375 réponses à ce sujet

[duckley]

Mortis5 wrote...

I'll agree on Eamon, but nevertheless Eamon was a threat to him and the stability he needed at that moment.

You're looking at slavery from 21st century morals. Thedas is based on medieval Europe which practiced slavery and didn't think it was wrong. Elfs in Thedas, although having freedom in most countries in Thedas, they are always at the bottom of society and you can say they are practically slaves. What he did was wrong, but there was no other way to fill the coffers.

Also, as far as I remember he didn't know about Howe's "experiments". And even if he did knew, you can't honestly expect him to turn against the only ally he has (the strongest arl) until stability is brought back to Ferelden.

I agree Eamon was a threat to Loghain's desire to rule Ferelden - and that is the issue - what kind of ruler do the people want? One that will engage in immoral, criminal behaviour  to get what they want? Eliminate the competiton at any cost?  Loghain eliminated or tried to eliminate  his perceived competition (Eamon, Cousland, Cailain, Wardens, Circle) instead of working with the Landsmeet to convince them otherwise. If he is willing to engage in these sorts of actions to get power - then what lengths would he go to, to keep power?

Yes, in our day we see  slavery as morally  wrong. But enough comments were made in the game to suggest that others believed it was wrong as well. I do believe that Ferelden was a country in which slavery was not permitted or accepted.

Considering Howe massacred the Cousalands and engaged in vicious torture, yes if Loghain were a man of honor, he would have jailed Howe. With friends like that - who needs enemies. As a  leader, who you associate and ingratiate yourself to matters. At any rate, IMO Loghain created much of the instability by his own actions directly or indirectly in the first place. Bad enough there was a blight - now  we have to deal with internal war. Bad plan Loghain ! .

Modifié par duckley, 15 septembre 2013 - 03:52 .

[duckley]

HiroVoid wrote...

So I guess the people who were against Uldred revolting are pro-templar?

Not all all. I always play a Mage. I am also not totally anit-Templar. Regardless, I dont agree with Mages turning to demonic possession  and murdering hundred of men, women and children to win their wars. As I mentioned in another post, Loghain gave Uldred a loaded gun and he used it. Loghian did not pull the trigger, but he in essence provided the amunition!

Loghain  should have known that no Mage would be able to convince the Circle to support him. If not he did not do his homework and can be considered incompetent. Eliminating the circle and the Mages as a threat was all part of his grand plan to control Ferelden and bring it into line with his vision. Lets put iot this way - he is not a very nice man!

Modifié par duckley, 15 septembre 2013 - 04:22 .

[Master Warder Z_]

Loghain is a good general.

I have never argued for him being a good person.

I will however argue up and down for him being labeled something as crass as "stupid" or incompetent though.

Modifié par Master Warder Z , 15 septembre 2013 - 03:59 .

[In Exile]

Mortis5 wrote...
Loghain was always suspicious on the Wardens based on the events that happened in the Calling.

I'll agree on Eamon, but nevertheless Eamon was a threat to him and the stability he needed at that moment.

Eamon wasn't a threat to him. As we see based on the first thing that Eamon says about Loghain when he recovers, Eamon worshiped the man as a hero. If Loghain found the right scapegoat Eamon would have been on his side uniting against the darkspawn. 

You're looking at slavery from 21st century morals. Thedas is based on medieval Europe which practiced slavery and didn't think it was wrong. Elfs in Thedas, although having freedom in most countries in Thedas, they are always at the bottom of society and you can say they are practically slaves. What he did was wrong, but there was no other way to fill the coffers.

Slavery is wrong in Ferelden. You strike a blow against Loghain at the Landsmeet just by saying he was a slaver. By Thedas morality, own people is NOT ok. And despite knowing that it was wrong - by the moral standards of his culture and society - Loghain does it anyway. It's not even about the elves - it's about the slavery itself.

Also, as far as I remember he didn't know about Howe's "experiments". And even if he did knew, you can't honestly expect him to turn against the only ally he has (the strongest arl) until stability is brought back to Ferelden. 

Executing Howe as a traitor would have solved most of his problems. He could even have blamed Ostagar on Howe. 

[Former_Fiend]

If people want to kill him in their own games, that's fine. I fully understand why someone would. And if they want to disagree with my reason for sparing him, that's also fine. I'm not going to impose my personal headcanon on anyone. 

I'd just appreciate the same courtesy. 

For all the side tracking we've done(and I'm certainly not innocent of it), this thread isn't about Loghain's moral actions or even if his schemes in origins were well planned out. 

This thread is about whether or not sparing Loghain and recruiting him into the wardens will have a major impact on Inquisition, and if so, what that impact may be. 

[Plaintiff]

In Exile wrote...

You're looking at slavery from 21st century morals. Thedas is based on medieval Europe which practiced slavery and didn't think it was wrong. Elfs in Thedas, although having freedom in most countries in Thedas, they are always at the bottom of society and you can say they are practically slaves. What he did was wrong, but there was no other way to fill the coffers.

Slavery is wrong in Ferelden. You strike a blow against Loghain at the Landsmeet just by saying he was a slaver. By Thedas morality, own people is NOT ok. And despite knowing that it was wrong - by the moral standards of his culture and society - Loghain does it anyway. It's not even about the elves - it's about the slavery itself.

I'd just like to throw in that Loghain has lived under an oppressive regime himself and didn't like it. He should absolutely know better.

[duckley]

Former_Fiend wrote...

If people want to kill him in their own games, that's fine. I fully understand why someone would. And if they want to disagree with my reason for sparing him, that's also fine. I'm not going to impose my personal headcanon on anyone. 

I'd just appreciate the same courtesy. 

For all the side tracking we've done(and I'm certainly not innocent of it), this thread isn't about Loghain's moral actions or even if his schemes in origins were well planned out. 

This thread is about whether or not sparing Loghain and recruiting him into the wardens will have a major impact on Inquisition, and if so, what that impact may be. 

t

Fair enough but in a round about way discussing his moral actions and why I would not spare him is to me implying that I do not see he will or should have any influence on the Inquistion. 

[Former_Fiend]

duckley wrote...


Fair enough but in a round about way discussing his moral actions and why I would not spare him is to me implying that I do not see he will or should have any influence on the Inquistion. 

If he doesn't have influence I don't think it will have anything to do with his moral character. I think it will be because Bioware's having to prioritize content and Loghain fans are something of a minority. 

But it's that "should" thing that bothers me. "I don't like the character so people who spared him shouldn't get to enjoy his presence in future games." I don't know if that's your intention, but that's really how it comes off. 

[Sviken]

duckley wrote...
I agree Eamon was a threat to Loghain's desire to rule Ferelden - and that is the issue - what kind of ruler do the people want? One that will engage in immoral, criminal behaviour  to get what they want? Eliminate the competiton at any cost?  Loghain eliminated or tried to eliminate  his perceived competition (Eamon, Cousland, Cailain, Wardens, Circle) instead of working with the Landsmeet to convince them otherwise. If he is willing to engage in these sorts of actions to get power - then what lengths would he go to, to keep power?

Too dangerous. The darkspawn horde where coming in vast numbers and there was no time to negotiate with other nobles about how they should stop the Blight. Also, most of the nobles probably wouldn't have seen things from Loghain's perspective (that Ostagar was unwinnable) and they would just accuse Loghain of trying to usurp the throne which would have made the civil war alot worse.

Yes, in our day we see  slavery as morally  wrong. But enough comments were made in the game to suggest that others believed it was wrong as well. I do believe that Ferelden was a country in which slavery was not permitted or accepted.

Yes, Ferelden has slavery banned, but would you really call the elves free men in any part of Ferelden? Any noble can come down to some elven alienage and rape, murder elves as he pleases and nobody is gonna do anything about it. Isn't that slavery? Furthermore elves practically work only as cleaners and other such jobs for a meager salary.

Considering Howe massacred the Cousalands and engaged in vicious torture, yes if Loghain were a man of honor, he would have jailed Howe. With friends like that - who needs enemies. As a  leader, who you associate and ingratiate yourself to matters. At any rate, IMO Loghain created much of the instability by his own actions directly or indirectly in the first place. Bad enough there was a blight - now  we have to deal with internal war. Bad plan Loghain ! .

Howe was a despicable man, but he was politically suave and the most powerful arl in Ferelden. If Loghain would have moved against Howe, Ferelden would have surely torn itself apart and nations like Orlais could have swiftly "liberate" the Ferelden people from the darkspawn horde. What good is a King (in his case - regent) without an army? It's not about honor, it's about survival. Yes, you can certainly blame Loghain for the civil war, but you can also blame Duncan who "forgot" to mention that Grey Wardens are needed to kill the archdemon.

Furthermore, if the Warden died at Ostagar Loghain's plan might have actually succeeded

In Exile wrote...
Eamon wasn't a threat to him. As we see based on the first thing
that Eamon says about Loghain when he recovers, Eamon worshiped the man
as a hero. If Loghain found the right scapegoat Eamon would have been on
his side uniting against the darkspawn.

You can argue that, but can Loghain really be sure that Eamon won't turn against him, if Eamon knew that Loghain abandoned Cailan?

Slavery is wrong in Ferelden. You strike a blow against Loghain at the
Landsmeet just by saying he was a slaver. By Thedas morality, own people
is NOT ok. And despite knowing that it was wrong - by the moral
standards of his culture and society - Loghain does it anyway. It's not
even about the elves - it's about the slavery itself.

Slavery just has a different name. You can't tell me that elven people are treated like the rest of society. Check my reference above.

Executing Howe as a traitor would have solved most of his problems. He could even have blamed Ostagar on Howe.

You can't execute the most powerful noble who was the most lands, wealth and army amidst civil war and a Blight.

Modifié par Mortis5, 15 septembre 2013 - 09:32 .

[Silfren]

Mortis5 wrote...
You're looking at slavery from 21st century morals. Thedas is based on medieval Europe which practiced slavery and didn't think it was wrong. Elfs in Thedas, although having freedom in most countries in Thedas, they are always at the bottom of society and you can say they are practically slaves. What he did was wrong, but there was no other way to fill the coffers.
.

Argh.  People really need to get over the fool notion that Thedas is lifted whole cloth from the real world medieval period of Europe.  That's NOT what "based on" means, and Gaider himself has expressly stated that it is only very loosely based, enough so that no one should be trying to draw 1:1 conclusions.

Slavery is banned outside of Tevinter, and it IS recognized by the larger world as immoral.  Yes, it's true that certain nations (Orlais) practice a servant culture that is little different, and it is true that the slave trade thrives while nations try to pretend it isn't there.  But to claim that slavery isn't widely regarded as wrong just shows that you haven't paid any attention to the lore at all. That slavery is both illegal AND recognized as morally wrong by the vast majority of Thedas is well established.  Moreover, the reaction of the nobles to the charge of selling elves into slavery makes it clear that in Ferelen in particular, slavery is not accepted at ANY level.

[Silfren]

Plaintiff wrote...

In Exile wrote...

You're looking at slavery from 21st century morals. Thedas is based on medieval Europe which practiced slavery and didn't think it was wrong. Elfs in Thedas, although having freedom in most countries in Thedas, they are always at the bottom of society and you can say they are practically slaves. What he did was wrong, but there was no other way to fill the coffers.

Slavery is wrong in Ferelden. You strike a blow against Loghain at the Landsmeet just by saying he was a slaver. By Thedas morality, own people is NOT ok. And despite knowing that it was wrong - by the moral standards of his culture and society - Loghain does it anyway. It's not even about the elves - it's about the slavery itself.

I'd just like to throw in that Loghain has lived under an oppressive regime himself and didn't like it. He should absolutely know better.

This is to me is one of the more damning things about Loghain.  Given his experiences with Orlais and his personal ideas about freedom, etc., I NEVER found it believable that he would go for selling elves into slavery.  Even if he were the politician type who would resign himself to the belief that it was a necessary evil, it never seemed plausible to me that the farmboy-turned-freedom fighter would ever stoop to something so low.  It's just NOT in his character.  

The only way it would be in his character would be to accept that Loghain's paranoia really HAD warped him, and that's just another argument for why Loghain is not fit to be in command of anything, let alone the reins of a nation.

[Silfren]

Mortis5 wrote...
You can't execute the most powerful noble who was the most lands, wealth and army amidst civil war and a Blight.

Yes, you can, actually. Howe was widely disliked by most of his peers, and he had just slaughtered the entire household of the Highever teyrnir. 

For that matter, neither Loghain nor anyone else believed it was a Blight, and the civil war didn't start five minutes after Ostagar.  Prior to the Landsmeet, he had a great deal of stature among the people and the nobility, what with being a teyrn himself, AND being the Hero of River Dane, the father of the queen, and his legendary friendship with Maric the Savior.  He very well could have charged Howe with the murder of the Couslands and had him executed. 

Loghain had an opportunity to handle EVERYTHING differently, starting with just admitting that he had retreated from the battle because he believed it was lost, and NOT trying to scapegoat anyone.  He had a LOT of clout he could have used, and he squandered every last ounce of it.

Modifié par Silfren, 15 septembre 2013 - 10:13 .

[dragonflight288]

Former_Fiend wrote...

If people want to kill him in their own games, that's fine. I fully understand why someone would. And if they want to disagree with my reason for sparing him, that's also fine. I'm not going to impose my personal headcanon on anyone. 

I'd just appreciate the same courtesy. 

For all the side tracking we've done(and I'm certainly not innocent of it), this thread isn't about Loghain's moral actions or even if his schemes in origins were well planned out. 

This thread is about whether or not sparing Loghain and recruiting him into the wardens will have a major impact on Inquisition, and if so, what that impact may be. 

Thanks.


EDIT: Now, I'm not going to try and convince people to like Loghain, because he makes a poor case for himself leading up to the Landsmeet, but I am going to ask one question, and those who oppose him, please answer honestly.

From a completely honest perspective, if you were the general at Ostagar, and if you saw the battlefield and deemed it unwinnable, and I mean the battle could not be won no matter what you did, and it was a well-established fact, and it was also just as established that if you charged in then nearly your whole army would be destroyed with only a handful of survivors, but the king is on the field.

What would you do? Would you save as much of the army as possible, or would you lead the charge into a battle you know you can't win, to save only one man out there?

Please ignore Loghain and his actions following the retreat. Please ignore politics between Ferelden and Orlais, and don't take into account the nobility. Simply put, what would you do in that given situation, if you were the one in charge of the battle?

Modifié par dragonflight288, 15 septembre 2013 - 10:40 .

[Former_Fiend]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Former_Fiend wrote...

If people want to kill him in their own games, that's fine. I fully understand why someone would. And if they want to disagree with my reason for sparing him, that's also fine. I'm not going to impose my personal headcanon on anyone. 

I'd just appreciate the same courtesy. 

For all the side tracking we've done(and I'm certainly not innocent of it), this thread isn't about Loghain's moral actions or even if his schemes in origins were well planned out. 

This thread is about whether or not sparing Loghain and recruiting him into the wardens will have a major impact on Inquisition, and if so, what that impact may be. 

Thanks.

You're welcome.

In other news, Wikipedia's currently listing Simon Templeman as appearing in Inquisition as Loghain, though without citation. IMDB, however, doesn't have Inquisition on his credits as of yet.

[dragonflight288]

Former_Fiend wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Former_Fiend wrote...

If people want to kill him in their own games, that's fine. I fully understand why someone would. And if they want to disagree with my reason for sparing him, that's also fine. I'm not going to impose my personal headcanon on anyone. 

I'd just appreciate the same courtesy. 

For all the side tracking we've done(and I'm certainly not innocent of it), this thread isn't about Loghain's moral actions or even if his schemes in origins were well planned out. 

This thread is about whether or not sparing Loghain and recruiting him into the wardens will have a major impact on Inquisition, and if so, what that impact may be. 

Thanks.

You're welcome.

In other news, Wikipedia's currently listing Simon Templeman as appearing in Inquisition as Loghain, though without citation. IMDB, however, doesn't have Inquisition on his credits as of yet.

Sweet. So I suppose Loghain is possibly making a reappearance. It'll likely be a cameo, and he may die in that scene where the Grey Warden fort is under attack in the trailer, or he may live, but there's now a distinct possibility he's in it.

Just talked to him in Awakening yesterday, and I love how he begrudingly appreciates the irony of being sent to Orlais.

[HiroVoid]

.................................................................it's wikipedia.

[Former_Fiend]

HiroVoid wrote...

.................................................................it's wikipedia.

That it is.

In all honesty, I'm taking this as a bad sign, but am remaining hopeful.

[sky_captain]

I spared him in my Dalish and Human Noble playthroughs. The Dalish because he had the understanding to see that throwing away an ally for revenge accomplished nothing in the face of the blight. The noble because she was taught to be honorable and not kill a yielding enemy, and also because she saw him as a personal hero for most of her life.

I don't think thay he will play a major role if any in Inquisition. Too many people killed him or had him sacrifice himself to kill the arch-demon, I do hope to see him again.

Perhaps if some of the speculation about Corypheus corrupting the warden order has any merit we may face him in battle once more as a boss of mini boss. Or maybe he gives us aid when facing corrupted wardens and gains an honorable death in service to the greater good. I can always dream.

[Former_Fiend]

To me, not having him show up at all seems silly. Out of all the characters in Origins, he's one of the few that was stated to be heading to Orlais, so it actually makes sense for him to show up there.

And they aren't necessarily bound by what happened in most playthroughs due to the dragon age keep questionaire; anyone can go to the keep and choose to spare him just to see what happens. They don't have to go back and replay origins to have an import.

[Master Warder Z_]

In Exile wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
So I figured I'd start this thread to see how we as a gaming community will speculate the (unlikely) affect Loghain will have in Inquisition since I assume most people killed him, whether at the Landsmeet or facing the Archdemon since they don't trust Morrigan.

How will anti-Orlesian Loghain, Ferelden's greatest general, now gifted with the abilities of a Grey Warden, affect or interact with the Inquisitor?

I think it's important that we have the DA: Keep. It makes it much more likely that people would want - and be able to get to see - a world state that involves Loghain being alive. 

Loghain's first love is Ferelden. Depending on what the plotline is for the game, I think he'd be there unless there was an even greater darkspawn threat facing it elsewhere. 

Despite the latest confirmation of his location being over in Orlais?

I think he would be Warden Commander over there by now considering he was sent there to head up the Recuirtment there by the First Warden's Authority.

[RazorrX]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Former_Fiend wrote...

If people want to kill him in their own games, that's fine. I fully understand why someone would. And if they want to disagree with my reason for sparing him, that's also fine. I'm not going to impose my personal headcanon on anyone. 

I'd just appreciate the same courtesy. 

For all the side tracking we've done(and I'm certainly not innocent of it), this thread isn't about Loghain's moral actions or even if his schemes in origins were well planned out. 

This thread is about whether or not sparing Loghain and recruiting him into the wardens will have a major impact on Inquisition, and if so, what that impact may be. 

Thanks.


EDIT: Now, I'm not going to try and convince people to like Loghain, because he makes a poor case for himself leading up to the Landsmeet, but I am going to ask one question, and those who oppose him, please answer honestly.

From a completely honest perspective, if you were the general at Ostagar, and if you saw the battlefield and deemed it unwinnable, and I mean the battle could not be won no matter what you did, and it was a well-established fact, and it was also just as established that if you charged in then nearly your whole army would be destroyed with only a handful of survivors, but the king is on the field.

What would you do? Would you save as much of the army as possible, or would you lead the charge into a battle you know you can't win, to save only one man out there?

Please ignore Loghain and his actions following the retreat. Please ignore politics between Ferelden and Orlais, and don't take into account the nobility. Simply put, what would you do in that given situation, if you were the one in charge of the battle?

There was nothing to show that Loghain SAW the battle.  His army had to be hidden in order for the hoard NOT to attack it.  He had to see the tower signal in order to know to attack, which he would have known IF he could actually see the battle.

The fact is that he always planed on NOT attacking.  David Gaider said as much (That Loghain had made arrangements for the Tower to NOT be lit).  What he did NOT intend is for Cailan to be down in the battle field.  What Loghain Intended was to sacrifice the Ferelden men that would be at Ostagar with the wardens in an effort to destroy the wardens and thus remove thier influence over Cailan.  The battle was always supposed to go south, with the wardens dying.  IF the hoard was not too big he would have polished them off and pulled Cailan away.  

When Cailan refuses to NOT be on the front line, Loghain walked off knowing that he may very well be sacrificing Rowan's son in order to save Ferelden from the Orlesians.  Now he MAY have intended to swoop in and rescue Cailan ALONE, ride through the pass and take Cailan back home, but when the time came he decided it would be best for Ferelden to cut his losses, and keep as many soldiers as he could incase Orlais were to attack.

So your hypothetical question is based upon your assumptions that Loghain had always intended to join the battle (which he had not), was somewhere that he could see the battle without fear of being targeted by the hoard (unlikely), saw it was way to many, and still did not send a small group to get the king.  The biggest problem is that instead of changing his strategy in order to save the king, he allowed things to proceed in accordance to his orignal plan to wipe out the Wardens.

The best answer would be - take a group of calvary, swoop in and save the king, leaving everyone else to cover your escape.  That is what he SHOULD have done, but he knew that if he did, Cailan would have let the Orlesians across the border.

[duckley]

Former_Fiend wrote...

duckley wrote...


Fair enough but in a round about way discussing his moral actions and why I would not spare him is to me implying that I do not see he will or should have any influence on the Inquistion. 

If he doesn't have influence I don't think it will have anything to do with his moral character. I think it will be because Bioware's having to prioritize content and Loghain fans are something of a minority. 

But it's that "should" thing that bothers me. "I don't like the character so people who spared him shouldn't get to enjoy his presence in future games." I don't know if that's your intention, but that's really how it comes off. 

As I said in a previous post, as much as I detest the man, those who spared him and import him into DA:I should definately get to see him in whatever capacity the producers chose. I want to see Alistair and Cullen - to characters that are equally contraversial, and hope to get the chance to as well.
Having said that, to be honest, I would be less happy however, if Loghain been spared was canon for reasons too many to get into now - but thats just me...:innocent:

[Former_Fiend]

duckley wrote...

Former_Fiend wrote...

duckley wrote...


Fair enough but in a round about way discussing his moral actions and why I would not spare him is to me implying that I do not see he will or should have any influence on the Inquistion. 

If he doesn't have influence I don't think it will have anything to do with his moral character. I think it will be because Bioware's having to prioritize content and Loghain fans are something of a minority. 

But it's that "should" thing that bothers me. "I don't like the character so people who spared him shouldn't get to enjoy his presence in future games." I don't know if that's your intention, but that's really how it comes off. 

As I said in a previous post, as much as I detest the man, those who spared him and import him into DA:I should definately get to see him in whatever capacity the producers chose. I want to see Alistair and Cullen - to characters that are equally contraversial, and hope to get the chance to as well.
Having said that, to be honest, I would be less happy however, if Loghain been spared was canon for reasons too many to get into now - but thats just me...:innocent:

"Canon" is and always will be a nebulous situation in Dragon Age, but I don't think you're going to have to worry about Loghain being alive for default games without imports or use of the Keep.

[Sviken]

Silfren wrote...
Yes, you can, actually. Howe was widely disliked by most of his peers, and he had just slaughtered the entire household of the Highever teyrnir.

Even if Loghain tried to execute him, what makes you think Howe would stand for that? He has become the most powerful noble in Ferelden, half of the king's army has been slaughtered and the darkspawn are marching on Ferelden lands. Not to mention the instability in the kingdom.

For that matter, neither Loghain nor anyone else believed it was a Blight, and the civil war didn't start five minutes after Ostagar.  Prior to the Landsmeet, he had a great deal of stature among the people and the nobility, what with being a teyrn himself, AND being the Hero of River Dane, the father of the queen, and his legendary friendship with Maric the Savior.  He very well could have charged Howe with the murder of the Couslands and had him executed.

If I remember correctly, most of the nobles where scared that if they turned against Loghain, he will kill their families, evidenced by the fact that Howe kept nobles in his dungeons (I honestly can't remember, if Loghain knew about that or Howe was just trying to gain more power.

Loghain had an opportunity to handle EVERYTHING differently, starting with just admitting that he had retreated from the battle because he believed it was lost, and NOT trying to scapegoat anyone.  He had a LOT of clout he could have used, and he squandered every last ounce of it.

Loghain admitting that he retreated from the battle and abandoning his king means treason. No noble lord will stand side by side which a man who abandoned his king no matter for what reasons. Everyone would have just blamed Loghain for trying to usurp the throne since no noble was at the battle to see that the darkspawn horde couldn't have been defeated at Ostagar.

[duckley]

Mortis5 wrote...

duckley wrote...
I agree Eamon was a threat to Loghain's desire to rule Ferelden - and that is the issue - what kind of ruler do the people want? One that will engage in immoral, criminal behaviour  to get what they want? Eliminate the competiton at any cost?  Loghain eliminated or tried to eliminate  his perceived competition (Eamon, Cousland, Cailain, Wardens, Circle) instead of working with the Landsmeet to convince them otherwise. If he is willing to engage in these sorts of actions to get power - then what lengths would he go to, to keep power?

Too dangerous. The darkspawn horde where coming in vast numbers and there was no time to negotiate with other nobles about how they should stop the Blight. Also, most of the nobles probably wouldn't have seen things from Loghain's perspective (that Ostagar was unwinnable) and they would just accuse Loghain of trying to usurp the throne which would have made the civil war alot worse.

I guess I am not clear on what Loghains's vision of stopping the blight was. If I recall correctly, he did not even think this was a true blight. If the other nobles didnt share Loghains vision, perhaps it was because it was a flawed vision? There is no evidence that I can see to suggest that had Loghain - a beloved general and hero to that point - would not have gotten support for his appraoch. Indeed - even in the face of his crimes, some nobles sided with him. Had he tried, I may not be so harsh in my judgement of him - although would still vehemently oppose his methods.

Quite frankly, I do beleive that Loghain was trying to usurp the throne. He thought (perhaps rightly so) - that Cailen was foolish

Yes, in our day we see  slavery as morally  wrong. But enough comments were made in the game to suggest that others believed it was wrong as well. I do believe that Ferelden was a country in which slavery was not permitted or accepted.

Yes, Ferelden has slavery banned, but would you really call the elves free men in any part of Ferelden? Any noble can come down to some elven alienage and rape, murder elves as he pleases and nobody is gonna do anything about it. Isn't that slavery? Furthermore elves practically work only as cleaners and other such jobs for a meager salary.

Yes, I agree the plight of the Elves is dispicable and Cailen indicated, as did Anora and Alistair - that they indended to try to ameloriate it. I am not convinced however, that this relality justifies Loghain conspiring with slavers.

Considering Howe massacred the Cousalands and engaged in vicious torture, yes if Loghain were a man of honor, he would have jailed Howe. With friends like that - who needs enemies. As a  leader, who you associate and ingratiate yourself to matters. At any rate, IMO Loghain created much of the instability by his own actions directly or indirectly in the first place. Bad enough there was a blight - now  we have to deal with internal war. Bad plan Loghain ! .

Howe was a despicable man, but he was politically suave and the most powerful arl in Ferelden. If Loghain would have moved against Howe, Ferelden would have surely torn itself apart and nations like Orlais could have swiftly "liberate" the Ferelden people from the darkspawn horde. What good is a King (in his case - regent) without an army? It's not about honor, it's about survival. Yes, you can certainly blame Loghain for the civil war, but you can also blame Duncan who "forgot" to mention that Grey Wardens are needed to kill the archdemon.

Furthermore, if the Warden died at Ostagar Loghain's plan might have actually succeeded
 
I do believe the Cousalnds and Eamon were more powerful than Howe. And yes, Duncan did not help matters!

In Exile wrote...
Eamon wasn't a threat to him. As we see based on the first thing
that Eamon says about Loghain when he recovers, Eamon worshiped the man
as a hero. If Loghain found the right scapegoat Eamon would have been on
his side uniting against the darkspawn.

You can argue that, but can Loghain really be sure that Eamon won't turn against him, if Eamon knew that Loghain abandoned Cailan?

Slavery is wrong in Ferelden. You strike a blow against Loghain at the
Landsmeet just by saying he was a slaver. By Thedas morality, own people
is NOT ok. And despite knowing that it was wrong - by the moral
standards of his culture and society - Loghain does it anyway. It's not
even about the elves - it's about the slavery itself.

Slavery just has a different name. You can't tell me that elven people are treated like the rest of society. Check my reference above.

Executing Howe as a traitor would have solved most of his problems. He could even have blamed Ostagar on Howe.

You can't execute the most powerful noble who was the most lands, wealth and army amidst civil war and a Blight.

Why not - Howe executed Cousland and Loghain took out Eamon.