3201 réponses à ce sujet

[Monica21]

Personally, I'm wondering why anyone even bothers responding to Xetykins anymore.

 

 

I often wonder that myself, and then find myself responding. Stubbornness?

[Xetykins]

He retreats at Ostagar to save the rest of Ferelden's forces instead of sending them all to die in a lost cause. There. Heroism 101.

Debatable. Otherwise people wont be discussing that still a lot of years after

[Monica21]

Debatable. Otherwise people wont be discussing that still a lot of years after

 

Well, this'll never work if we have different definitions of heroism. If yours is, "Do something that agrees with my version of morality," then yeah, standstill.

[Xetykins]

I often wonder that myself, and then find myself responding. Stubbornness?

Hey, you on the other side of the fence give it as good as you get. Its rather enjoyable.

Thats why its cooler to hang out here than anywhere on bsn.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Debatable. Otherwise people wont be discussing that still a lot of years after

Just because there's no possible room for debate on a certain issue doesn't mean people don't debate. Otherwise Global Warming wouldn't be a political issue. (There's rather more room than that for debate here, but the fact that the debate's still going isn't evidence of that.)

[Xetykins]

Just because there's no possible room for debate on a certain issue doesn't mean people don't debate. Otherwise Global Warming wouldn't be a political issue. (There's rather more room than that for debate here, but the fact that the debate's still going isn't evidence of that.)

My point exactly

[Xetykins]

Well, this'll never work if we have different definitions of heroism. If yours is, "Do something that agrees with my version of morality," then yeah, standstill.

The debate on that one isnt about morality tho. Its about abandonment or tactical retreat

[Persephone]

Hey, you on the other side of the fence give it as good as you get. Its rather enjoyable.

Thats why its cooler to hang out here than anywhere on bsn.

 

Hee. I'll say this tho: You may make me grit my teeth sometimes but you enable me to sharpen my debating skills, you never get personal or throw insults around.....and stubborness to the point of being immovable despite a whole lot of evidence is something you have in common with Loghain himself.   That's not to say that your viewpoint is entirely wrong, just very......biased.

 

Sorry, couldn't resist. And I'm kidding ofc.

[dragonflight288]

The debate on that one isnt about morality tho. Its about abandonment or tactical retreat

 

And I think it's been well established that, in the case of Ostagar itself, according to Inquisition, various analyses of character, and the people who were there and not caught up in ideology, that Ostagar isn't about Loghain taking the moment to seize power nor was it planned. Solas himself says he observed the battle after it happened by going to the Fade and observed how the Spirits there reenacted the battle, but since spirits reflect the emotions of the soldiers, he saw in one instant valorous soldiers fighting while a power-made villain sneered and left his king to die and in the next moment he saw a torn veteran commander making the decision to save as many lives as possible. 

 

It's like reflecting on someone like Aveline on the front lines and then reflecting Loghain himself. 

 

In the books, Maric forced Loghain to make a promise to never let a single life be placed over the good of Ferelden itself because he was angry that Loghain risked the rebellion's forces in favor of saving him, and his choosing to retreat and gather reinforcements seems to be him keeping a promise to his best friend. 

 

Also, the pictures shown in previous pages of the darkspawn horde going well into the horizon of the Wilds shows us how much larger the Horde was compared to Ferelden's forces at Ostagar. It was a battle that was doomed to be lost because of sheer size of the enemy. Heck, the final battle was also one that was going to be lost, both Oghren and Sten make it clear that our forces are outnumbered three to one and the only reason the Warden has any hope of winning is because the Archdemon was there as well. 

 

You'll find that Loghain's supporters, when they defend his actions at Ostagar, are not actually defending the man of any of his other actions, they are merely saying that there is a rationale to his actions at Ostagar, and the retreat is justifiable. 

[Big Magnet]

In my game Loghain always lives. 

 

Because Simon Templeman 

[Callidus Thorn]

The thought occurred, late last night, that Loghain actually had a pretty good reason to think the Wardens were traitors.

 

So, he's hanging back, waiting for the signal. From the reports of his scouts, and his own experience of battle, he's probably got a pretty good idea of how long he's likely to be waiting. But the time comes, and there's no signal, so he waits. And he wonders why there's no signal.

 

Now, if there was no signal at all, he might just think that something went wrong, perhaps the Tower was attacked or something, since he knows the Darkspawn live underground, they could have tunnelled their way into it. But the signal is late, too late to save the King, but perhaps just in time for him to lead his forces to their death in an ill-advised rescue attempt? He's got good reason not to trust the Grey Wardens(The Calling, and Ferelden history), and it's they who are to light the Beacon. It's assumed by Alistair that Loghain knows his parentage, giving Loghain another reason to distrust them. And given Loghain's past, anyone trying to take Ferelden would have to get rid of him. What better bait than the son of Maric and Rowan to lead him into a trap?

 

Between not keeping the King back, the role played by Alistair and The Warden, and the fact that the signal was late rather than entirely absent, I think his belief that the Wardens betrayed Ferelden actually makes sense.

 

Or maybe I was just too tired when I thought this

[Monica21]

The thought occurred, late last night, that Loghain actually had a pretty good reason to think the Wardens were traitors.

 

So, he's hanging back, waiting for the signal. From the reports of his scouts, and his own experience of battle, he's probably got a pretty good idea of how long he's likely to be waiting. But the time comes, and there's no signal, so he waits. And he wonders why there's no signal.

 

Now, if there was no signal at all, he might just think that something went wrong, perhaps the Tower was attacked or something, since he knows the Darkspawn live underground, they could have tunnelled their way into it. But the signal is late, too late to save the King, but perhaps just in time for him to lead his forces to their death in an ill-advised rescue attempt? He's got good reason not to trust the Grey Wardens(The Calling, and Ferelden history), and it's they who are to light the Beacon. It's assumed by Alistair that Loghain knows his parentage, giving Loghain another reason to distrust them. And given Loghain's past, anyone trying to take Ferelden would have to get rid of him. What better bait than the son of Maric and Rowan to lead him into a trap?

 

Between not keeping the King back, the role played by Alistair and The Warden, and the fact that the signal was late rather than entirely absent, I think his belief that the Wardens betrayed Ferelden actually makes sense.

 

Or maybe I was just too tired when I thought this

 

I think that's one very possible explanation, especially considering him speaking up when Cailan wanted to send the Wardens instead of one of his own men. Another possible explanation is that Loghain knew about the tunnels under the Tower and feared that, since the signal was late, you were fighting your way through and that meant the darkspawn already had a way to get behind the Ferelden troops. The Tower did end up being overrun after all, and you don't survive without Flemeth.

 

So you have darkspawn still filling the valley and effectively sandwiching your troops if you charge, darkspawn now behind your lines and able to attack Ferelden's troops from the front and rear. Yeah, there's really no getting out of that.

[Elhanan]

The thought occurred, late last night, that Loghain actually had a pretty good reason to think the Wardens were traitors.
 
So, he's hanging back, waiting for the signal. From the reports of his scouts, and his own experience of battle, he's probably got a pretty good idea of how long he's likely to be waiting. But the time comes, and there's no signal, so he waits. And he wonders why there's no signal.
 
Now, if there was no signal at all, he might just think that something went wrong, perhaps the Tower was attacked or something, since he knows the Darkspawn live underground, they could have tunnelled their way into it. But the signal is late, too late to save the King, but perhaps just in time for him to lead his forces to their death in an ill-advised rescue attempt? He's got good reason not to trust the Grey Wardens(The Calling, and Ferelden history), and it's they who are to light the Beacon. It's assumed by Alistair that Loghain knows his parentage, giving Loghain another reason to distrust them. And given Loghain's past, anyone trying to take Ferelden would have to get rid of him. What better bait than the son of Maric and Rowan to lead him into a trap?
 
Between not keeping the King back, the role played by Alistair and The Warden, and the fact that the signal was late rather than entirely absent, I think his belief that the Wardens betrayed Ferelden actually makes sense.
 
Or maybe I was just too tired when I thought this

My issue with these types of conjectures - past threads are full of them - is that Loghain could not see the battle; hence the need for the signal fire. For whatever reason; to leave the King to die, or to save his own men after a failed strategy, the blame is on Loghain either as murderer or failed tactician.

[Monica21]

My issue with these types of conjectures - past threads are full of them - is that Loghain could not see the battle; hence the need for the signal fire. For whatever reason; to leave the King to die, or to save his own men after a failed strategy, the blame is on Loghain either as murderer or failed tactician.

 

My issue with posts like this is that no one cares about the front line soldiers who didn't get to choose whether they would be on the front lines. Remember that guy who sees the darkspawn and starts to back away, then the guy behind him puts a sword hilt on his back and pushes him back in line? That guy didn't get to choose.

 

Loghain repeatedly asked Cailan to stay off the front lines, and Cailan repeatedly told him that he was going to fight on the front lines. Loghain had to build a plan around the kind of battle Cailan wanted, because Cailan wanted a "glorious" battle. "Cailan's death was his own doing" indeed.

[Elhanan]

My issue with posts like this is that no one cares about the front line soldiers who didn't get to choose whether they would be on the front lines. Remember that guy who sees the darkspawn and starts to back away, then the guy behind him puts a sword hilt on his back and pushes him back in line? That guy didn't get to choose.
 
Loghain repeatedly asked Cailan to stay off the front lines, and Cailan repeatedly told him that he was going to fight on the front lines. Loghain had to build a plan around the kind of battle Cailan wanted, because Cailan wanted a "glorious" battle. "Cailan's death was his own doing" indeed.

Loghains' plan; Cailan's choice of position. And when first encountering an unknown enemy, some may balk, but for their own good, as well as those around them, friends will bolster them to stay the course. Loghain strayed from his, even when reminded of his duty to the King.

[Monica21]

Loghains' plan; Cailan's choice of position. And when first encountering an unknown enemy, some may balk, but for their own good, as well as those around them, friends will bolster them to stay the course. Loghain strayed from his, even when reminded of his duty to the King.

 

I would argue that his duty is to Ferelden and Cailan is not Ferelden, so I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Elhanan]

I would argue that his duty is to Ferelden and Cailan is not Ferelden, so I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

A conclusion reached on many occasion over these years. Agreed!

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Or maybe I was just too tired when I thought this

No, no, this actually makes perfect sense if one of your premises is that Loghain didn't betray the king on purpose.

[Natureguy85]

 

 is barely even based on the game or books, and revolves around the assertion that Loghain is aparanoid lunatic, tyrant, and so on and so forth, and bears no resemblance whatsoever to Loghain in The Stolen Throne or The Calling, despite the fact that the game disagrees with that.

 

 

Just to address this part of your comment;

 

If I have to read the books to understand such an important character in a game that I played without even knowing the books existed, that's poor design and writing. Side media is for side stories. That's one thing Mass Effect did right. The books (which I didn't read but I've read summaries) added flavor to the universe and detailed side stories involving characters from the games, but I didn't need them to understand the characters. The games told me all I needed to know about those events.

 

There is a perfectly good argument to have based solely on the game about if Loghain was power hungry or was just a fanatic doing what he thought best for Ferelden, like Meredith in DA2.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Just to address this part of your comment;

 

If I have to read the books to understand such an important character in a game that I played without even knowing the books existed, that's poor design and writing. Side media is for side stories. That's one thing Mass Effect did right. The books (which I didn't read but I've read summaries) added flavor to the universe and detailed side stories involving characters from the games, but I didn't need them to understand the characters. The games told me all I needed to know about those events.

 

There is a perfectly good argument to have based solely on the game about if Loghain was power hungry or was just a fanatic doing what he thought best for Ferelden, like Meredith in DA2.

I believe Callidus's argument is that Xetykins wasn't paying much attention to the games either.

[dragonflight288]

Loghains' plan; Cailan's choice of position. And when first encountering an unknown enemy, some may balk, but for their own good, as well as those around them, friends will bolster them to stay the course. Loghain strayed from his, even when reminded of his duty to the King.

 

According to the devs, the beacon was an hour late, and Duncan outright told us before he left that we had less than an hour to light the beacon. 

 

It's probably a miracle Loghain stayed as long as he did. 

[Callidus Thorn]

Just to address this part of your comment;

 

If I have to read the books to understand such an important character in a game that I played without even knowing the books existed, that's poor design and writing. Side media is for side stories. That's one thing Mass Effect did right. The books (which I didn't read but I've read summaries) added flavor to the universe and detailed side stories involving characters from the games, but I didn't need them to understand the characters. The games told me all I needed to know about those events.

 

There is a perfectly good argument to have based solely on the game about if Loghain was power hungry or was just a fanatic doing what he thought best for Ferelden, like Meredith in DA2.

 

I believe Callidus's argument is that Xetykins wasn't paying much attention to the games either.

 

This, and that, since Xetykins has read the books as well, there's no reason not to cite them. This thread's about whether we kill him or not, and why. If the books give us a better understanding of the character, why shouldn't we reference them, especially if the person we're talking to has also read them? And that part was mostly about Xetykins assertion that "in the game all his deeds did not point out to the same man on the books. Not a single trace.", even though there's plenty you can cite to show that his actions in both are consistent.

 

Generally speaking, Natureguy85, I'd agree with you about side media. But sometimes you get a character cast in a role where you can't take the time in game to fully explore their backstory and find out why they do what they do. Loghain serves well enough as an antagonist in the game, and for those that want more, the option is there in the books.

[Elhanan]

According to the devs, the beacon was an hour late, and Duncan outright told us before he left that we had less than an hour to light the beacon. 
 
It's probably a miracle Loghain stayed as long as he did.

He could not leave until he had some excuse to hand his troops; would not be fitting the General. That is why the look of concern is so intense on the man at departure....

Ne sneers at Ser Cauthrian; not at the Darkspawn. Multiple witnesses, including some tortured for holding 'another version of the truth' state it clearly enough. Lore states it clearly enough. Etc.

Great man gone bad; normally lose him at the Landsmeet.

[Monica21]

Just to address this part of your comment;

If I have to read the books to understand such an important character in a game that I played without even knowing the books existed, that's poor design and writing. Side media is for side stories. That's one thing Mass Effect did right. The books (which I didn't read but I've read summaries) added flavor to the universe and detailed side stories involving characters from the games, but I didn't need them to understand the characters. The games told me all I needed to know about those events.

There is a perfectly good argument to have based solely on the game about if Loghain was power hungry or was just a fanatic doing what he thought best for Ferelden, like Meredith in DA2.

That's a perfectly valid opinion, but the books are still canon so citing them is valid. You can choose to ignore out-game canon and base decisions only on in-game evidence, but then you're coming to incomplete conclusions. If you do want to go with just in-game evidence, there are still plenty of reasons to spare Loghain. The books help me support my claims; my claims are not made because of the books.

[Gothfather]

I almost always let Loghain join the Wardens where he dies killing the archdemon. its the way of the wardens to allow redemption through service and sacrifice and its not about deserving redemption its about stopping the blight no matter the cost. I don't "like" Loghain but I think is a very well written character who is more than just a twirling moustache villain. He has complexity and "life" to his character that has sadly been lost with many of Bioware's villains in subsequent games. TIM could have been similarly written but in the end he almost became a parody at the conclusion of ME3. He sort of just appears out of no where and this dramatic confrontation ends up being a near farce.