Also, Alistair was a Warden for only a brief time before the events of Ostegar, so his POV of extreme measures is likely contained to that of the Joining and general knowledge of what was known by all Wardens
As I recall he mentions the Wardens would abandon villages during the Blight. So it's not like he didn't have anything to base it off of.
Berating the King in public is wrong for his station, no matter the opinion of either.
Loghain didn't berate the king in public. It was in a private war council, where only the King, himself, Duncan, a representative from the mages (Uldred) and the Chantry were present. The only reason we were there was because the king requested our presence for....reasons.
And the guards tell us about their disagreements in hushed whispers, saying we didn't hear it from them.
I think Loghain was perfectly justified trying to interpose his opinions to Cailan at the war council. Cailan was living with his head in the clouds and Loghain was constantly saying that we must attend to reality. He even tells us in person that "Maric would understand that it takes more than legends to win a battle. But that's not an argument that I'll repeat here." Loghain even gives a talking-down to a Warden who calls Cailan a fool. "You must remember that he is your king, and a very young man."
What Loghain and Alistair do is very different. One acts out in front of all the nobility at the very meeting that may have set apart as a man to lead them, the other maintains his composure until they're in a private situation, where he attempts to keep his King from making life-threatening stupid choices. But the king has no intention of listening to him because he wants the battle to be sung by bards for centuries.
Don't get me wrong. Alistair is a good man who mostly tries to do the right thing as much as he can. But the difference between him and Loghain is he is willing to let Ferelden, his friends, and his duty burn in the blight if he doesn't get his way and abandon everything he fought for, while Loghain will burn anything and everything that gets in the way of him doing his duty, and he'll deal with his regrets later.
So ultimately, what I'm saying in response to your comment, not berating the king when he's being an idiot is just as bad as berating him in public and making him look the fool. But Loghain doesn't do that.
Loghain is easy to hate, and for a long time I did hate him. Then I did one playthrough to recruit him, went to RtO with him, listened to what he had to say and listened to his party banter. I thought before recruiting him it would be a one-time thing. Instead, I find myself highly respecting the man, can understand where he's coming from and will defend his retreat at Ostagar as a necessary tactical decision, even if I don't defend most of what he does after Ostagar.
I can see why people would kill him for selling elves into slavery. My Hawke killed plenty of slavers without hesitation. I can see people wanting him dead because they feel he's too risky to keep alive and in the same camp as them, considering the Antivan Crows, the bounty, or his rather brutal actions during the civil war that you hear about from the gossipers and the rumors from Bodahn and other innkeepers. The story about the Hunters who ambushed some of his men and what he did to them in response is particularly brutal, although not unexpected considering the setting. People may kill him because he hired a blood mage to poison another noble, and that makes sense as well.
But I find myself getting in the habit of defending him on actions that he had little or even nothing to do with, or on things where there is plenty of blame to go around. Like that fiasco at the Landsmeet while we're on our way out of the Wilds. He's calling for reinforcements to fight the darkspawn, but he has absolutely no political tact and I acknowledge that, but I also acknowledge that Teagan's well-intended but horribly timed declaration of Loghain grabbing for power also as a factor, as well as Loghain's horrible choice of words in response. I also acknowledge the fact that not all the nobles who went to war against Loghain shared Teagan's ideals, heck the game makes it clear that some of them are hoping to take advantage of the power vacuum. I blame the bannorn more for the civil war than I do Loghain. Heck, the codex entry itself makes it clear that they go to war with each other once over a tree, so the blame cannot fall solely on Loghain for that and he was trying to fight the darkspawn when they decided to fight back, forcing his hand and making it so he had no choice but to fight them instead.
Rule of thumb in a leadership position is NOT to publically berate someone. Based on the grapevine ay Ostegar, Loghain and the King both failed here; we simply were allowed a cut-scene into one such event. If Loghain wished to correct the failures observed in his Royal student's participation, this should have been done elsewhere.
Cailan is oft judged for being foolish, but this also falls on the teacher.
Again, Loghain didn't berate Cailan publicly at all. He even defends Cailan publicly when our Warden says Cailan sounds like a fool. He argues with him in private, during a private war council where only a handful of people were present. Duncan, as leader of the wardens. A representative from both the chantry and the circle, himself, the king, and our warden for....reasons Cailan didn't disclose to us. Only that he wanted us there.
Again, Loghain didn't berate Cailan publicly at all. He even defends Cailan publicly when our Warden says Cailan sounds like a fool. He argues with him in private, during a private war council where only a handful of people were present. Duncan, as leader of the wardens. A representative from both the chantry and the circle, himself, the king, and our warden for....reasons Cailan didn't disclose to us. Only that he wanted us there.
It was not done privately, and to a superior in command. Bad form altogether.
We'll have to disagree on this.
EDIT: I'm putting in this edit to explain why I disagree.
The point of the war council isn't to announce your plan to the interested parties and they relay the information to their own subordinates. The point of a war council is formulate a strategy, be given advice on why a certain position or maneuver won't work, be told about any potential flaws and possible contingency plans. That, in and of itself will require being told you're wrong and that you should back down on certain issues.
Loghain was trying to make the point that Ferelden didn't need the Orlesians and it probably wasn't wise to rely on the Grey Wardens to carry the battle until it was time to light the beacon, as well as light the beacon to begin with. And when he said Cailan being on the front line was too dangerous, Cailan pulled both the rank card and brought the Orlesians into the discussion knowing full well it would goad Loghain. The mages tried pointing out that the beacon was utterly unnecessary and the mages could take its place, but the Chantry stopped that idea before the sentence could even finish because a mage was suggesting it and the Grand Cleric didn't want to trust any lives to magic.
The war council is probably the most appropriate place to criticize Cailan's plan of seeking glory on the front line, even if it hurts his feelings, it is wise to be told that kind of stuff.
If you surround yourself with yes-men who agree with you all the time and don't criticize you, you end up like George Lucas and the Star Wars Prequel trilogy. Grand ambitions and a major flop.
Modifié par dragonflight288, 14 février 2015 - 09:56 .
Cailan was not called foolish for relying upon the Wardens, wishing to be on the front lines, or asking for Alistair and the Warden to light the beacon. The King was called foolish for wanting to ally with the Orlesians; which had little to do with the immediate conflict, but violated Loghain's sense of pride, and prejudice. It was uncalled for, and Cailan responded well in reminding him and those there as to who was King.
It was Loghain's strategies and tactics; stated there at the Council. It is also his failure, seeing that Duncan and Cailan died because of it; directly or indirectly.
Loghain: You risk too much Cailan, it's too dangerous for you to be playing hero on the front line.
Cailan: Then maybe we should wait for the Orlesian forces after all.
Cailan only brought up the Orlesians to get Loghain to get off his back for wanting to fight at the front.
yes, Loghain made the plan, but he had to make it in such a way because Cailan refused to be anywhere but at the front.
Loghain: You risk too much Cailan, it's too dangerous for you to be playing hero on the front line.
Cailan: Then maybe we should wait for the Orlesian forces after all.
Cailan only brought up the Orlesians to get Loghain to get off his back for wanting to fight at the front.
yes, Loghain made the plan, but he had to make it in such a way because Cailan refused to be anywhere but at the front.
It was not done privately, and to a superior in command. Bad form altogether.
It was Loghain's strategies and tactics; stated there at the Council. It is also his failure, seeing that Duncan and Cailan died because of it; directly or indirectly.
You do realise you're undermining your own argument here, right?
You claim that the blame rests solely upon Loghain, because it was his strategy, but you acknowledge Cailan as his superior in command?
Cailan refuses to wait for Eamon's forces to arrive, so we know that Cailan is placing restrictions on how, when, and where the battle will be. We see Cailan overrule Loghain more than once, and yet you still place the blame solely on Loghain? Cailan forced a battle without waiting for all their forces (knowing they were outnumbered), on a battlefield that was compromised(tunnels under the Tower), and insisted on fighting in the most dangerous position of all. If Cailan's making stategic decisions like that, then he is to blame for what happened, more than Loghain. If you've got your country's greatest military commander giving you advice, you don't ignore him for the pursuit of personal glory. And that's exactly what Cailan did.
Placing the blame solely on Loghain is, to be frank, not consistent with what we're shown of events.
How did Cailan force the battle? It was the Darkspawn that attacked Ostagar, waiting would have meant abandoning the fortress and letting the Darkspawn push into southern Ferelden.
You do realise you're undermining your own argument here, right?
You claim that the blame rests solely upon Loghain, because it was his strategy, but you acknowledge Cailan as his superior in command?
Cailan refuses to wait for Eamon's forces to arrive, so we know that Cailan is placing restrictions on how, when, and where the battle will be. We see Cailan overrule Loghain more than once, and yet you still place the blame solely on Loghain? Cailan forced a battle without waiting for all their forces (knowing they were outnumbered), on a battlefield that was compromised(tunnels under the Tower), and insisted on fighting in the most dangerous position of all. If Cailan's making stategic decisions like that, then he is to blame for what happened, more than Loghain. If you've got your country's greatest military commander giving you advice, you don't ignore him for the pursuit of personal glory. And that's exactly what Cailan did.
Placing the blame solely on Loghain is, to be frank, not consistent with what we're shown of events.
How did Cailan force the battle? It was the Darkspawn that attacked Ostagar, waiting would have meant abandoning the fortress and letting the Darkspawn push into southern Ferelden.
We barely arrive at Ostagar before finding out that the King is not waiting for Eamon's forces to arrive. If there is nowhere else that the battle can be fought, then why would Duncan bother to mention it? Cailan suggests waiting for the Orlesians to Loghain, clearly to bait him, but Loghain does not protest the notion of delaying, only the presence of Orlesians. The battle could be fought elsewhere, indeed, it should have been fought elsewhere, since the darkspawn had tunnels beneath Ostagar.
Fighting the battle before they're ready just increases the likelihood of failure.
Loghain is the General and in charge of the plans. Cailan is the King and selects who is General.
Cailan and the Wardens are responsible for their own errors, but paid with their lives. Loghain deserves no less, as his continuing actions continue to worsen matters against this same Blight.
The Darkspawn evidently did not get the message to wait either.
Firstly; You've yet to prove that the battle could be won, and that defeat was solely the fault of Loghain. If the battle at Ostagar could not be won, as we are told by more than one character in the game, then you're saying that Loghain deserves to die for failing to produce a miracle by winning an unwinnable battle. If the battle could not be won then it is not the fault of Loghain's strategy, but the reckless actions of a king putting his glory ahead of the safety of his country. Without some genuine proof one way or the other about whether or not the battle could be won, saying that their defeat was solely down to Loghain's strategy is nonsense.
Not to mention the fact that the Grey Warden's errors are far worse than Cailan's. No matter how well the battle went, unless the Archdemon appeared the Blight could not be stopped, so there is a very real chance Ostagar would have been nothing more than a meatgrinder, killing as many or more to no actual benefit, because the Blight would continue.
Secondly; They died, so Loghain deserves death because he didn't? Fantastically flimsy reasoning. And then you decide that, for instance, the civil war is solely the fault of Loghain? And please, feel free to point out all the options that Ferelden doubtlessly had at that point, since clearly you must have a lengthy list of things Loghain should have done differently.
Thirdly; As I mentioned above, as soon as we get to Ostagar we're given proof that the Cailan is rushing to the battle. Or are you actually trying to argue that there was nowhere else in Ferelden that they could have fought the darkspawn? Or that Loghain couldn't possibly have had a plan for fighting the darkspawn anywhere but Ostagar?
Daveth says it like this on why they set up at Ostagar.
"The Bllight started deep in the wilds see, so we're trying to force them to us by putting the army right at the edge. Dangling meat in front of the bear if you take my meaning."
What I can gather, the blight was deep in uninhabited areas, save for a few Chasind clans, and the plan was to use Ostagar as a defensive position and use the army as bait to draw the darkspawn out, where they were hoping superior positioning would carry the day.
It wasn't that the darkspawn were attacking Ostagar. They were lured there by the army, and likely harrassing scouting parties. It was a battle that was chosen by Loghain and Cailan, and I got the impression that they had the time to wait for Eamon's forces, Orlais or whatever nobles they were expecting to show up but didn't. But Cailan wanted his glorious victories.
But Ostagar wasn't used like it should've been. A fortress is used best if your army, is, well, inside the fortress. Not out in the valley.
But there isn't any glory in holing up in the keep, shooting arrows from the walls, and let the waves of darkspawn break on the walls.
The plan fell apart before it could be implemented, and very little of it had anything to do with Loghain.
Step one: draw the darkspawn into the valley and a shield wall. Preferably fire several volley of arrows, from the ground as well as the walls.
Instead, Cailan charges into the valley and gets himself, the wardens, and the soldiers with them surrounded on three sides. After firing only a single volley of arrows and wasting all the mabari.
Step two: Alert the tower to light the beacon once the darkspawn are fully committed.
Instead, what we've got is this.
So in essence, what we're planning to do is this....putting in spoiler tag for size.
But we've got is actually this....
So ultimately if Loghain actually had charged, what we would actually have is this.
And finally we arrive at
Step three: Light the beacon and Loghain charges.
Thing is, the darkspawn tunneled in and took the tower almost as soon as the battle started, and had a backdoor into the valley, and Cailan's forces and the Grey Wardens were likely outnumbered on all sides now. No one sent a message to Loghain to inform him the tower was lost. We simply chose to charge up the tower, fighting our way up every floor, completely missing the signal by (according to the devs) a whole hour with Loghain none the wiser.
Since Duncan told us we had less than an hour to get up the tower and light the beacon, we can bet Loghain knew the estimated time frame as well. From where he was, it could easily have been that the Wardens, who were in charge of lighting the beacon, deliberately delayed the signal. And it wouldn't surprise him since he personally saw the Wardens ally with Orlais an nearly get Maric killed, as well as watch them nearly turn all the surface dwellers into blighted beings.
The battle was doomed from the start because Cailan wanted to be on the front lines.
Cailan is one man amongst thousands. Failure had almost nothing to do with where he was at the time.
And assuming for the moment that the diagrams are correct, there is a huge jump from B to C. More like > and ^ (ie Allies) meeting v and < (ie; Darkspawn). It might not have worked, but not trying almost always yields failure, as it did here. Thing is, should Loghain live in the game, he has to live with the doubt. But in my games, that rarely occurs.
While I appreciate the poetic touch, he isn't living with the doubt. He admits that he's a failure of a ruler and that he's done many things wrong, but he flatly says that he'd do the same again as far as Ostagar itself is concerned.
No; Loghain is not the only one to blame for the failure of Ostegar. But he is the one responsible for the plans, and retreating before fully implementing it. One cannot say with certainty that it would have worked or not, but one can certainly affirm that by leaving, it would (and did) fail completely.
He might have been responsible for the strategy for the battle, but we see firsthand that he was not the only one making decisions on that front. So the blame cannot solely fall on Loghain when his options are being limited by Cailan.
Loghain is deserving of death for failing at Ostegar, for allowing Howe to remain as council, for promoting that serpent to more power, for poisoning Eamon, for selling Elves to Tevinter, for attempting to kill the remaining Wardens, etc.
1) Failing at Ostagar: Do you then assign the same penalty to the King's Guard, or to any others who survived? To those soldiers who followed him, knowing that it meant abandoning their king? Alistair and The Warden, for failing to light the Tower in time?
2) Right, because the middle of a civil war is the perfect time to start turning on those who support you. That's going to help. With the army depleted by Ostagar, and civil war in Ferelden, he needed all the help he could get. Ideally he should have cut Howe's head off, but the situation was anything but ideal.
3) Eamon would have done nothing but shout for Loghain's head. Not exactly going to help matters, is it.
4) Crappy move, I'll not deny it. But by that point desperation's kicking in. The darkspawn are advancing, the treasury is empty, and failure means everyone dies anyway. Their deaths(which is ultimately it what might have been) would at least let him keep fighting.
5) In a previous post I talked about how it could well make sense for Loghain to believe the Wardens betrayed him.
Ostegar was selected due it's defensive positioning. As was discovered, the area was also the site of a major rift of Darkspawn. Waiting for replacements from either Eamon or Orlais would likely have not helped as the Darkspawn would have attacked nonetheless. However, as Eamon was poisoned and Orlais was turned back at the borders by Loghain, this option was never possible anyway.
Cailan waved off Duncan's message from Eamon as him missing out on the glory. Loghain objected to the idea that forces from Orlais were needed. Neither of them said that there wasn't time, that they couldn't wait for additional forces. As for never possible, Eamon's forces could still have been there, had they waited. Considering the call to arms came early enough for Teyrn Cousland's forces to get to Ostagar, Eamon's forces were more likely delayed than not called for.
Loghain let his pride, arrogance, and bigotry interfere with his actual duty of defending Ferelden. Instead, it became actions that were written off as justified, but he was wrong; dead wrong, as it goes.
Pride, arrogance, and bigotry? Feel free to provide some actual examples of those. Considering that he was Ferelden's greatest military leader, and had played a massive role in freeing Ferelden, and had made enormous personal sacrifices to do so, I'd hardly call it pride or arrogance for him to believe he could do it again. Add to that the Bannorn's reaction, and who exactly could he have handed things over to?
No, seriously, I want someone, anyone, to put forward someone that Loghain could have handed command to.
KoP's legacy endures! The blog on Ostagar is being used again!
He might have been responsible for the strategy for the battle, but we see firsthand that he was not the only one making decisions on that front. So the blame cannot solely fall on Loghain when his options are being limited by Cailan.
1) Failing at Ostagar: Do you then assign the same penalty to the King's Guard, or to any others who survived? To those soldiers who followed him, knowing that it meant abandoning their king? Alistair and The Warden, for failing to light the Tower in time?
2) Right, because the middle of a civil war is the perfect time to start turning on those who support you. That's going to help. With the army depleted by Ostagar, and civil war in Ferelden, he needed all the help he could get. Ideally he should have cut Howe's head off, but the situation was anything but ideal.
3) Eamon would have done nothing but shout for Loghain's head. Not exactly going to help matters, is it.
4) Crappy move, I'll not deny it. But by that point desperation's kicking in. The darkspawn are advancing, the treasury is empty, and failure means everyone dies anyway. Their deaths(which is ultimately it what might have been) would at least let him keep fighting.
5) In a previous post I talked about how it could well make sense for Loghain to believe the Wardens betrayed him.
Cailan waved off Duncan's message from Eamon as him missing out on the glory. Loghain objected to the idea that forces from Orlais were needed. Neither of them said that there wasn't time, that they couldn't wait for additional forces. As for never possible, Eamon's forces could still have been there, had they waited. Considering the call to arms came early enough for Teyrn Cousland's forces to get to Ostagar, Eamon's forces were more likely delayed than not called for.
Pride, arrogance, and bigotry? Feel free to provide some actual examples of those. Considering that he was Ferelden's greatest military leader, and had played a massive role in freeing Ferelden, and had made enormous personal sacrifices to do so, I'd hardly call it pride or arrogance for him to believe he could do it again. Add to that the Bannorn's reaction, and who exactly could he have handed things over to?
No, seriously, I want someone, anyone, to put forward someone that Loghain could have handed command to.
* If one has a snake attached to them, better remove it before the poison spreads further.
* Pride in his refusal to listen to other council, ignorance about needing Wardens, bigotry against Orlais are examples that spring to mind. And Teagon seems capable, IMO.
A: How was Loghain to do this? There was a Civil War, and there were darkspawn, and Loghain believed that there were Orlesians. You want him to open another front?
B: He seems like an idiot to me, but then the move on his part that I believe to be idiotic (namely refusing to work with someone he believed to be evil despite a threat in the South that had crossed the Godzilla Threshold) is the same one you judge Loghain for not doing. (I'm aware that Loghain was doing the same thing with Orlais, but at least he wasn't compounding the error by also alienating Howe.) So maybe we could hash this out after settling A, unless you can come up with a better candidate.
+ Even if Loghain believed Alistair betrayed him, the Regent was wrong about needing Wardens for the Blight, and nearly doomed Ferelden in his ignorance.
And this is due to a flaw of Loghain's? I've argued many times that while Loghain can hardly be accused of logical thought, the logical move if you don't understand how the Wardens are literally necessary is to conclude that they aren't; I don't remember ever seeing a counterargument that was more sophisticated than "they've always done it before," which is the same evidence Loghain had and which I'm arguing isn't close enough to proof that he's a fool for believing them unnecessary.
A: How was Loghain to do this? There was a Civil War, and there were darkspawn, and Loghain believed that there were Orlesians. You want him to open another front?
B: He seems like an idiot to me, but then the move on his part that I believe to be idiotic (namely refusing to work with someone he believed to be evil despite a threat in the South that had crossed the Godzilla Threshold) is the same one you judge Loghain for not doing. (I'm aware that Loghain was doing the same thing with Orlais, but at least he wasn't compounding the error by also alienating Howe.) So maybe we could hash this out after settling A, unless you can come up with a better candidate.
And this is due to a flaw of Loghain's? I've argued many times that while Loghain can hardly be accused of logical thought, the logical move if you don't understand how the Wardens are literally necessary is to conclude that they aren't; I don't remember ever seeing a counterargument that was more sophisticated than "they've always done it before," which is the same evidence Loghain had and which I'm arguing isn't close enough to proof that he's a fool for believing them unnecessary.
* Loghain's plan was mot limited by Cailan; only where the King was to be during the battle was in play. And while others bear responsibility, The King and Duncan are dead, Uldred became possessed, and have no idea of that specific leader of the Chantry, but she was more instrumental in watching over the Mages while there. Only Loghain lived; how fortuitous....
Yes, he was limited by Cailan. Cailan wanted "a battle the bards would sing of for centuries that would end the Blight", which when you get down to it.... using Ostagar as it was meant to be used (as a garrisoned fortress where the soldiers aren't on the outside) isn't particularly glamorous, even when you're going up against a Zerg Rush from a bunch of tainted dipshits.
Cailan wants a glorious battle, but he doesn't want to do the leg work. He blows off the strategy meetings, yet wants something where he can "ride with the fabled Grey Wardens against a tainted god" in the field of battle. Loghain has to work with an idiot manchild's vanity and gloryhounding persona because any strategy that would be better isn't going to be good enough for Cailan. So using what information he has to go off of at this point in time -- "the horde is going to be larger this battle, but still can be defeated" -- he creates the Anvil&Hammer strategy to flank the Darkspawn, so that it satisfies Cailan's damned ego and can work out.
The Grand Cleric of Ferelden shows up later. Fun fact: the Chantry came out in support of Loghain throughout his Regency, from start to finish.
And it seems like you're trying to say that Loghain is responsible for Uldred being a ****** (never mind Cailan and Duncan being dumbasses). Nah, doesn't fly.
* If one has a snake attached to them, better remove it before the poison spreads further.
That viper has many tails.
or do you think that simply removing Howe would remove the only player on the board in that aspect that shouldn't be antagonized? If so, that's honestly a naive sentiment (no offense Elhanan).
Howe has his forces that are loyal to him. Hell, his son Thomas fought in the Civil War. You think he'd just lay down and accept his father being imprisoned and hanged? He'd turn against Loghain and rally people like Bann Esmerelle who would fight against Loghain on a third front, removing not only forces Loghain needs but also supply routes (the Pilgrim's Path runs from Denerim to Amaranthine and is critical for trade).
Howe is a snake and a slimeball but alienating him now when the entire Bannorn is deciding politics are better then putting aside emotions and facing the critical threat (the Darkspawn) is stupid.
* Poisoning Eamon via Blood Mage cannot be justified, to me at least.
Seems little different from the political games that are played all the time. It happens in Orzammar, Ferelden, Kirkwall, Orlais, etc.
If you have an issue with one, you have an issue with them all.
* Eamon may have been delayed due to poison, as Cousland was delayed due to treachery; uncertain.
Except Bryce sent the majority of his forces down with Fergus, while he stayed behind and planned to ride out with Howe's forces.
Teagan seems like a capable Commander; a bit of a fool when it comes to woman, esp those with Orlesian accents.
Ah yes, Teagan, the man who wasn't at Ostagar and rarely attends court, yet believes Loghain to be responsible for his nephew's death. The man who openly agitates a strained political situation at the worst possible time. This man is sure to be a capable commander who would be loyal to Loghain and not a threat at all.
Common lore is that it does take a Warden to kill an Archdemon
Common lore is that a Warden has always struck the killing blow, which is a different thing altogether.
A Warden being the one who killed the Archdemon doesn't in and of itself say they are absolutely needed. At best, it says that they know something that regular soldiers don't know
Even if Loghain believed Alistair betrayed him
Alistair was raised by a Fereldan traditionalist/nationalist who married an Orlesian noblewoman, then joined not one but two orders that trace their history back to Orlais. That second order was noted to have been collaborating with an Orlesian mage previously, rose up against the kingdom 200 years prior (justified though it was, no one knew the truth), and historically helped Orlais.
Given all that (and there's more to it, IIRC) it's not out of hand to suspect that Alistair is being used to satisfy Fereldan sentiments while giving Orlais an easy way in.
Would have liked to see Howe imprisoned and tied for his crimes; not rewarded and left to devastate even more of Ferelden.
Teagan seems like a capable Commander; a bit of a fool when it comes to woman, esp those with Orlesian accents.
Common lore is that it does take a Warden to kill an Archdemon; reason why so many ask as to why and how (eg; Alistair, Blackwall), but not all know the answer specifically and correctly (eg; Riordin). Loghain was taking a huge risk with the country.
.I don't know if any of these really answer the objections they correspond to, and I know the first one doesn't.
Edit: The third I guess does, but while I agree that Loghain was gambling with the fate of his country, the specific gamble in question would look pretty safe if you didn't know exactly why that gamble is a bad idea. The Wardens say that literally only they can end the Blights, but they offer no evidence apart from four stories, and in the absence of that evidence such a claim would look like somebody repeating myths (from a non-Warden) or someone handing down a charter myth to justify their place in society (from a Warden.) I'm aware that the myths are true, but with such a grand claim and such little evidence, Loghain can't be blamed for not believing them. I agree that Loghain was arguably being foolish not having them anyway (more because they can be used as cannon fodder than because Loghain should have credited their stories without the full backstory, which he should have had since Duncan even suspected it might be relevant to their shared goal) but refusing their aid was far from his biggest error.
Retour en haut
