I wonder if that might be beside sylvanaerie's core point, though, at least as I understood it.
Loghain didn't "save the king's army" in the sense that a lot of the army died in the battle when Loghain quit the field. He preserved some of it, and left the rest to die.
My understanding is that Sylvanaerie is accusing Loghain of destroying that army in its entirety in favor of saving the local army of Gwaren.
That is not the impression I get from his dialogue with Wynne. He flatly says that the people who died there were his men.
Why would he keep the king's men with him and his byatch and not his? I'd imagine there would have been some reaction from those soldiers when they got pulled out while their king is dying.
As I'd thought I'd just finished explaining, the distinction isn't all that clear cut. Loghain's the general of the King's army. Cailan's men are also to some degree Loghain's.
As I'd thought I'd just finished explaining, the distinction isn't all that clear cut. Loghain's the general of the King's army. Cailan's men are also to some degree Loghain's.
FWIW, you do see some of the soldiers in the valley that were under Cailan's command -- in the sense that Cailan is the one giving orders to those there according to the plan, which I must stress he couldn't even do properly -- have Gwaren heraldry on their shields. So some of the men there were directly from Gwaren, yes.
FWIW, you do see some of the soldiers in the valley that were under Cailan's command -- in the sense that Cailan is the one giving orders to those there according to the plan, which I must stress he couldn't even do properly -- have Gwaren heraldry on their shields. So some of the men there were directly from Gwaren, yes.
I'll concede that it's a mix of troops along with the wardens and Cailan to bolster the numbers of the wardens which could have included some men/women from Gwaren. There potentially were Chasind dog handlers, possibly troops from Highever and the Bannorn and Warrior/Rogue Hawke, Carver and Aveline, and there were supposed to be mages down there as well--though I don't recall seeing any--it wasn't just the king's men.
I was just debating that someone posted that Loghain 'saved the king's men' when he didn't, as it would have been the king's men down there actually fighting with the king, not in the troops Loghain was to flank the enemy with. Though I suppose some of the army that retreated could have included some of the king's men as well.
And agreed, Cailan was an idiot who didn't even stick to the plan, but then I think of Ostagar as a perfect shitstorm of mistakes from all three leaders.
And agreed, Cailan was an idiot who didn't even stick to the plan, but then I think of Ostagar as a perfect shitstorm of mistakes from all three leaders.
Sounds about right.
Yes, he should.
*waves enthusiastically*
*waves back to everyone*
It's been a while
Used your own blog and diagrams from way back when in this thread to discuss Ostagar. Hope you don't mind.
Used your own blog and diagrams from way back when in this thread to discuss Ostagar. Hope you don't mind.
It's just that you did so well that we didn't see much point reinventing the wheel.
I'm neutral on Loghain. I can't fault him for Ostagar. That battle was likely unwinnable. If Cailan had kept his army in a defensive position, it would have been much more in their favor. But no, he made the army charge and turned it into a free-for-all battle and didn't even TRY to use Ostagar's defensible aspects to his army's advantage. They might have won by the skin of their teeth had Loghain charged, but it's more likely that they would have lost the entire Ferelden army instead of just half of it. And if that had happened... There would probably have been too few soldiers in the end-game to do well enough against the blight for our Warden's team to actually make it to the Archdemon. So his choice to let Cailan die is likely the only reason Ferelden had any hope at all.
So you'd think I'd actually be pro-Loghain, huh? Not so fast. Everything he did AFTER Ostagar is what brings me back to neutral with him. Selling elven citizens as slaves, poison and arl, putting a bounty on the wardens, letting Howe be in charge, being indirectly the cause of the Circle turning into hell, and sending him army to reinforce the Orlais border instead of sending them south which let the darkspawn pretty much run roughshot across Ferelden? No, those were all very big mistakes. Those mistakes counteract the positive feelings I had about him because of his regretfully-necessary move at Ostagar. Ostgar=good, post-Ostagar=bad, result=neutral.
So you'd think I'd actually be pro-Loghain, huh? Not so fast. Everything he did AFTER Ostagar is what brings me back to neutral with him. Selling elven citizens as slaves, poison and arl, putting a bounty on the wardens, letting Howe be in charge, being indirectly the cause of the Circle turning into hell, and sending him army to reinforce the Orlais border instead of sending them south which let the darkspawn pretty much run roughshot across Ferelden? No, those were all very big mistakes. Those mistakes counteract the positive feelings I had about him because of his regretfully-necessary move at Ostagar. Ostgar=good, post-Ostagar=bad, result=neutral.
Again: most of that's fair enough. Loghain's decisions get a lot harder to defend as the game goes on, culminating in the slavery thing.
Used your own blog and diagrams from way back when in this thread to discuss Ostagar. Hope you don't mind.
Oh of course I don't mind. I like the idea of contributing to Loghain's defense from beyond the figurative grave.
After seeing the Orlesian nobility first-hand in Inquisition, I now completely understand Loghain's opposition to bringing their influence into Fereldan and why he would rather take his chances against the Darkspawn. That thing was rotten. To. The. Core.
I'm just happy that i have allowed him to destroy the Archdemon, Alistair was too shortsighted at the Landsmeet,if he his born is because of Loghain if he is saved his because of Loghain.
Well i literally playthroughed whole game to a BG veteran friend of mine and that was his way of playing.(I was giving attributes and doing gameplay while he was doing dialogue and story choices. I haven't given any spoilers not even hints about story part):
Riordan wants you and Alistair to recruit Loghain and Alistair whines a lot just to interrupt him.(Ser Whines A lot?)
So you literally have no idea what's going on except that Riordin's words like "GW can recruit anyone, we're not judges"
"Sure" you'd say, after all Riordan is your senior and seems to know a few things more than you and Alistair. He tries hard to tell you something. Must have a good reason since he was being tortured by Howe just an hour ago.
And Anora says "Either you gain a general or he dies and you will take your revenge"
"Fine, why not?" Either you gain +1 warden, a former war hero, a strategical genius, a highly respected man at least by common folk... Or you get revenge.(Even being GW is a curse, so even if he joins your order he'll die soon enough but i'll pass this)
So he went with "Let's recruit Loghain" option and totally disappointed by Alistair's leaving. Thought : "He had an oath. Archdemon coming. He was a nice fellow but why he turned into a cry baby? Haven't Daveth was more questionable than a general? He was a canditate so why a war hero can't be? Just because Alistair wants to see color of his blood?"
So we reloaded. And this time even he wanted to see reason, he couldn't agree with that "wah wah pedal" called Alistair. Wouldn't suit his roleplaying and wouldn't make sense to kill someone just that some companion wanted him to do so.
That's where he quit playing.
So in short Loghain should live to make sense. That non-logical choice between Alistair vs Loghain(while one leaving) just placed there to make things "critical". But instead of being a "hard choice" it is simply annoying, ridiculus and leaves a sour taste.
Landsmeet's beginning is usually where i quit playing my characters aswell. No matter how i was a "manipulator", how high was my approval with Alistair, how i talked like "We need everyone we can get" before and at Landsmeet cancels it all and drops my character into mess. Since i can't RP what's the point of RPG anyway?
TLDR: Let Loghain live, anyone disagrees dangers the mission because of their prefers and put their own "hatred" above whole country. Or be female noble and kill him just to sit on throne, but don't lecture me about how bad and ambitious Loghain was 
Guest_Mlady_*
Live. People tend to end violence with violence and it doesn't solve anything. It's also the worst death in the game imo because of how it plays out if you kill him. It's wrong on so many levels. The game hints many times at his remorse for what he's doing. It's all in the face expressions. It hints enough so the player knows something's up, and when comes the time to give him a chance, if you followed closely enough, you realize he is redeemable. He didn't revel in his choices, he didn't do anything at all that matched how Howe acted, and that in itself showed he was not what we were meant to think he was. Without metagaming, from the first time I played it, I knew he wasn't an evil villain meant to die by my hand, and to this day he's still alive in DAI and currently rebuilding the Wardens.
He's a fallen Hero, but as long as the good man is still in there underneath all the paranoia and stupid choices, I see no reason to behead him. And as a companion, he does not betray you either, and by DAI he's changed for the better.
Can't say the same about Samson... that was a disappointment... but even then my Inquisitor tried to help him.
He's a fallen Hero, but as long as the good man is still in there underneath all the paranoia and stupid choices, I see no reason to behead him. And as a companion, he does not betray you either, and by DAI he's changed for the better.
Can't say the same about Samson... that was a disappointment... but even then my Inquisitor tried to help him.
Guest_Mlady_*
This is why with me Loghain will always return to fly again.GW accept everyone among their ranks, murderers or dangerous blood mages,and i have to agree with Alistair non-sensical vendetta against the man who have freed Ferelden after 80 years of occupation?And for what reason? Because he killed Duncan?A crime that he has not even committed in the first place,since it was Duncan who has decided to hide the GW secret regarding the AD, how in the world was possible for Loghain to secure the GW for their vital importance if he doesn't know this?
That's the thing. And Alistair claims being a Grey Warden is an honor, but just how many are thieves, murders, etc? They are not perfect knights with pure hearts. They are dark men and women being granted another chance because they had potential and were seen as such to the leaders of the GW. Blackwall is another example of that.
Alistair is a good example of being blinded by hero worship. When I first pointed out that Duncan probably saved him because he saw a use for him, Alistair bitterly tells me it was because he's a good man. He refused to see anything else but white and black. By the end of my PT he had hardened into a decent King, but still had a long way to go and carried his grudge about Loghain surviving over 3/4 years and stated his feelings to Hawke about it.
Even if I romanced him, I would still not kill Loghain. If he sees fit to dump a lovely noblewoman because she's got a good heart and understands the importance of gaining allies, and her duty to the GW, then he's not worth her time and she can find a better man.
This is why with me Loghain will always return to fly again.GW accept everyone among their ranks, murderers or dangerous blood mages,and i have to agree with Alistair non-sensical vendetta against the man who have freed Ferelden after 80 years of occupation?And for what reason? Because he killed Duncan?A crime that he has not even committed in the first place,since it was Duncan who has decided to hide the GW secret regarding the AD, how in the world was possible for Loghain to secure the GW for their vital importance if he doesn't know this?
While you can certainly argue that the merits of keeping Loghain outweight the need to punish him, Alistair does not have a "non-sensical vendetta against the man who freed Ferelden after 80 years of occupation." He has a sensical vendetta against the man who betrayed his King, sold out the army at Ostagar, and blamed the Wardens. Loghains previous actions, however heroic and noble, do not excuse or wipe away his recent ones. You can even have a discussion with Ser Cauthrien about how Loghain is no longer the man she once followed. Loghain's past is what establishes him as a tragic, fallen hero rather than just some *******, but he's still a tragic, fallen hero. He's actually the textbook definition. His strong patriotism, which served him so well during the war, was taken too far and led him to do bad things. This was ultimately his downfall.
I also hate the excuse and attempt to shift blame on Duncan for not explaining to people why the Gray Wardens are necessary. There is something to be said for it, but even if you don't understand why, it's common knowledge that the Wardens are necessary. Even if it's just that they are the best at killing Darkspawn, they are what you need. But there were legitimate reasons for the secrecy. How would people react to the idea that the Warden's drink Darkspawn blood and are tainted?
Anyway, this knowledge wouldn't have changed what Loghain did because there had not yet been sign of the Archdemon.
Live. People tend to end violence with violence and it doesn't solve anything. It's also the worst death in the game imo because of how it plays out if you kill him. It's wrong on so many levels. The game hints many times at his remorse for what he's doing. It's all in the face expressions. It hints enough so the player knows something's up, and when comes the time to give him a chance, if you followed closely enough, you realize he is redeemable. He didn't revel in his choices, he didn't do anything at all that matched how Howe acted, and that in itself showed he was not what we were meant to think he was. Without metagaming, from the first time I played it, I knew he wasn't an evil villain meant to die by my hand, and to this day he's still alive in DAI and currently rebuilding the Wardens.
He's a fallen Hero, but as long as the good man is still in there underneath all the paranoia and stupid choices, I see no reason to behead him. And as a companion, he does not betray you either, and by DAI he's changed for the better.
Can't say the same about Samson... that was a disappointment... but even then my Inquisitor tried to help him.
I like your post because it shows such a different perspective than mine on events but your conclusion does follow from your premise. You clearly give a lot of weight to Loghain's history. I weigh Loghains actions in Origins far more than what I'm told about his past because it's what's happening right in front of me. I'm told about what a great man and leader he is, but I never get to see it. What I see is a paranoid despot who betrays his King in what is at best a misguided attempt to save his country. The odd way in which they let you meet him struck me as strange and I knew he was going to betray us from the way they ended the strategy meeting scene. I knew he was going to be the villain.
Loghain shows no remorse at the time of the decision to kill him or not. In fact he tries to justify his actions throughout the Landsmeet. Because of this, I think they have him come to your team too late for it to be effective for me. I don't get to see him have any remorse. There's only a few lines of dialogue and only if you pursue them.
Loghain shows no remorse at the time of the decision to kill him or not. In fact he tries to justify his actions throughout the Landsmeet. Because of this, I think they have him come to your team too late for it to be effective for me. I don't get to see him have any remorse. There's only a few lines of dialogue and only if you pursue them.
I can't say I really expect him to, and it not something I'd expect him to do. He's facing certain death, the loss of both his teyrnir and his reputation, and similar for his daughter's unknown future. He's not going to get a trial where he's going to be allowed to say his side of the story, and if he did it's very unlikely anyone when listen. Under those circumstances, I can understand him not showing remorse. It's not like Alistair ever shows remorse for Loghain's death either.
Modifié par Mike3207, 05 juin 2015 - 04:01 .
Retour en haut
