3201 réponses à ce sujet

[DarthGizka]

I mean, we're using what's presented not only by the games but by Word of God. All you're doing is saying "THE WIKI IS RIGHT, SUCKERS!!!" and not accepting that it's hardly objective.

Yes, that's precisely what I meant with "people who won't - or can't - read". To boldly invent whatever suits your fancy instead of bothering to read what people actually wrote or what the evidence in the game actually says. And no, it wasn't really necessary to give a live demonstration. Did I say anywhere that people should take the wiki as gospel instead of keeping their own counsel? No, I didn't.

The wiki has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least wildly inaccurate. But it is still the most compact, comprehensive and reliable source of information that we have at our disposal, certainly more reliable than the utterings of Gaider who wouldn't know the word 'consistency' if it bit him in the *ss. The wiki info can and should be ignored if and when there is specific reason to do so, not simply because people can't be arsed to read either the topic they're posting in or some other source of information. The wiki tends to be much more approachable than the reams of posts in a topic like this or the mountains of data in the game itself, which is why I mentioned it.

Trying to make sense of a Gaider story is like playing Battleship against someone who keeps moving ships around and doesn't even bother to take account of previous hits and misses. They seem to think if a square hasn't been called yet then they can invent whatever they want, forgetting that a hit must have at least one adjacent square that is also a hit (under common rules where ships occupy two squares or more).

With the game there is the additional difficulty that its parts were made by many different people besides Gaider, with many different views. In some cases the effect has been extremely beneficial (just compare Cailan, Duncan and Loghain to the insipid characters in the books), sometimes not so much. But often it means that there will be conflicting evidence regarding specific matters, or no direct evidence at all where the devs deliberately tried to keep all options open and not to commit to anything.

Things are difficult enough already without adding the - entirely avoidable - element of attitudinal illiteracy.

Kinda doesn't make you a serious contributor to these discussions.

The readers kinda seem to have a different opinion on that score.

[dragonflight288]

And the wiki, which can be altered by just anyone who wishes to edit is somehow more reliable than the lead writer?

[Dabrikishaw]

Gaider has had some hiccups regarding his memory of content in Dragon Age: Origins before, but I wouldn't use it against him unless he was being contradictory.

[Mykel54]

Honestly all the evidence in the game suggests that Loghain planned to depose Cailan (remove the puppet) and place himself as regent with Anora as queen. However it isn´t clear at all whenever this was his plan from the start, or whenever this was his plan B at Ostagar, the plan A being to give Cailan a chance and help him win the battle.  If you ask Anora this she only says something like "It is disturbing to think he planned to murder him before Ostagar, i rather think he improvised on the battle". So the current in game information leaves it open, and Loghain´s version is also the second one (that he improvised).

 

If we accept that it was his plan A, then a lot of stuff in the game makes sense (the teyrn crown, Howe´s actions, the signal tower, Eamon´s poisoning etc.) and Loghain remains the master tactician he is supposed to be, and is depicted as in the stolen throne.

 

If we accept that it was his plan B, then Loghain ends up looking incompetent, and a lot of stuff stops making any sense, the only good thing he salvages is that he looks less bad for retreating at Ostagar.

 

I also don´t care what Gaider posted before because that is only his opinion and not part of any published material, if he wrote a comic or short story about it, then i would take that seriously, until then, it is just some personal opinion.

 

To sum up, i prefer to think that Loghain did plan it all along, because he is a ruthless bastard (Maric says so in the Calling, how Loghain´s personality changed since the stolen throne) who is obsessed with maintaining ferelden´s independence, that is his main attribute. All his actions in DAO are perfectly reasonably for a guy which, thanks to all the hero of river dane worship, now believes he is some kind of ferelden´s messiah, that only he is capable of saving his homeland and everyone else should bow to his superior leadership and do what he says.

[Mike3207]

It's really not something we can say for sure, as Loghain never really explains his reasons for making the decision to retreat at Ostagar. He does say something like, "the darkspawn would have had him, or they would have had all of us". I take from that he simply reached the point where the signal was late enough that to try to extricate Cailan from that situation would have doomed the entire army.If that happens, there's really nothing stopping the darkspawn from laying waste to the entire country.

[Xetykins]

At the end of the day, it really did not matter if loghain lived or died at ostagar. Because the whole time he was not doing anything about it anyway. The blight that was the most imminent and bigger danger was not his major concern. He left 70% of ferelden ( come landsmeet) be eaten by the blight because he's busy with his mentally conjured battles with the orlesians. He does not see the real danger even if it has already bitten him on the arse.
On that reason alone, without pointing out his other atrocities, its really really hard for me to get my head around this " everything I've done is for the good of ferelden" speech.

And no, he didnt soundly beat the civil war. When I was almost ready for landsmeet, I still came across battles between loghains men and some bann.

My opinion is only based on what I've seen in the game. No crazy wild theories pulled out of someone's butt, or the after thought of the writer. We're talking about whats happening in the game after all. This is the reason why I never refered to any WoG aside from the very funny and sarcastic ones( I love those). Because if I do that then I will start doubting everything ive experience in the game. Then I'll start doubting any choice I have to make in the future games, because the writers might say something that contradicts on what I thought and saw was the right choice. My little pea brain would explode if that happens for sure.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

At the end of the day, it really did not matter if loghain lived or died at ostagar. Because the whole time he was not doing anything about it anyway. The blight that was the most imminent and bigger danger was not his major concern. He left 70% of ferelden ( come landsmeet) be eaten by the blight because he's busy with his mentally conjured battles with the orlesians. He does not see the real danger even if it has already bitten him on the arse.
On that reason alone, without pointing out his other atrocities, its really really hard for me to get my head around this " everything I've done is for the good of ferelden" speech.

And no, he didnt soundly beat the civil war. When I was almost ready for landsmeet, I still came across battles between loghains men and some bann.

My opinion is only based on what I've seen in the game. No crazy wild theories pulled out of someone's butt, or the after thought of the writer. We're talking about whats happening in the game after all. This is the reason why I never refered to any WoG aside from the very funny and sarcastic ones( I love those). Because if I do that then I will start doubting everything ive experience in the game. Then I'll start doubting any choice I have to make in the future games, because the writers might say something that contradicts on what I thought and saw was the right choice. My little pea brain would explode if that happens for sure.

A: Loghain's first thought was to handle the darkspawn, at least according to the scene at Denerim. He sent soldiers out to turn back the Orlesians, true, but he had plans for the Blight before it became clear there were other things that had to be handled first. (Which seems to me to be to some degree the Civil War rather than Orlais, though how much is what I couldn't tell you.)

 

B: As for the Civil War, we hear from the gossips that Loghain keeps winning battle after battle, with one encounterable dialogue ending with something like "Well, that about settles it. The Regent will have the entire Bannorn wrapped up soon." And you'll notice I didn't say that the entire Civil War was over: I said that Loghain had "pretty much won," which is what that bit of evidence supports and which isn't significantly challenged by that one Chanter's Board mission.

 

C: In-game evidence that Loghain doesn't want Cailan dead: the dialogue at the start of the strategy sessions that suggests Loghain had gotten pretty annoying about Cailan's insistence on sitting on the front lines.

[Loco duke]

you should Ask yourself whether Decide with your heart Or your mind? Emotionally Hope to help him regain his honor & make Alistair see reason in it. or choose logically & say he's too much trouble, better to be off with him. but I'd Always kill'em. just because I love the challenge!!!  

[DarthGizka]

@ Riverdaleswhiteflash

 

A: Loghain thought the Blight was something that could be put on the back burner until he had completed his power grab and scratched his itch with the Orlesians.

B: If Loghain hat "pretty much won", why did he come to the Landsmeet with a small, sorry bunch of losers instead of an army? As far as I can see, there is no evidence for that at all apart from some idle chatter.

C: This indicates only that Loghain hadn't yet firmly committed to feeding his king to the darkspawn (in which case he might have encouraged Cailan, although such a sudden reversal might have been suspicious in itself). The consensus seems to be anyway that Loghain committed to his betrayal only during the moments after the beacon was lit.

 

P.S.: The point regarding B is that the Landsmeet would hardly have dared stand against Loghain if he had "pretty much won", with little hope of accomplishing anything even if they did.

[Xetykins]

A. My point still stands. How could he claim to do everything for ferelden if he lets more than half of it burn? Its not as if it all happened so sudden and he cant do anything about it. The whole campaign took around about a year. There's not ifs and maybes here. His priority is wonky. He'd rather spend all that year on trying to prove he's the almighty and all should bow down to him before he considers saving his own people he claimed to protect.

B. When the warden in game keeps on slaughtering his men on those battles then hes definitely not going to win. I think I've saved 3 bannorns all in all. All that and more against what little was left of his army from ostagar. The future doesnt look too bright. That is my opinion. And even without the warden, the civil war will still go on even if he's beaten them to submission. Because again, he's unlawfully stealing noble's lands. Personal opinion aside in the game he did not win that war.

C. I dont see where I mentioned ostagar or cailan on my wall of text. But if you must know how I saw that scene. I only saw the tactician who did not follow his own tacs. Anyway, that wasnt the entire problem for me. His actions afterwards was what did it.See A.... or the fact that ferelden citizens got sold by no other but by their very own hero. I dont even want to think about what happens if he runs out of denerim elves. There was really no portrayal of his heroism in my entire game.

D. Bedtime.

F. What Darthgizka said.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

@ Riverdaleswhiteflash

 

A: Loghain thought the Blight was something that could be put on the back burner until he had completed his power grab and scratched his itch with the Orlesians.

B: If Loghain hat "pretty much won", why did he come to the Landsmeet with a small, sorry bunch of losers instead of an army? As far as I can see, there is no evidence for that at all apart from some idle chatter.

C: This indicates only that Loghain hadn't yet firmly committed to feeding his king to the darkspawn (in which case he might have encouraged Cailan, although such a sudden reversal might have been suspicious in itself). The consensus seems to be anyway that Loghain committed to his betrayal only during the moments after the beacon was lit.

 

P.S.: The point regarding B is that the Landsmeet would hardly have dared stand against Loghain if he had "pretty much won", with little hope of accomplishing anything even if they did.

A: And what, precisely, was he to do about it until he'd completed his power grab? (Which I suppose is a legitimate way of putting it.) The darkspawn are in the south. He'd need to go through or near the Bannorn to reach them. Not to mention that part of the reason for his power grab is to put more soldiers on the front-lines, which one might assume he's doing with all the land he's grabbing.

 

B: I am confused as to when you think you're seeing the entirety of Loghain's army during the Landsmeet. Also, the point of the Landsmeet is that it's a legal way of handling Loghain, with the size of his army (and the treaty-based army) theoretically being irrelevant. ("Theoretically" being the operative word here, since were it not for the Blight Loghain's army could have launched a coup against the victorious party in the Landsmeet if they'd chosen.) Not to mention that many of the people who can theoretically stand up to Loghain in the voting were allies of his who it came to light he had secretly wronged: allies suddenly becoming enemies can seriously weaken a ruler's regime.

 

C: That consensus seems to be at least partially based on Word Of Gaider, so I'd thought you were disputing it. Sorry for the confusion.

 

 

A. My point still stands. How could he claim to do everything for ferelden if he lets more than half of it burn? Its not as if it all happened so sudden and he cant do anything about it. The whole campaign took around about a year. There's not ifs and maybes here. His priority is wonky. He'd rather spend all that year on trying to prove he's the almighty and all should bow down to him before he considers saving his own people he claimed to protect.

B. When the warden in game keeps on slaughtering his men on those battles then hes definitely not going to win. I think I've saved 3 bannorns all in all. All that and more against what little was left of his army from ostagar. The future doesnt look too bright. That is my opinion. And even without the warden, the civil war will still go on even if he's beaten them to submission. Because again, he's unlawfully stealing noble's lands. Personal opinion aside in the game he did not win that war.

C. I dont see where I mentioned ostagar or cailan on my wall of text. But if you must know how I saw that scene. I only saw the tactician who did not follow his own tacs. Anyway, that wasnt the entire problem for me. His actions afterwards was what did it.See A.... or the fact that ferelden citizens got sold by no other but by their very own hero. I dont even want to think about what happens if he runs out of denerim elves. There was really no portrayal of his heroism in my entire game.

D. Bedtime.

F. What Darthgizka said.

A: In order to attack the darkspawn, he would need to go through or near the Bannorn, which is where most of the dispute of his authority comes from. (I'm citing the in-game map for this.) That's more of a problem than you might think.

 

B: Three bannorns is a pretty small portion of the country. The Codex states that no one lord in that region holds more than a dozen leagues. And as I mentioned in response to Gizka's post, Loghain and Howe were explicitly not the only nobles fighting for his regency. Howe mentions allies during the scene that introduces Zevran, and just about every noble who automatically appears in the Landsmeet chamber tends towards Loghain unless you make an argument they personally aren't capable of ignoring or complete a quest to expose a way in which Loghain hurt them personally. It's not that hard to see Loghain handling this reasonably well, especially since when you think about it, there's no real indication that the entire Bannorn rose.

 

C: You disparagingly mentioned Word Of Gaider. I'd assumed you meant Ostagar. As for the tactician not following his tactics... yeah. Tacticians don't always do that. If the situation that the tactics were written for is not the situation you're facing, (say an important beacon gets lit late) the planned tactics may or may not remain the optimal ones. The rest I'm not going to dispute, since there's not much I can say to defend slavery. (It's really Ostagar and the Civil War I think he gets a bum rap on.)

 

D: I really hope I can get to sleep at a decent hour tonight. I've been seeing the sunrise lately. And not by waking early.

 

F: I noticed, thank you.

[Elendil]

I'm well aware of the arguments for and against Loghain. Instead of entering a "discussion" I will simply say what my decision was at the Landsmeet and explain my reasoning.

 

To start off I need to explain that every choice I make in the game is based on several things.

 

1. My character's origin. (i.e. Human Noble vs Dalish Elf)

2. My character's class. (i.e. Warrior vs Rogue)

3. My character's race.

4. My character's religious convictions including the likelihood of whether or not they would even have any. (i.e. Higher caste dwarfs worshipping the "Stone" vs casteless dwarfs with no feasible or legal means to improve their lives)

5. Actions and words taken in the game by myself or others.

6. What my character could feasibly know AT THAT TIME.

7. My own personality and thought processes that take into factor all of the above.

 

My character is Aaeden Cousland, human noble warrior. This character has been raised being instilled with the importance of duty, honor, and justice. He knows the importance of power and that it is used to protect and help. Misuse or abuse of that power has serious consequences. His father is kind and helps those less fortunate even members of groups who are considered less than citizens (and to others less than human). He has grown up surrounded by love from all his family and loves them greatly in return. He has also grown up with belief in the Maker, Andraste, as well as traditional beliefs concerning mages. He knows the history of his family including that his family fought against the king of Ferelden at one point in history and were forgiven. He is aware of the history of the war between his country and Orlais. Like his father he does not fear or hate them but like his fellow Fereldens he does not entirely trust them and is wary of them.

 

*NOTE: The bit about responsibility and abuse of power is based on your first mission or rather afterwards. After dealing with the rodents and you talk to the gripey old woman you find out she was your nanny. She proceeds to tell you a story she constantly told you as a child. The story is about a mabari hound that was chosen to be the companion to the son of a. Because of this privelage he started treating his fellow hounds and their owners poorly. The years went by and the arrogance and cruelty of the hound increased to a point that the chieftan decided to choose a different hound for his son. Enraged by this decision, the hound attacks the chieftan and bites him. The entire tribe and even his fellow hounds turn on him and kill him. This teaches my character that being a leader means that the way you weild your power and abilities affects everyone. You need power and competence but it must be tempered with empathy and compassion.

 

Now my decision: Loghain is killed by me. Allistair and Anora rule together.

 

REASONS:

 

1.) Allistair is by blood the rightful heir to the throne. As a noble this would be important to me. Although I understand his shortcomings he has a level of sympathy, empathy, and compassion that is necessary for a leader. Anora has what Allistair lacks which is experience, decisiveness, and the ability to remove herself emotionally from a situation. The two of them together are better than apart. HE keeps her from becoming indifferent and inhuman and SHE keeps him from being impulsive and naive.

 

*One thing to note. The reason I wish to keep her alive (even when she betrays us at the Landsmeet) is not just because I believe her necessary for Ferelden's future. I also believe that she had nothing to do with Cailan's death and (despite what she may seem) that she did love him. She does not deserve to lose her life because of her father. I believe she loves Ferelden however she does love her position more. One reason why I did not wish her to rule alone.

 

2.) Loghain abandoned good warriors on the battlefield, betrayed his king, and blamed innocent people for it. As a warrior this kind of treachery is the foulest. To not help a comrade DURING battle when you said you would is the same as killing them yourself. Then he has the gall to blame someone else. This not only shows he can't be trusted during war but he also has NO HONOR.

 

3.) Loghain is blinded by his fear and hatred of Orlais. Loghain allows Ferelden to be practically swallowed by the Blight because of his fear of Orlais. This shows a lack of objectivity and inability to prioritize threats. This shows he has BAD JUDGEMENT.

 

4.) Loghain becomes so self-centered to the point to where he believes he and he alone understands the true dangers that threaten Ferelden. He also believes that he cares about Ferelden more than everyone else. In his arrogance he goes to eliminate everyone who disagrees with him or would disagree with him such as Eamon, the Grey Wardens, and possibly the Couslands. He continues to spiral uncontrollably by betraying the values of his people as well as his own. Allying himself with a man who murdered a friend and his family out of jealousy and greed. Hiring assassins to murder people who did no wrong. Hiring an apostate blood mage to kill a man who, other than being a possible political rival, did nothing to warrant death. And lastly he allowed innocent beings to be sold as slaves to fund a civil war that he caused. This shows he is greatly IMBALANCED.

 

5.) All this shows one way or another that he has NO EMPATHY or COMPASSION.

 

It is for these reasons that I not only prevented his kingship but had him slain.  He was too imbalanced to reason with, too angry to listen, no empathy to understand, and his word could no longer be trusted. Leaving him alive would risk civil war even were his daughter queen. It had been indicated that he would have allowed Anora murdered to discredit Eamon. If Ferelden was to survive the Blight, recover, and then flourish... then Loghain could not be allowed to be a part of it.

 

So there you have it. There's my reasoning. Thanks for reading!

[TEWR]

A: Loghain thought the Blight was something that could be put on the back burner until he had completed his power grab and scratched his itch with the Orlesians.

 

Tell me, when the Bannorn are blocking his movements south and stand in the way geographically, how's he supposed to move his army and supply lines through them safely without being harassed?

 

 

There's a map of Ferelden. The Blight is pouring out from the South (and ****, some lords actually decided hey let's leave our lands undefended (Lothering) all on their own) and the Bannorn is a massive sprawl of land. Not just what's smack dab in the middle, but rather all around the nation. Remember, banns exist in Amaranthine and Gwaren and Highever and everywhere.

 

Christ almighty, the way people on the forums think they like to believe people can fight on multiple fronts and still come out the victor as if it's easy as pie when the fact of the matter is fighting on multiple fronts reduces your chances of victory. The more fronts you fight on, the more resources you end up expending in different areas. Given that the Darkspawn have virtually unlimited troops and no need for supplies like food or money, Loghain's decision to turn his attention towards the Bannorn which are rebelling against his authority (and poorly at that, though even disunited movements can be a problem) was sound because you need a united front to face the Darkspawn.

 

He had to fight them. He wanted to face the Darkspawn first and barely anyone was sensible enough to say "Well, the political fumbles of Ostagar can wait until the nation is secure!". The Bannorn geared up for war against Loghain despite the Darkspawn threat and given how Loghain's very actions were meant to prevent a Civil War it's thus implied that the Bannorn struck the first blow.

 

Hell, some Banns were even burning their own land rather then let Loghain use the food to feed his troops! While that's their right, the fact that a war is going on that could take an indeterminate amount of time (Blight) makes it an asinine move.

 

People like to act like Loghain was the sole person who didn't believe it was a Blight. While he didn't believe in the Blight's veracity, he at least took it as a serious threat. But you hear from Bodahn/Tavern keepers that many people actually believe, since the Darkspawn aren't showing any signs of being united post-Ostagar, that it isn't really a Blight at all and not even something worth addressing.

 

Which honestly goes to show me that the Archdemon was sending out roving bands of Darkspawn to scout the areas, cause a bit of chaos here and there, and feed into peoples' belief that the Blight wasn't a Blight at all while taking advantage of the Civil War to weaken Ferelden.

 

Pretty smart, honestly.

 

 

 

B: If Loghain hat "pretty much won", why did he come to the Landsmeet with a small, sorry bunch of losers instead of an army? As far as I can see, there is no evidence for that at all apart from some idle chatter.

 

Other then the fact that most Banns that fought him actually got their asses handed to him. And those that managed to eke out a victory against his forces, of which there are few, ended up being Darkspawn chow as a result because they didn't have enough forces to handle the Darkspawn (Pyrrhic victories are so nice, aren't they Banns?).

 

Loghain's got the military might and has got the authority now because he easily crushed the Bannorn, but as Landsmeets are a yearly thing they're called no matter what. Eamon's calling this particular one to address Loghain's Regency and whether it should stand, as well as claiming a new Theirin appeared on the scene.
 

[Deathsaurer]

Whether or not he believed it was a blight or not is irrelevant. The fact is he started the conflict with the Grey Wardens when he tried to blame Ostagar on them instead of owning up to his choices. Everything after that only fed into the impression that he was a completely deluded man with a poor ability to judge peoples character.

[TEWR]

From his perspective, the Wardens actually were responsible for leading Cailan to his death. It's complex, but it's not as if he was trying to use them as a scapegoat. He actually believed they were wrong.

 

Plus, if you ask Teagan if he doesn't believe Loghain, Teagan will tell you what Loghain told them. Unfortunately, I can't recall it perfectly and it was once on the DA wiki but I guess somebody wanted it taken off, but suffice to say it was him also ignoring how his own nephew Cailan was a glory-seeking manchild.

 

Honestly, many people that edit the DA wiki are less concerned with objectivity and more concerned with looking impressive IMO. One of the things I wish they'd do is add in every quote a character says on a side page (like the KHwiki does). Be easy and allow for more concise information.

 

At any rate, Loghain truly did believe the Wardens were at fault for Ostagar. And in a way, the Wardens do share some of the blame. By refusing to temper Cailan's mentality that the Blight could be quelled just by their sheer presence -- Duncan attempts to do this, but very poorly and he backs down far too easily -- it ends up feeding into Cailan's vanity and glory-seeking.

 

Cailan takes the Wardens' word very highly, yet Duncan doesn't really take advantage of this because of a rather constricted view of what being a Warden entails.

 

Think the Jedi, I suppose. The Jedi creed used to mean something but ended up being distorted to something that tried to create emotionless automatons IIRC. For the Wardens, they've taken the idea of political neutrality that they subscribed to during the Third Blight and distorted it to "Be very quiet around nobility.".

 

Beyond that, Loghain never once bought into their political neutrality. With the Warden's exile for rebelling against a king (justified though it was, no one knew the full story) coupled with how in the past they used to serve Orlais' interests and how in the Calling Loghain witnesses some Wardens working with the Darkspawn, it becomes easy for him to see them as responsible for leading the king to his death.

 

Cailan ignored the strategy proposed by Loghain all because he thought the Wardens would be enough to win the day.

 

You goaded him into making the charge! He believed the tales, Warden! He thought that your handful of men would turn the tide for him, strategy and consequences be hanged!

 

Cailan charged out into the open, after wasting Mabari troops which are good support and only firing one volley of arrows into the horde. By their silence, the Wardens were feeding into Cailan's manchild mentality.

 

Then look at how the tower signal was lit up at the wrong time. It's lit at the wrong moment. It was supposed to be lit when the entire horde was committed to the field. Instead, it's lit when the horde is still coming out in force and Cailan's forces are cracking under pressure.

 

This is all to say nothing of how he believes Alistair to be under Orlais' control.

 

From his perspective, what the Wardens were trying to do was worm their way into Cailan's trust and lead him to the battle, with them sending up the signal at the wrong time, hoping that Loghain would charge into the battle to try and save Cailan. And then both would die, the entire army lost at Ostagar. As a result, 200 Wardens would come in to face the Darkspawn along with 24 divisions of cavalry (Riordan's numbers, which contradict with what Loghain was told) and the Darkspawn would be defeated, and Orlais would institute Alistair as a puppet Theirin so as to satisfy nationalist Fereldan sentiments while also giving them a means to do what they want. And Ferelden would be theirs again.

 

It's very complex. Hell, I wouldn't begrudge a person saying it's paranoid, but to say it doesn't have some pretty damn good reasons isn't right. That's why I'm so adamant about Loghain's character. People should understand everything that goes on for him and not fall victim to their assumptions, which are also colored by the viewpoint of the game.

[ShadowLordXII]

From his perspective, the Wardens actually were responsible for leading Cailan to his death. It's complex, but it's not as if he was trying to use them as a scapegoat. He actually believed they were wrong.

 

Plus, if you ask Teagan if he doesn't believe Loghain, Teagan will tell you what Loghain told them. Unfortunately, I can't recall it perfectly and it was once on the DA wiki but I guess somebody wanted it taken off, but suffice to say it was him also ignoring how his own nephew Cailan was a glory-seeking manchild.

 

Honestly, many people that edit the DA wiki are less concerned with objectivity and more concerned with looking impressive IMO. One of the things I wish they'd do is add in every quote a character says on a side page (like the KHwiki does). Be easy and allow for more concise information.

 

At any rate, Loghain truly did believe the Wardens were at fault for Ostagar. And in a way, the Wardens do share some of the blame. By refusing to temper Cailan's mentality that the Blight could be quelled just by their sheer presence -- Duncan attempts to do this, but very poorly and he backs down far too easily -- it ends up feeding into Cailan's vanity and glory-seeking.

 

Cailan takes the Wardens' word very highly, yet Duncan doesn't really take advantage of this because of a rather constricted view of what being a Warden entails.

 

Think the Jedi, I suppose. The Jedi creed used to mean something but ended up being distorted to something that tried to create emotionless automatons IIRC. For the Wardens, they've taken the idea of political neutrality that they subscribed to during the Third Blight and distorted it to "Be very quiet around nobility.".

 

Beyond that, Loghain never once bought into their political neutrality. With the Warden's exile for rebelling against a king (justified though it was, no one knew the full story) coupled with how in the past they used to serve Orlais' interests and how in the Calling Loghain witnesses some Wardens working with the Darkspawn, it becomes easy for him to see them as responsible for leading the king to his death.

 

Cailan ignored the strategy proposed by Loghain all because he thought the Wardens would be enough to win the day.

 

You goaded him into making the charge! He believed the tales, Warden! He thought that your handful of men would turn the tide for him, strategy and consequences be hanged!

 

Cailan charged out into the open, after wasting Mabari troops which are good support and only firing one volley of arrows into the horde. By their silence, the Wardens were feeding into Cailan's manchild mentality.

 

Then look at how the tower signal was lit up at the wrong time. It's lit at the wrong moment. It was supposed to be lit when the entire horde was committed to the field. Instead, it's lit when the horde is still coming out in force and Cailan's forces are cracking under pressure.

 

This is all to say nothing of how he believes Alistair to be under Orlais' control.

 

From his perspective, what the Wardens were trying to do was worm their way into Cailan's trust and lead him to the battle, with them sending up the signal at the wrong time, hoping that Loghain would charge into the battle to try and save Cailan. And then both would die, the entire army lost at Ostagar. As a result, 200 Wardens would come in to face the Darkspawn along with 24 divisions of cavalry (Riordan's numbers, which contradict with what Loghain was told) and the Darkspawn would be defeated, and Orlais would institute Alistair as a puppet Theirin so as to satisfy nationalist Fereldan sentiments while also giving them a means to do what they want. And Ferelden would be theirs again.

 

It's very complex. Hell, I wouldn't begrudge a person saying it's paranoid, but to say it doesn't have some pretty damn good reasons isn't right. That's why I'm so adamant about Loghain's character. People should understand everything that goes on for him and not fall victim to their assumptions, which are also colored by the viewpoint of the game.

 

Except that a lot of arguments against Loghain are based on what we see in the game itself. If there's an argument to be made in the defense of Loghain, then the game fails to make it viable or strong.

 

I don't even hate Loghain, I think that he's a very dynamic and multi-layered character and again, Ostagar wasn't his fault. He didn't help the situation, but Duncan and Cailan also share a lot of blame for how that battle unfolded. In addition, nobody understood the Blight's strength at Ostagar as Flemeth had warned, so Ostagar was an inevitable loss regardless of what anyone did.

 

But just because you can understand Loghain's perspective, that doesn't mean that he wasn't wrong. He was wrong about the wardens. Wrong about his conspiracy concerning Orlais. Wrong to demand the bannorn's support rather than earn it the legal and official way. He has good reasons for distrusting Orlais and the Wardens considering his experiences and limited knowledge concerning that latter, but that doesn't justify his actions which were very well on their way to destroying the country that he was trying to protect.

 

Not to mention the things that he did and allowed which in turn compromised the laws and ideas that his country stood for. The list has been posted numerous times, so I won't bother listing them out. In a way, it makes him something of a tragic villain who truly believes that he's saving his country when he's actually destroying it.

[Deathsaurer]

Not to mention the things that he did and allowed which in turn compromised the laws and ideas that his country stood for. The list has been posted numerous times, so I won't bother listing them out. In a way, it makes him something of a tragic villain who truly believes that he's saving his country when he's actually destroying it.

You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

[TEWR]

I don't even hate Loghain, I think that he's a very dynamic and multi-layered character and again, Ostagar wasn't his fault. He didn't help the situation, but Duncan and Cailan also share a lot of blame for how that battle unfolded. In addition, nobody understood the Blight's strength at Ostagar as Flemeth had warned, so Ostagar was an inevitable loss regardless of what anyone did.

 

Note that nowhere did I say Loghain didn't share some of the blame there at Ostagar. I was just trying to explain why he thinks the Wardens are at fault for Ostagar. Pretty much everybody had a say in the blame. Chantry too, for sending only seven mages to combat a threat that has hundreds upon hundreds of their own mages.

 

He was wrong about the wardens. Wrong about his conspiracy concerning Orlais.

 

Wardens yes. Orlais, debatable. Celene does seem to have designs on gaining Ferelden peacefully from what we know of RtO and even Anora was suspicious of Celene's desires (as she knew about Cailan and her corresponding, per DAII's Bard's Honor codex). I can't say what the Masked Empire says of Celene's goals for Ferelden other then that she diffuses a potentially disastrous incident between Grand Duke Gaspard and Arl Teagan.

[Deathsaurer]

Regardless of Orlais intentions they can be fought far more easily than the Dark Spawn. If they tried to take over again I'd have been first in line to oppose them. But you don't turn away help in a situation like this.

[TEWR]

Well, Loghain was only turning away Orlesian help. As I said earlier to ShadowLord, Loghain sought the aid of the Dwarves and the Mages (Thedas' best assets against the Darkspawn). It's also known that Lord Harimann sent some of his troops to aid Ferelden when other Marcher nobility in Kirkwall were opposed to the idea.

 

It's unknown if they came after the Landsmeet we were a part of or before, but regardless the former two go to show that Loghain was only opposed to aid from Orlais. Even Cauthrien makes this pointedly clear by how Loghain's intentions were that Ferelden would rally behind him and push back the Darkspawn without crying to Orlais for aid.

 

To be honest, given how much of the nobility seem to express discontentment -- based on a rumor heard -- at Loghain being made a noble when he was just a commoner it seems a lot of the opposition was also due to that resentment as much as it was any sense of short-sighted altruism (like from Teagan).

[Deathsaurer]

I'm well aware he was asking for aid. His ambassador tried to kill me. Fact of the matter is we needed all the help we could get. Meta knowledge, seeing the army marching through the Deep Roads after Urthemiel flew off even with all the troops Orlais was sending it wouldn't have been enough in a protracted war. Ferelden was utterly screwed if not for killing Urthemiel when we did.

[Xetykins]

To be honest, given how much of the nobility seem to express discontentment -- based on a rumor heard -- at Loghain being made a noble when he was just a commoner it seems a lot of the opposition was also due to that resentment as much as it was any sense of short-sighted altruism (like from Teagan).

Is it so hard to believe that the nobles, specially Teagan reacted the way he did because of their strong principles, honor or sense of justice that Loghain lacks. You seem to be going out of your way to explain Teagans reaction to the extent that it becomes rediculous. Im saying its rediculous because Teagan even married a commoner in my game. He's not a snob, and he does not bow down to tyrants. He was not written that way, as I assume the same with the nobles he was at war with.

@Riverdaleswhiteflash
1. Theres no stopping loghain from staying his hand and request a truce from the bannorns to deal and help out their common folks at least get away from the darkspawn first.
Lothering is a great example of this. He did placed men there but for one reason alone that we can see. To ambush the wardens. The people had to fend for themselves. If there's a will, theres a way. Or he's not written that way.

2. If a bannorn was really that small then it speaks even more about his incompetence.

3. Let me rephrase it. To me he looked like the tactician who never intended to follow through his own tactic. Even looking at the strategy meeting.

4. I hope you got your sleep. I had a bout with insomnia for a week and I was a walking time bomb to everyone around me. Not nice :-(

[Jedimaster88]

Wardens yes. Orlais, debatable. Celene does seem to have designs on gaining Ferelden peacefully from what we know of RtO and even Anora was suspicious of Celene's desires (as she knew about Cailan and her corresponding, per DAII's Bard's Honor codex). I can't say what the Masked Empire says of Celene's goals for Ferelden other then that she diffuses a potentially disastrous incident between Grand Duke Gaspard and Arl Teagan.

 

Are you reading the masked empire at the moment? I´ve read it but I dont want to give away spoilers if you havent finished it yet.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Is it so hard to believe that the nobles, specially Teagan reacted the way he did because of their strong principles, honor or sense of justice that Loghain lacks. You seem to be going out of your way to explain Teagans reaction to the extent that it becomes rediculous. Im saying its rediculous because Teagan even married a commoner in my game. He's not a snob, and he does not bow down to tyrants. He was not written that way, as I assume the same with the nobles he was at war with.

@Riverdaleswhiteflash
1. Theres no stopping loghain from staying his hand and request a truce from the bannorns to deal and help out their common folks at least get away from the darkspawn first.
Lothering is a great example of this. He did placed men there but for one reason alone that we can see. To ambush the wardens. The people had to fend for themselves. If there's a will, theres a way. Or he's not written that way.

2. If a bannorn was really that small then it speaks even more about his incompetence.

3. Let me rephrase it. To me he looked like the tactician who never intended to follow through his own tactic. Even looking at the strategy meeting.

4. I hope you got your sleep. I had a bout with insomnia for a week and I was a walking time bomb to everyone around me. Not nice :-(

 

1: I suppose there wasn't. Though I'm not denying he's a complete failure of a politician. At any rate, would they have accepted? Whatever Loghain's faults as a politician, under the circumstances I can see people refusing to work with him (much less for him) no matter how reasonable he is.

 

2: Bear in mind that Loghain loses those battles because you were there. Losing a battle because the Warden was fighting for the other side isn't much of a black mark on a man's record. As for the ones you weren't there for, I think the evidence (see above arguments) points towards him having some degree of competence.

 

3: I can see that interpretation I suppose. Still, there's at least evidence both before and after the fact to indicate that he hadn't wanted Cailan dead. (Before in that he was trying to talk Cailan out of it, after in that even after being punished for all his crimes [most of which I'm not disputing and he doesn't either at that point] he's still insisting that Cailan's death was his only option for non-treasonous reasons.)

 

4: Yep. It is awesome to be able to see a morning without needing to go to sleep shortly after.

 

Other Point: I think you have Teagan down, but TEWR is probably right about at least a few of them.

[Jaison1986]

You know, in this whole Loghain charade, it doesn't bother me the fact that people blame him for his actions and resent him from that. But it does bother me how some people make a point of oversimplifying the situations he get himself into and that he causes. And how people also handwave the blame that other individuals also held.