

[jillabender]

Vit246 wrote...

Since we're still talking about the damn Battle of ostagar, can we agree that Bioware on average sucks at portraying warfare?

Haha, there's some truth to that, for sure! As much as I love the Dragon Age games, the way they portray combat has little in common with real-world combat. That's not necessarily a problem, but it does sometimes create confusion in situations where battlefield decisions are a plot point.

For example, it's clear that in a real-world battle, the tactics we see Cailan use (abandoning a natural choke-point for one) would be supremely idiotic, but are we meant to see them as idiotic in-universe, or is it simply another manifestation of combat in the game having little resemblance to combat in real life?

Either way, my thoughts on the Battle of Ostagar are that I'm prepared to accept David Gaider's explanation that Loghain believed the battle had been lost, but I don't think we really know enough to say for sure whether Loghain's perception was correct or not.

Modifié par jillabender, 13 avril 2013 - 04:29 .

[dragonflight288]

jillabender wrote...

Vit246 wrote...

Since we're still talking about the damn Battle of ostagar, can we agree that Bioware on average sucks at portraying warfare?

Haha, there's some truth to that, for sure! As much as I love the Dragon Age games, the way they portray combat has little in common with real-world combat. That's not necessarily a problem, but it does sometimes create confusion in situations where battlefield decisions are a plot point.

For example, it's clear that in a real-world battle, the tactics we see Cailan use (abandoning a natural choke-point for one) would be supremely idiotic, but are we meant to see them as idiotic in-universe, or is it simply another manifestation of combat in the game having little resemblance to combat in real life?

Either way, my thoughts on the Battle of Ostagar are that I'm prepared to accept David Gaider's explanation that Loghain believed the battle had been lost, but I don't think we really know enough to say for sure whether Loghain's perception was correct or not.

I personally interpret that battle as Cailan being an idiot. Duncan was telling him to get reinforcements. Loghain was telling him the front lines was too dangerous for the king to be at, and all Cailan was talking about how the King of Ferelden rode side-by-side with the Wardens to stem the tide of evil. Cailan said he hoped for a war like in the tales, and to face the archdemon, and put way too much faith in the Grey Wardens and into Duncan, who was again, always urging Cailan to wait for reinforcements.

I think Cailan was so caught up in winning glory in battle and and living up to the legend of fighting with the grey wardens to defeat the darkspawn, that he completely ignored sound tactical sense, and ignored every reasonable thing to do in war, like hold the choke point, keep using the archers, and for the love of all that's decent, don't charge a large enemy force and expose yourself on all sides....

That wasn't Loghain and it wasn't Duncan. It was all Cailan. If Bioware intended to show off Cailan's idiocy, they succeeded admirably. If they were trying to get a good action sequence, they again did a great job. But if they were trying to show a battle as it should've been fought....that wasn't done so well.

Again, I interpret that as all Cailan's love of glory and legends.

[jillabender]

dragonflight288 wrote...

I personally interpret that battle as Cailan being an idiot. Duncan was telling him to get reinforcements. Loghain was telling him the front lines was too dangerous for the king to be at, and all Cailan was talking about how the King of Ferelden rode side-by-side with the Wardens to stem the tide of evil. Cailan said he hoped for a war like in the tales, and to face the archdemon, and put way too much faith in the Grey Wardens and into Duncan, who was again, always urging Cailan to wait for reinforcements.

I think Cailan was so caught up in winning glory in battle and and living up to the legend of fighting with the grey wardens to defeat the darkspawn, that he completely ignored sound tactical sense, and ignored every reasonable thing to do in war, like hold the choke point, keep using the archers, and for the love of all that's decent, don't charge a large enemy force and expose yourself on all sides....

That wasn't Loghain and it wasn't Duncan. It was all Cailan. If Bioware intended to show off Cailan's idiocy, they succeeded admirably. If they were trying to get a good action sequence, they again did a great job. But if they were trying to show a battle as it should've been fought....that wasn't done so well.

Again, I interpret that as all Cailan's love of glory and legends.

I think there's some truth to Vit246's observation that BioWare's games have never really shown a realistic "battle as it should have been fought."

But in this case, I am inclined to think they intended to show that Cailan let his over-eagerness get the better of him, and they certainly succeeded in that.

Modifié par jillabender, 15 avril 2013 - 10:13 .

[MisterJB]

I'm extremely supportive of the Templars and the Circle System which also means being supportive of their second duty which is to protect the mages.
I have to agree with TEWR. Rather than stupidly rising to Anders' bait, what Meredith should have done was send every mage to Gallows, lock it down, cut off all nautic acess, search the tower for blood mages or conspirators who might have helped Anders or the Resolutionists, send Templars and Guardsmen to the streets in case the population became violent and publically execute Anders for his crime.
It might have even prevented the war since it would show the mages that after one of their own had wanted to make them unwilling martyrs, it was the templars who stepped up to do their duty to the mages as well as non-mages.

But, unfortunately, it is not what happened hence this thread.

[TEWR]

MisterJB, don't try to bring this thread back on topic! You know that's a futile endeavor! Bask in the glory that is the Loghain debates! =P

Vit246 wrote...

can we agree that Bioware on average sucks at portraying warfare?

Yeah, they suck horribly. For Cailan's charge, it fit his character as a person that repeatedly ignored all forms of tactics and strategy, going so far as to avoid Loghain whenever the man wanted to talk about such things with his king.

But for other things, like how Loghain was Teyrn for 19 years yet ignorant of Ostagar's layout, when he's repeatedly described as a man that wants to know where his borders end and how best to defend them -- something even he says -- is Bioware's failure at consistent writing of their general.

Nevertheless, I can overlook that in the end because Loghain displays tactical sense by retreating from a battle that could not be won and because he's crushing the Bannorn.

Still, Bioware sucks at warfare. There's no doubt about that.

[Hazegurl]

jillabender wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

He may have had his reasons but leaving your King to die on a battlefield so you can take his throne

Except he didn't abandon his king so he could take his throne.

What he did was take the throne after the king died in an unwinnable battle..

Yeah, that's why he lied about the events of that day. Because that's what people do when they make justified decisions based on proper tactics. They lie and frame other people for it then send assassins to kill them. 

Well, David Gaider has said that in his mind, Loghain had prepared for the possibility that he might need to abandon the battlefield, but he probably would have committed his men to the battle if he had believed that he could possibly save Cailan - he abandoned the field because he was convinced the battle had already been lost. Of course, as David Gaider puts it, whether you believe that Loghain's perception was correct is up to you. Here's part of what he had to say:

David Gaider wrote...

The darkspawn forces were getting stronger with each engagement. Loghain knew that, and knew that it wasn't going to keep being so easy. I would say that he knew what might happen the minute Cailan made his strategy clear: rely on the Grey Wardens to win the day. 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.

I admit, though, that the first time I played the game, I got the strong impression that Loghain, after failing to convince Cailan to give up his plan for an alliance with Orlais, had reluctantly decided that Cailan needed to die because only he, Loghain, could save Ferelden. In short, I got the impression that he deliberately planned to use the battle as a way of getting rid of Cailan, and one of the things that tripped me up was the very thing you said: If Loghain really believed the battle had been lost, why did he feel the need to lie about his decision to retreat?

After thinking about it a bit more, though, it makes more sense to me - I think Loghain's motivation for framing the Grey Wardens (As his lackey puts it: "The Grey Wardens led the King to his death! The Teyrn could do nothing!") was simply that he wanted to ensure that he, and not the Grey Wardens, would be the one who led Ferelden against the Blight. If Loghain had simply told the truth, the nobles would probably have expected him to work with the Grey Wardens, and he certainly didn't want to allow Orlesian Grey Wardens into the country - that was the thing he wanted to avoid above all else.

So, as I think about it now, David Gaider's explanation for Loghain's motivations does actually fit with what we see in the game. I think the main thing that tripped me up was that the dialogue given to Alistair and the Warden at Flemeth's hut assumes that they believe Loghain could have won the battle but deliberately chose to betray Cailan (even Flemeth's dialogue tends in that direction), and once that idea was lodged in my head, it was hard to shake it.

Of course, it's understandable that Alistair and the Warden would assume Loghain deliberately chose to betray Cailan, because they didn't actually see what was happening on the battlefield when he gave the order to retreat. Still, I wish there had been an option to portray the Warden as not leaping to conclusions.

I think Gaider's explanation should have been executed better in game, that is if he wanted the audience to see it this way. Cause really, I also see Gaider's explanation as a speculation not facts cause as you said, character dialouge leans more on the betrayal side. Such as Alistair saying that Calian nearly defeated the darkspawn and especially Flemeth's words about how some men's hearts holding shadows darker than any tainted creature. Now Flemeth does go on to speculate that Loghain probably thinks he can stop the Blight. But there is no excuse for him standing there until the beacon is lit, sees plainly that it is then sounds the retreat.  It would make more sense if he sent his men down, saw too many darkspawn then sounded the retreat without fighting.

Anyway, I never saw Loghain as being any smarter than King Calian. For all of Calian's stupidity or blind hero worship at least he recognized a threat, gathered the men who were experts in such a threat, and then proceeded to let go of old wounds(Orlesians) to see the threat eliminated.  Actually I woud say that Calian was smarter than Loghain for trying to push the darkspawn back from one area than waiting for them to spread throughout Fereldan and dividing the military. With Loghain's support Calian could have at least pushed back to another location in time for the Orlesian grey Wardens to arrive who most likely would have brought the Orlesian military.  But of course Loghain's head would have exploded.

As for the Wardens jumping to conclusions. I think an assassin's blade at your back would do that to you. 

Now back to the real topic of this thread lol!!

[TEWR]

Yeah, that's why he lied about the events of that day. Because that's what people do when they make justified decisions based on proper tactics. They lie and frame other people for it then send assassins to kill them.

Already covered.

Furthermore, he had reasons to blame the Wardens for the deed. For one, they historically did help Orlais and the Chantry expand their borders during Blights and he feared they had gone back to such days. For another, Soldier's Peak, where the Wardens rebelled against the crown.

The truth about that story was not known to the general public. All that was known was that Sophia Dryden led the Wardens against the Fereldan crown.

Thirdly, the Wardens by their neglect to say anything meaningful to Cailan and Loghain inadvertently caused Loghain to suspect they were doing it deliberately to keep Cailan in his glory mode. They didn't urge Cailan to stay behind the front lines, they didn't reveal why they were truly necessary, they didn't say "Your Majesty, for all our necessity we cannot turn the tides of battle by ourselves" and so on in such a way that Cailan would listen to them. All of that kept Cailan and Loghain in the dark, and for Cailan it only made his glory-hounding worse.

Cailan believe the Wardens would be able to end the Blights easily by virtue of them simply being there, in the sense of "Who gives a damn about strategy and consequence and tactics? We have Grey Wardens on our side! Victory is assured!". And that led him into ****ing up the battle plan Loghain put forth and charging straight out into the open, exposing all of his flanks.

And for what it's worth, Loghain brings this up if you try and pin Cailan's death on him at the Landsmeet.

Fourth, from Loghain's point of view they not only delayed when the beacon was lit -- as Alistair lit it at the wrong time, the signal had already been sent -- but lit it at the wrong moment as well. While we the players know why the beacon was delayed (Darkspawn) Loghain did not. So from his point of view, they were deliberately stalling.

It was supposed to be lit when ALL the Darkspawn were committed in the field, which they weren't. Cailan's men were cracking under pressure (due in large part to Cailan's idiotic charge and use of men in the cinematic) while the Darkspawn army was still pouring through the Wilds, something Loghain could see just enough of. And it's something the Warden can see from the bridge.

When the beacon's lit, what's going through Loghain's mind is that they held off lighting it until Cailan's men were cracking under pressure and lit it when the Darkspawn still weren't committed, in the hopes that Loghain would charge to try and save his king or try to win the battle or both, and in the end Ferelden would not only lose its monarch but also its greatest general.

Ferelden would then be sucked into a massive power vacuum and destroy itself from within, wherein Orlais would swoop in to save the day as they had done to Nevarra, the Free Marches, and the Anderfels in the past.

And he does tell the Bannorn about Ostagar and why he had to retreat. Teagan doesn't believe that his nephew was a glory-hounding fool -- which he was -- or that Loghain pulled his men in order to save them. The sad thing is that despite Loghain wanting desperately to avoid the Bannorn pulling itself into such a vacuum, the Bannorn still sucks itself in.

Look up Teagan's DA wiki article. It's in the quotes section and I've often heard him say it in-game.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 avril 2013 - 04:58 .

[Hazegurl]

He still lied, still tried to silence the last two wardens,and still caused the Blight to spread. I believe that he believes he is justified in his actions. But I don't see it in game. I'm not saying Calian was the brightest bulb in the bunch, he was seeking blind glory. He's just smarter than Loghain.

Now as for the Mages and Templars...The Templars should just ship them all to the Imperium so they can have their precious freedom in a mage society.

[TEWR]

He still lied

It would only be a lie if he actually knew the truth. He didn't. Lacking particular information that disproves what you believe but believing, based on what information you do have, something else doesn't mean you're lying.

It just means you're misinformed.

He lacked X, the Warden's necessity in defeating the Blights. He knew Y, that they helped Orlais in the Chantry in the past.

He was misinformed and was wrong to brand the Wardens as enemies of the crown.

But he wasn't lying, because he didn't know the truth.

Think about it, haven't you ever lacked information, said something based on what you did know, only to find out you were wrong later on? That doesn't make you a liar, it just makes you ignorant of certain facts.

still tried to silence the last two wardens

Yes, and? One, you may have a new best buddy because of him, so yay!

Two, you were enemies. It wasn't a personal vendetta, but rather just business.

and still caused the Blight to spread

No, he didn't. The Bannorn did. Loghain wanted a unified Ferelden to fight the Darkspawn, without crawling to Orlais for assistance -- especially after the King's death.

The Bannorn decided to prioritize politics over siding with Loghain against the Darkspawn, at least until the Blight was dealt with. The proper time to deal with a political succession crisis if you're taking issue with who's declared acting Regent is after the nation is safe.

When the Bannorn began waging a war against Loghain, he had to prioritize that. He was forced to. This is basic military sense. You cannot wage a war on two fronts.

He did not cause the Blight to spread.

He's just smarter than Loghain.

Cailan refused reinforcements from Redcliffe when they were nearby (repeatedly, in fact), baited his general into fighting a battle when they're ill-prepared, fought on the front lines despite Loghain's repeated protests, ruined Loghain's battle plan, and didn't even have enough foresight to draw up a document legitimizing his bastard brother that he knew about for years and years and say "If I die, he's my heir."

Whereas Loghain knows military strategy, knows the king shouldn't fight on the front lines, was right the whole time about Orlais (they lied about how many troops they were sending), and many other things.

Cailan's an idiot. Loghain is not.

And Loghain's a far greater asset to Ferelden alive then dead, something you hear about in-game. The people have a morale boost if he's alive, which is great for fighting battles. He's the Hero of River Dane, more a symbol of Fereldan ideals then a man.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 15 avril 2013 - 09:34 .

[dragonflight288]

Whereas Meredith isn't looked up to by the people of Kirkwall like Loghain is in Ferelden. People were just as likely to slam their door shut in the faces of templars as they would be to help them. Almost everyone in Ferelden, save the banns and arls who decided to play politics, supported Loghain.

Loghain acted on misinformation concerning Wardens, and the Grey Warden we play as, generally acts on misinformation on Loghain. My first playthrough, I tried using everything I had on Howe as evidence against Loghain...and failed miserably because they are two separate people. Heck, even the elf Berwick in Redcliff who was keeping an eye on things was working for Howe and not Loghain. The situation in the denerim alienage was caused by Vaughn, and the purge done by Howe. The nobles being tortured, was done by Howe, locking Vaughn away and reporting his death by an elven uprising, done by Howe.

The most connection I can possibly think of in that regard, is that since Loghain himself hired Jowan to poison Eamon, and rescued him from the templars, the only prisoner of Howe's that Loghain, based on in-game evidence even knew about, was the templar who was the brother of Alfstanna.

Loghain was a ******-poor politician, but he stood on what he believed in and he never once deviates from his position that he's doing what's best for Ferelden. The biggest difference between him and Meredith is, that ultimately Loghain is willing and able to admit he's wrong. He says there's a strength in Alistair he hadn't seen since Maric should Alistair duel him, and he says the same thing of our Warden, and when he learns the truth of the Grey Wardens and why they're needed, he puts everything on the line for the single goal of defeating the archdemon, and throws everything he has at it. Meredith, on the other hand, never admits that she's wrong. Even if you side with the templars and stand up to her, which is after every mage in the Circle is dead, she still accuses you an all her templars of being influenced by blood magic, when there aren't any mages left alive to use it. Hawke can tell Meredith that Orsino wasn't involved with Thrask's rebellion in any way, and she'll accuse Hawke of being influenced by blood magic. She is incapable of admitting she's wrong.

Loghain and Meredith on the surface appear to be two peas in a pod, but ultimately, they're quite different. Loghain isn't a bad person. Merely misguided and spends most of the game misinformed, and we the players are also misinformed about him (pretty much cemented by that scene with Flemeth, but that doesn't mean we know everything that's happened.)

[LobselVith8]

Hazegurl wrote...

Regardless of the nature of the Fifth Blight only Wardens can stop it as they are the only ones who can slay an Archdemon. I have never once stated anything about them not needing help at all but mages alone are not essential to the extent you are claiming they are.

I pointed out that the mages were effective against large groups of darkspawn because that's precisely the reason Duncan wanted to utilize them, especially since the darkspawn have their own magic. And if the Warden-Commander thinks that having a mage in every regiment would be effective in dealing with the darkspawn, then I think he may have a point.

Hazegurl wrote...

They are only essential to ending the Blight if they too are Wardens. Correct me if I'm wrong but I am under the impression that you are comparing a one mage in every regiment tactic as having equal firepower to an entire army. I highly doubt that is what Duncan was implying and if anything his strategy would also include covering Lohgain's army as well. Even if Duncan received the right amount of mages they would dead without the support of Lohgain's troops.

I'm not dismissing the need for an army; I'm addressing that the mages are an asset that shouldn't be ignored, especially when history has shown how effective they are. Considering that the mages were the "greatest advantage" the Chantry led forces had against the Qunari in the New Exalted Marches (being more than a match for the advanced technology of the Qunari), and Ariane implies that the Circle played a role in the defeat of the elves (during the Exalted March on the Dales), I imagine that the mages are more effective than you give them credit for.

Hazegurl wrote...

Besides to say that Wardens need a half-dozen nations then turn around and dismiss the need for an entire army based soley on the presence of one group sort of contradicts that point.  

I think it's a mistake to ignore the power that the mages wield.

Hazegurl wrote...

PS: Loghain actually isn't so bad when he's beaten like a dog. I loved having my evil warden noble taunt him at camp, and I kept him alive at the end to keep the torment going as I was marrying Anora  

Loghain is a man who saw his mother raped and murdered by Orlesians, fought for years to free his homeland of the Orlesian occupation, played a key role in finally freeing Ferelden from the shackles of Orlesian oppression, and distrusted the idea of letting a plethora of Olresian troops onto Ferelden soil when Orlais previously used the Third Blight to 'help' Nevarra and then invade it after the end of the Blight. My Surana Warden opposed Loghain, but I didn't hate the Teyrn for trying to save his nation.