280 réponses à ce sujet

[Maria13]

Vicious wrote...

...

If you have an effective rebuttal i'd love to hear it. also apologies for grammar errors and repeating myself, english isnt so great.

Your English is actually great.

I think it's too early to say that Cailan is a horrible king.  He is young and untested.  Leadership, whatever the pundits might say, is usually not something that can be learned very well beforehand and I think Cailan is just at the beginning of his kingly career path.  I agree that the similarities with the behaviour of unhardened Alistair are startling, but the point is Alistair is capable of being hardened and I would say that Cailan too is capable of learning.

I do not think the advantages for Orlais taking over Ferelden are so clear cut.  All Orlesians (and Antivans!) despise Ferelden, Ferelden is a fractious ununified backwater (much like Afganistan, but cold and with lyrium instead of opium, but let's not go there, shall we?) and with no notable resources. It will be equally present in the Orlesians' minds that they were recently given a bloody nose and lost lots of lives in vain there. 

If she has any sense it is unlikely the genius empress would really wish to marry the King of Ferelden, the reason being Orlais, like Ferelden, is a patriarchy and the King will take precedence.  Cailan whatever his failings would not agree to being a consort (although, he could use Alistair for that, ha, another train of thought...).  What they could do is use each other, temporarily, of course.  Queens if they wish to retain power in patriarchies always marry below themselves.

And as for Orlesian chevaliers...  Are the Ferelden nobility much better?  What about the dwarven oligarchs? And the continued oppression of the elves...

Anyway...

[Spitz6860]

if you played the City Elf origin when you first meet him he would ask about the conditions in Alienage and promises you that he would set thing straight in there once this is all over. so from that perspective, he's very likely to make a great king, he's just young and hotheaded, usually age and experience fixes that.

[Solica]

thegreateski wrote...

Well it's a good thing that Queen Anora was the one actually controlling the kingdom isn't it?

Well, it's always impossible to judge how serious you are. But in this case it fits as a background.

Ultimately, her "control", it ended up in the Couslands, the king, the Gray Wardens, countless more, being murdered, a destructive civil war, a swine like Howe getting hold of a lot of titles and rising in power, and as a final topping - a Blight left uncapped. Nobles raping and murdering elves in the alianage, not fearing any consequences, is just an example of the injustices in the Ferelden she has supposedly "controlled" for 5 years. 
I have no reasons to consider Anora as something else than a doublefaced, charming but shrewd and cold, very ambitious, honorless, brutal, visionless peasant b'. And she is also her father's tool.

It is possible to interpret Cailan in a different way than just accepting Loghain's view of him.
Is he really trying to get rid of Anora? Well, if he is - good for him! Then it would mean that he shows signs of understanding, and that he shows some backbone in taking some action.

Does he really intend to unite Orlais and Ferelden? Well, I do not have RtO, so I don't know how much of that perception is depending upon completely trusting Loghain's words and judgements. But seeking Orlais help is a sound and prudent decision, reflecting on the need to positively cap the darkspawn at Ostagar, regardless if he doubts it might be a real Blight. Besides that, other longterm threats are abound, like the qunari. After 30 years, it's about time for some peaceful relations with Orlais, for their mutual security and prosperity. If Cailan is making contacts with Orlais, 30 years after his father led a bloody rebellion, I'd say it might be signs of him having tremendous potential as a ruler, ...if he were to be rid of the Loghains. Of course,  he could also just be a clueless puppet of the Empress. That possibility exists, though I'd say it reeks of Loghain's fantasies. But Cailan is dead, so we'll never know.

Modifié par Solica, 24 janvier 2010 - 12:33 .

[Xandurpein]

It's funny how all rant about Anora being a peasant. The fact is that formally Alistair is the peasant, not she.

[Solica]

Xandurpein wrote...


It's funny how all rant about Anora being a peasant. The fact is that formally Alistair is the peasant, not she.

Lol, it's just semi-roleplay. A way to get in a perceived insult.
But I think it's also a reminder about her background, that she does not, cannot, share the values of the nobles. You can consider that positive or negative, I suppose it can be both, depending upon both the person and the nobles as a yard stick.

But no, formally, Alistair is of royal blood.

Modifié par Solica, 24 janvier 2010 - 12:40 .

[Maria13]

Xandurpein wrote...


It's funny how all rant about Anora being a peasant. The fact is that formally Alistair is the peasant, not she.

And a good point.. Anyone know any examples of bastards (I mean the fatherless kinds, there are plenty of the others) inheriting thrones?  I don't.  I know examples of bastards being better all round leaders and commanders that the monarchs (Phillip the second of Spain and his bastard brother Don Juan de Austria, who led the Spanish navel force at Lepanto) but not actually securing the throne... It would set too dangerous a precedent.

Modifié par Maria13, 24 janvier 2010 - 12:42 .

[Vicious]

Maria13 wrote...


Your English is actually great.

Thank you.

   I agree that the similarities with the behaviour of unhardened Alistair are startling, but the point is Alistair is capable of being hardened and I would say that Cailan too is capable of learning. 

I would agree at that. Cailan was capable of learning imho, but the problem was he was already in a position of huge power and was making some very boneheaded moves.

I do not think the advantages for Orlais taking over Ferelden are so clear cut.  All Orlesians (and Antivans!) despise Ferelden, Ferelden is a fractious ununified backwater (much like Afganistan, but cold and with lyrium instead of opium, but let's not go there, shall we?) and with no notable resources. It will be equally present in the Orlesians' minds that they were recently given a bloody nose and lost lots of lives in vain there. 

Ah, but you see, victory is victory. Orlais is still the greatest power in Thedas and no doubt their national pride suffered somewhat when Ferelden freed itself. We don't know anything about Empress Celene except that she plays the game of thrones exceptionally well vs. the rest of her royal court. But it's reasonable to assume that Orlais wanted Ferelden before for whatever reason [land expansion/trade routes/taxation being a big one. Conquering a land for actual resources is more of a modern way of thinking.] and those reasons would probably be unchanged, even if they became more trouble than they're worth in terms of going to war with.

If she has any sense it is unlikely the genius empress would really wish to marry the King of Ferelden, the reason being Orlais, like Ferelden, is a patriarchy and the King will take precedence.  Cailan whatever his failings would not agree to being a consort 

I would agree with you but you are giving Cailan too much credit I think. Obviously Celene would consider this: But you should consider this as I'm sure she did: Cailan did not run Ferelden. Anora did. Cailan's view of matters was very short-sighted and unfortunate. Even if he had more power on paper [like he did in Ferelden] Celene would be running things, with a vastly expanded empire and completely outdoing all of her predecessors, who failed to conquer Ferelden time and time again.


I would say The fact that he would consider marrying her AT ALL is very strange, [Arl Eamon suggested leaving Anora for another woman to make heirs and his reasoning was Anora was almost 30, Celene is even older!!!] but it's there so we must make of it as it is.

Cailan was not a great general, Loghain did all his tactics for him. He wasn't much of a King, he never even stepped foot in an alienage because he wasn't allowed [his own words and he's KING] Cailan was, at best, a good warrior and a nice guy with his heart in the right place. Those are good attributes, but not kingly ones.

And as for Orlesian chevaliers...  Are the Ferelden nobility much better?  What about the dwarven oligarchs? And the continued oppression of the elves...

First off, to be fair, EVERYONE oppresses the Elves. Orlais does even worse than Ferelden: At least in Ferelden they have alienages and can make  honest livings. In Orlais they are commonly used as SLAVES. Not household servants or indentured, just plain old Slaves. Anora's own handmaiden is an Escaped Slave. And the antics of a few Ferelden Nobles pales in comparison to what Chevaliers can do - There are LEGIONS of them, and they all have the same rights: For being Knights, you can do whatever the hell you want to the common folk. It's the same basic problem but multiplied many times over.

To be completely fair though, both countries are still better than Tevinter and the Qunari would treat elves. [former use them in blood magic rituals, latter obliterate them]


Anyway before anyone say it, I don't think Anora was a good Queen in game, but the game seems to state a lot of stuff as fact [she was a good queen, Loghain was a good general] that is never actually SHOWN in the game, and even when stuff goes south, the game still claims their reputation like none of the stuff happened. rly confusing

Modifié par Vicious, 24 janvier 2010 - 12:58 .

[Solica]

Vicious wrote...
Anyway before anyone say it, I don't think Anora was a good Queen in game, but the game seems to state a lot of stuff as fact [she was a good queen, Loghain was a good general] that is never actually SHOWN in the game, and even when stuff goes south, the game still claims their reputation like none of the stuff happened. rly confusing

There are in my mind a few really big weaknesses in the official story.

I think we can basically put that down to how hard it is to make a story like this with so many "faces", so many different experiences.
Also I think Bioware wanted to give the players some kind of receipt, upon finishing the game, how their actions may have influenced Ferelden. That's why we get the epilogues.

Personally, I think they were completely wrong to do that. We don't need the epilogues. And the epilogues constrict the freedom of making expansions and sequels. I don't like them at all. If the story is finished, then let it be. Let the player speculate about what happened next, or experience it in a sequel.

My way of consoling Loghain as a "good" general (which he definitely isn't, he's a good captain. ...or corporal) is simply to accept that he is perceived as a good general, by the people of Ferelden. In reality, he's just been lucky or have been able to rely on Maric, to cover for his flaws.
As for Anora, well, I'm damning her, because my first PC was a city elf, and because of the way she tries to get rid of my PC. But if you apply a more gracious view: Well she's not perfect, but who is? She makes some horrific mistakes, which would have meant the end of Ferelden, if she had been successful. She allows herself to be dominated by her father, but again, a difficult position for her. But ultimately, free of her father, and possessing the social skills she have, it's not totally out of question that she could have made a better than average job of governing Ferelden. I hate her, but I can like accept that as plausible.

The most difficult pieces to swallow, IMO, in the supposedly "official" story, is that "Howe acted alone". I don't believe that for a second, though I'm prepared to accept that the collusion might not have been complete. Also chiming in false, is the suggestion that Loghain would have charged at Ostagar, if he hadn't persuaded himself of that he wasn't sure of a victory. That just reeks of being part of a late, um, well, revision. There are too many details in the game pointing to him planning to use the battle to have the Wardens massacred, and what the h', lets do the king too.

Modifié par Solica, 24 janvier 2010 - 02:06 .

[melkathi]

The Gay Warden wrote...

There.

Well done ! 
We are proud of you!

[Xandurpein]

Solica wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...


It's funny how all rant about Anora being a peasant. The fact is that formally Alistair is the peasant, not she.

Lol, it's just semi-roleplay. A way to get in a perceived insult.
But I think it's also a reminder about her background, that she does not, cannot, share the values of the nobles. You can consider that positive or negative, I suppose it can be both, depending upon both the person and the nobles as a yard stick.

But no, formally, Alistair is of royal blood.

Alistair is an unacknowledged bastard. Unacknowledged bastards have absolutly no legal rights to title, lands or noble name. Alistair is legally the son of a serving whench and nothing more, unless Arl Eamon and the player convinces the Landsmeet to make him King.

An acknowledged bastard would still not be in line of succession, unless there was no other living heir available. Some acknowledged bastards would even start their own bloodlines, tied to the original one, but is only aknowledged bastards. Unacknowledged bastards simply had no legal rights at all and their status solely dependant on their mothers status, not to mention that their mother was a single mother which was very bad in the Medieval world, even if I don't think we know exactly how this is treated in Fereldan.

So legally Alistair is the son of a serving woman and Anora is the daughter of a Teyrn. That's it. Personally I wonder if Arl Eamon's push to make Alistar King has more to do with him having a guilt trip over abandoning Alistair than any sense of propriety.

/Edit. No... there where no rules for child support back then. Many still did pay for the kid to insure that the mother kept quiet and didn't make a scandal, but that had nothing to do with the law..

Modifié par Xandurpein, 24 janvier 2010 - 04:00 .

[Xandurpein]

Maria13 wrote...

 I agree that the similarities with the behaviour of unhardened Alistair are startling, but the point is Alistair is capable of being hardened and I would say that Cailan too is capable of learning.

Now this is something I never managed to understand. I can see that Cailan and Alistair share a general disinterest in ruling, and maybe taking fairy tales a bit too serious, but in other ways their personalities seems to me to be almost opposites.

Cailan is very confident,  to the point of being over-confident, loves to lead his army in battle and seems to be as much a womanizer as Maric was Alistair on the other hand doubts himself. doesn't want to lead and is generally awkward with women. Can you really see Alistair talking like Cailan does at Ostagar if he was King?

[Monica21]

Xandurpein wrote...

Solica wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...


It's funny how all rant about Anora being a peasant. The fact is that formally Alistair is the peasant, not she.

Lol, it's just semi-roleplay. A way to get in a perceived insult.
But I think it's also a reminder about her background, that she does not, cannot, share the values of the nobles. You can consider that positive or negative, I suppose it can be both, depending upon both the person and the nobles as a yard stick.

But no, formally, Alistair is of royal blood.

Alistair is an unacknowledged bastard. Unacknowledged bastards have absolutly no legal rights to title, lands or noble name. Alistair is legally the son of a serving whench and nothing more, unless Arl Eamon and the player convinces the Landsmeet to make him King.

An acknowledged bastard would still not be in line of succession, unless there was no other living heir available. Some acknowledged bastards would even start their own bloodlines, tied to the original one, but is only aknowledged bastards. Unacknowledged bastards simply had no legal rights at all and their status solely dependant on their mothers status, not to mention that their mother was a single mother which was very bad in the Medieval world, even if I don't think we know exactly how this is treated in Fereldan.

So legally Alistair is the son of a serving woman and Anora is the daughter of a Teyrn. That's it. Personally I wonder if Arl Eamon's push to make Alistar King has more to do with him having a guilt trip over abandoning Alistair than any sense of propriety.

/Edit. No... there where no rules for child support back then. Many still did pay for the kid to insure that the mother kept quiet and didn't make a scandal, but that had nothing to do with the law..

He was an unacknowledged bastard that apparently everyone knew about, even the gossipers in-game. I base that on the fact that Eamon didn't have to present any evidence at the Landsmeet to prove that Alistair was Maric's son.

As for Eamon's push, I think his motives were true. He wanted Alistair because he was the last surviving Theirin and wanted to keep a Theirin on the throne. I can't recall exactly what he says, but I thought he felt very strongly about not breaking the bloodline.

[Xandurpein]

Monica21 wrote...

As for Eamon's push, I think his motives were true. He wanted Alistair because he was the last surviving Theirin and wanted to keep a Theirin on the throne. I can't recall exactly what he says, but I thought he felt very strongly about not breaking the bloodline.

The point I was trying to make is that legally, at least in the real Medieval world, it doesn't matter one bit if the entire world knows about it. Legally acknowledging a bastard has nothing to do with admitting that he is the father, acknowledging a bastard means giving the bastard the right to part of your family. Proving somehow that Alistair is indeed Maric's son, doesn't suddenly make him an acknowledged bastard.

I suppose that in reality, the fact that everyone knew about Alistair, makes it easier for the Landsmeet to accept him as King, maybe even "retroactivly" pass some law making him Maric's son. But before the Landsmeet he is not in any way Maric's heir, at least not legally.

This is another example of how people tend to reason from a present day perspective, rahter than from a medieval perspective.

[Monica21]

I understand your point and agree with it, I just failed to make that clear. While he is unacknowledged however, it would seem that not only Eamon but the rest of the nobles prefer to keep the Theirin line intact despite Alistair's bastard status.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Monica21 wrote...

I understand your point and agree with it, I just failed to make that clear. While he is unacknowledged however, it would seem that not only Eamon but the rest of the nobles prefer to keep the Theirin line intact despite Alistair's bastard status.

Not necessarily so. Afterall the nobles will agree with Anora ruling on her own or with a King consort of non-Theirin blood. Only Eammon emphasised on the bloodline. And to his credit, there is a certain validity in his argument. But not enough to convince me that Anora (and the PC) aren't better for the job.

[Xandurpein]

Monica21 wrote...

I understand your point and agree with it, I just failed to make that clear. While he is unacknowledged however, it would seem that not only Eamon but the rest of the nobles prefer to keep the Theirin line intact despite Alistair's bastard status.

I agree with you that this is Eamon's wish yes. But don't forget that it takes a lot of influence from the player  activly promoting that idea if it is to succede. You can push through this idea if you want, or you can choose not to.

[RangerSG]

Maria13 wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...


It's funny how all rant about Anora being a peasant. The fact is that formally Alistair is the peasant, not she.

And a good point.. Anyone know any examples of bastards (I mean the fatherless kinds, there are plenty of the others) inheriting thrones?  I don't.  I know examples of bastards being better all round leaders and commanders that the monarchs (Phillip the second of Spain and his bastard brother Don Juan de Austria, who led the Spanish navel force at Lepanto) but not actually securing the throne... It would set too dangerous a precedent.

Well, William the Conqueror was a bastard (in fact, "the bastard" was his original title) and he inherited the Duchy of Normandy before taking the English throne.

[Xandurpein]

RangerSG wrote...

Maria13 wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...


It's funny how all rant about Anora being a peasant. The fact is that formally Alistair is the peasant, not she.

And a good point.. Anyone know any examples of bastards (I mean the fatherless kinds, there are plenty of the others) inheriting thrones?  I don't.  I know examples of bastards being better all round leaders and commanders that the monarchs (Phillip the second of Spain and his bastard brother Don Juan de Austria, who led the Spanish navel force at Lepanto) but not actually securing the throne... It would set too dangerous a precedent.

Well, William the Conqueror was a bastard (in fact, "the bastard" was his original title) and he inherited the Duchy of Normandy before taking the English throne.

Yes, but William the Conqueror was an acknowledged bastard. His father even named him his legitimate heir. William was the only son of Robert. Duke of Normandy and Robert named William his heir before he died.  Maric never acknowledged Alistair. So it's not at all the same.

[Maria13]

Don Juan was also an acknowledged bastard.

[RangerSG]

Xandurpein wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

Maria13 wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...


It's funny how all rant about Anora being a peasant. The fact is that formally Alistair is the peasant, not she.

And a good point.. Anyone know any examples of bastards (I mean the fatherless kinds, there are plenty of the others) inheriting thrones?  I don't.  I know examples of bastards being better all round leaders and commanders that the monarchs (Phillip the second of Spain and his bastard brother Don Juan de Austria, who led the Spanish navel force at Lepanto) but not actually securing the throne... It would set too dangerous a precedent.

Well, William the Conqueror was a bastard (in fact, "the bastard" was his original title) and he inherited the Duchy of Normandy before taking the English throne.

Yes, but William the Conqueror was an acknowledged bastard. His father even named him his legitimate heir. William was the only son of Robert. Duke of Normandy and Robert named William his heir before he died.  Maric never acknowledged Alistair. So it's not at all the same.

Bastards always had to be "legitimized" first. Acknowledgement was not really the issue, legitimization was the issue. Maric may not have acknowledged Alistair, but both Maric and Loghain acknowledged his blood (so does Anora). So there seems to be attempt at hiding him either. Now, the Landsmeet, we have to assume, would 'legitimize' Alistair so he could inherit.

And in effect, since Maric's only other son is dead, it is much the same case. And of course, this distinction only held true in socieites influenced by the old Salic laws and Carolingian inheritance.

[JrayM16]

Cailan made a bad impression on me from the moment I met him.

[Xandurpein]

RangerSG wrote...

Bastards always had to be "legitimized" first. Acknowledgement was not really the issue, legitimization was the issue. Maric may not have acknowledged Alistair, but both Maric and Loghain acknowledged his blood (so does Anora). So there seems to be attempt at hiding him either. Now, the Landsmeet, we have to assume, would 'legitimize' Alistair so he could inherit.

And in effect, since Maric's only other son is dead, it is much the same case. And of course, this distinction only held true in socieites influenced by the old Salic laws and Carolingian inheritance.

I agree, that is pretty much what I tried to say. A Landsmeet can legitimize Alistair, but up until then he is not a legitimate heir to anything. I did use the word acknowledge, because I think that's what they said in the game, but if you say legitimize is the correct word, I believe you.

My point was moslty aimed at those who claim that Anora somehow tries to take the throne from the "legitimate heir" as this is nonsense. A Landsmeet can make Alistar Maric's legitimate heir and King of Fereldan of course, but then again a Landsmeet can pretty much make anyone KIng, if all present agree to it.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Vicious wrote...
First off, to be fair, EVERYONE oppresses the Elves. Orlais does even worse than Ferelden: At least in Ferelden they have alienages and can make  honest livings. In Orlais they are commonly used as SLAVES. Not household servants or indentured, just plain old Slaves.

Leliana sez something completely different...


Now, speeaking of Cailan - wihtout the devs actually telling us, we can only speculate. We have no idea how smart and manipulative he really was. We see him only shortly and hear from him from a few others, most of whom might very well be lying or not know the truth.
So some people see Cailans behavior at Ostagar as stupidity and gloryseeking. Far enough, it cna be interpreted like that. But ti's no the only interpretation.
Him being constantly confident in victory - is that shortsightednes and bravado, or good acting and morale boosting?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Food for thought: http://www.weddingve...meaning/cailan/
Coincidence?

[Xandurpein]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Food for thought: http://www.weddingve...meaning/cailan/
Coincidence?

A hidden joke maybe...