310 réponses à ce sujet

[theskymoves]

Ah, I see. Thanks.

 

As far as I've been able to determine, the only 'official' bits of Loghain's fade nightmare that exist in the wild (via the toolset files) are the morphs that were to be used for Maric and Cailan, the core soundset for Fade!Maric and Fade!Kid!Cailan, and character files (UTC/CHR) for those two... there's no finished scene or any dialogue that I've been able to find buried anywhere.

 

The description in the CHR for Fade!Maric reads:

 

Fade spirit in the form of the late King Maric. This spirit takes on Maric's form to torment Loghain. The imposter Maric is noble and jovial.

 

And the description for Fade!Kid!Cailan read:

 

Fade spirit who has taken the form of the young King Cailan in order to torture Loghain. The young Cailan is enthusiastic and cheerful.

 

A fan made a machinima of what the scene might have looked like, but I believe it is all conjecture, down to the appearances of the two Theirins... that's definitely not the 'official' Maric morph, and I don't believe that is Bioware's version of kid!Cailan.

 

/obnoxious and overbearing pedantry

 

ETA that this is Bioware!Maric's morph (in the toolset):

and this is Bioware!Kid!Cailan:

 

/even more obnoxious and overbearing pedantry

[sylvanaerie]

Wow, this argument finds yet another thread.  I've already posted my views a thousand times on this subject.  Gonna just pop some corn sit back in my seat and watch the drama unfold...

[TheMadHarridan]

@theskymoves: I thought the video was quite good and insightful, and thank you for posting it. Definitely how I would have imagined Loghain's nightmare to play out. I definitely liked the depiction of Maric, as that's about what I imagined he would look like.

 

As for the official Bioware morphs, Kid!Cailan looks appropriate, but what on earth were they thinking with that morph of Maric? He looks like a thinner, blonder Lloyd. Yuck! 

[Elfyoth]

I was having this discussion today with a friend and thought I would try to get some insight from you fine folks. Was Loghain justified in what he did at Ostagar? My friend seems to think so. I do not, however. I feel like he is a war criminal. That doesn't mean I'm ignoring the fact that he was a hero and did great things for Ferelden. And if he did have a good reason for leaving his king to die to fall to the darkspawn, I would certainly hear him out.

 

My friend seems to think he had a good reason  - there were too many darkspawn, and even if he sent his troops in to reinforce those that were already fighting, they still would have lost the battle. He points to the Ostagar DLC as evidence, where one of Cailan's men says the battle was already lost. It's been a long time since I've played that DLC, so I can't really say if that's what was really said or not.

 

Nevertheless, it's got me thinking about the whole thing. I do remember the landsmeet rather well, and Loghain didn't make any arguments that swayed me. He seemed like a man driven by prejudice and paranoia, so much so that he would sacrifice his king and anyone else who got in his way. The threat of Orlais, however, was distant, and as Cailan put it, "a thing of the past."

 

So, what say you? Am I right or am I wrong on this?

 

 

Beware! This post may contain spoilers of DA:O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Loghain Betrayed Cailain becouse he thought he was to much focused on Glory and acted with no resposebillity on the throne on he's eyes, and most Fereldan's eyes if they knew he was going to marry Celene the empress of Orlais, But leaving the very last Grey wardens of Fereldan in a Battle against the Darkspawn that can destroy the world, and leaving so many soliders that have families, and betreying them by leaving with he's men, that not right in my opinnion. Eventually everyone have an opinnion

[theskymoves]

@theskymoves: I thought the video was quite good and insightful, and thank you for posting it. Definitely how I would have imagined Loghain's nightmare to play out. I definitely liked the depiction of Maric, as that's about what I imagined he would look like.

 

As for the official Bioware morphs, Kid!Cailan looks appropriate, but what on earth were they thinking with that morph of Maric? He looks like a thinner, blonder Lloyd. Yuck! 

 

IIRC, Bioware!Maric's morph is largely based on Loghain's. (And I agree that it's pretty awful... so awful I spent way too much time trying to make one that merged the features of his sons.)

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

When should someone save someone?  perhaps it should be scheduled.  Last I checked, a lord swears fealty to their king.  Anything short of loyalty could be seen as traitorous.  It does not look good to return home unscathed with all of your men when your King lies dead.

He didn't return with all his men. The ones in the valley were apparently Loghain's too.

 

The survivor may not, but the law and authority remains; thus there are trials and resultant penalties facing those found guilty of desertion causing death. Loghain is true believer, but it does not make him right.

The problem is that some codes of law specifically realize that insisting the law be followed even when breaking it is for the best can cause miscarriages of justice, and therefore specifically allow for the legal defense of necessity (ie. I did what I had to do) to mitigate or remove legal culpability if the defense can make a good case that what they did was better all around than that the law be followed. Which does seem like a rather Ferelden interpretation of it given how many laws you can ignore as the Arl of Amaranthine and how few complaints you get from anyone not specifically harmed. (Though perhaps it should be noted that that defense is not accepted as a defense against murder charges, at least in the United States.)

 

 

3) Logain made a crown for himself

We don't know when that happened, though. A suitably simple crown (which we can't know Loghain's wasn't since the devs haven't actually shown it to us) might have been possible to complete even assuming that Denerim was the first stop from Lothering, given that the Warden would be walking that distance on foot and that Loghain is apparently meant to have been in Denerim before the Warden arrived at Lothering. And given that the programmers seem to have assumed that Denerim was the last stop (judging by Gorim acknowledging the Landsmeet even if it hasn't started yet), Loghain's goldsmiths seem to have had a whole year to work on it canonically.

[Elhanan]

The problem is that some codes of law specifically realize that insisting the law be followed even when breaking it is for the best can cause miscarriages of justice, and therefore specifically allow for the legal defense of necessity (ie. I did what I had to do) to mitigate or remove legal culpability if the defense can make a good case that what they did was better all around than that the law be followed. Which does seem like a rather Ferelden interpretation of it given how many laws you can ignore as the Arl of Amaranthine and how few complaints you get from anyone not specifically harmed. (Though perhaps it should be noted that that defense is not accepted as a defense against murder charges, at least in the United States.

If the individual soldier were to choose to desert and leave his other men because he believed them unworthy of rescue, then he should defend that belief to the related courts, be it military or civilian. In Loghain's case, there are several witnesses against his actions. However, in the Landsmeet, he is judged not for these actions, but for other crimes; some linked to the military action like the tortured Noble.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

If the individual soldier were to choose to desert and leave his other men because he believed them unworthy of rescue, then he should defend that belief to the related courts, be it military or civilian. In Loghain's case, there are several witnesses against his actions. However, in the Landsmeet, he is judged not for these actions, but for other crimes; some linked to the military action like the tortured Noble.

That's not precisely the case Loghain is making; he is arguing that rescuing them, though it would be good for the country if he managed it, is impossible. I don't think that retreat under such circumstances legally qualifies as desertion in most militaries (assuming you put yourself right back at the disposal of your country, as Loghain, Uldred, Wynne, and arguably the Wardens did and as Carver, Aveline, and a non-mage Hawke neglected to do), though admittedly I've never read that statute and could be wrong. In short, I believe that the Landsmeet considering the Wardens' accusations of treason at Ostagar to be a point against the Warden, and for them to require things other than Ostagar to condemn Loghain for, is as it should be.

[Elhanan]

That's not precisely the case Loghain is making; he is arguing that rescuing them, though it would be good for the country if he managed it, is impossible. I don't think that retreat under such circumstances legally qualifies as desertion in most militaries (assuming you put yourself right back at the disposal of your country, as Loghain, Uldred, Wynne, and arguably the Wardens did and as Carver, Aveline, and a non-mage Hawke neglected to do), though admittedly I've never read that statute and could be wrong. In short, I believe that the Landsmeet considering the Wardens' accusations of treason at Ostagar to be a point against the Warden, and for them to require things other than Ostagar to condemn Loghain for, is as it should be.

The reason I included the Landsmeet as a civilian court; not a military one. Loghain is not supposed to be tried here for the events of Ostagar, though some later events might be associated with it. But as a Player, I judge Loghain by the evidence I am able to see and witness, and hold him accountable for those actions; his military trial, as it were.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

The reason I included the Landsmeet as a civilian court; not a military one. Loghain is not supposed to be tried here for the events of Ostagar, though some later events might be associated with it. But as a Player, I judge Loghain by the evidence I am able to see and witness, and hold him accountable for those actions; his military trial, as it were.

Original Post: Unless the burden of proof is lower in a military court, I still don't think you have enough for those.

 

Additional Notes: I don't really know how that answers my argument. Nor do I think it's entirely true, since while most of the people there seem to have accepted Loghain's story on Ostagar, the Warden does have to face accusations in that direction from Loghain. (I also think I remember reading that there are some nobles who express doubt in Loghain if you pick that option, but Loghain has a good enough case that it still on the whole works out badly for you. I wouldn't know since I don't pick that option.)

[Elhanan]

Unless the burden of proof is lower in a military court, I still don't think you have enough for those.

As the Warden, we all do. Some here find him not guilty. In my games, I usually condemn the General to death; be it at the Landsmeet, or by allowing him to sacrifice himself by killing the Archdemon. Only once that I recall did I allow him to live into the events of DAA.

Believe that is what this and other like threads are about; discussions concerning judicial reviews.

[Mike3207]

Wow, this argument finds yet another thread.  I've already posted my views a thousand times on this subject.  Gonna just pop some corn sit back in my seat and watch the drama unfold...

Just a thousand times? Slacker.

[Undead Han]

No.

 

Loghain almost destroyed his country. The Blight would have overrun Ferelden if not for the Warden surviving and foiling Loghain's plans.

[X Equestris]

If the individual soldier were to choose to desert and leave his other men because he believed them unworthy of rescue, then he should defend that belief to the related courts, be it military or civilian. In Loghain's case, there are several witnesses against his actions. However, in the Landsmeet, he is judged not for these actions, but for other crimes; some linked to the military action like the tortured Noble.

Loghain did no desert. He withdrew. Besides, you overestimate the court system of a feudal society like Ferelden. The lords act as judges. With Cailan dead, that leaves Anora. She isn't going to judge her father guilty of such crimes.

[Elhanan]

Loghain did no desert. He withdrew. Besides, you overestimate the court system of a feudal society like Ferelden. The lords act as judges. With Cailan dead, that leaves Anora. She isn't going to judge her father guilty of such crimes.

I believe he deserted his post. However, in context, I believe I was responding to someone willing to leave leaders and men due to feelings of their lack of a standard; sounds homicidal and quite chaotic to me.

And all courts are flawed, as they are made up of humanity. Still, it is the established authority, and should respect the process unless it can be proven to be corrupt.

[dragonflight288]

Original Post: Unless the burden of proof is lower in a military court, I still don't think you have enough for those.

 

Additional Notes: I don't really know how that answers my argument. Nor do I think it's entirely true, since while most of the people there seem to have accepted Loghain's story on Ostagar, the Warden does have to face accusations in that direction from Loghain. (I also think I remember reading that there are some nobles who express doubt in Loghain if you pick that option, but Loghain has a good enough case that it still on the whole works out badly for you. I wouldn't know since I don't pick that option.)

 

I have. On my first playthrough.  

 

A noble does comment on it, but it's the noble who always votes for the Wardens no matter what. Bringing up Ostagar doesn't help the Warden out at all. Bringing up the threat of the Blight being more pressing than Orlais is far more effective, and it's the only way to get Arl Wulf to side with you. 

[Mike3207]

You're dealing with the possible destruction of the Fereldan army, and the ability of the darkspawn to destroy the entire country at their leisure. Next to that, it's hard to make the case that Loghain made the wrong decision. if there's one thing we know about Loghain, he'll do anything for Ferelden.

[Darkly Tranquil]

I don't think there will ever be a definitive resolution regarding the validity of Loghain's actions at Ostagar, there are just too many unknown variables to make an informed judgment. Hence why we're still arguing about it years later. David Gaider is probably the only one who knows for sure, but he will never tell, since it provides him with an endless supply of lulz.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

I don't think there will ever be a definitive resolution regarding the validity of Loghain's actions at Ostagar, there are just too many unknown variables to make an informed judgment. Hence why we're still arguing about it years later. David Gaider is probably the only one who knows for sure, but he will never tell, since it provides him with an endless supply of lulz.

He gave his take, noting that some people would not accept it. He says that Loghain at least believed he had no chance of saving Cailan. And yet the debate continues.

 

I believe he deserted his post. However, in context, I believe I was responding to someone willing to leave leaders and men due to feelings of their lack of a standard; sounds homicidal and quite chaotic to me.

And all courts are flawed, as they are made up of humanity. Still, it is the established authority, and should respect the process unless it can be proven to be corrupt.

First paragraph: Okay, but there's pretty good circumstantial evidence, and word of devs, that that's not what happened here.

 

Last sentence: I agree that that's usually the correct course of action. That said, if you think about it, that's actually the exact opposite of what the Guerrins do to save Ferelden from the darkspawn.

[Aimi]

The reason I included the Landsmeet as a civilian court; not a military one.

It's worth pointing out that this is not a particularly clear distinction. Even though much of their legal authority stems from their rights of administration and petition over their lands, the banns and arls are also the commanders, staffers, and suppliers of the king's army. In other threads, I've analogized Ferelden's Landsmeet not to the English Parliament (which I think is hopelessly anachronistic) but to the "army assembly"-style comitati of the early medieval Western European kingdoms - Merovingian Francia, Gothic Italy and Spain, Vandal Africa. Given the participants in the Landsmeet, as well as its remit, I think this is a better comparison.

---

On a similar note, I think that attempting to figure out whether Loghain's actions specifically qualified as "treason" or "desertion" is a dead end. We don't know Ferelden's laws. Real-world comparisons are slim pickings. For example, Ine's Law is silent on the subject of treason (it merely imposes fines for failing to participate in military service). England only got its first clear, consistent definition of "treason" in 1351. In that law, a man is guilty of treason if he "compasse[s] or imagine[s] the death of the king", but whether Loghain's actions qualify as that is open to debate.

And as I've tried to point out in my own thread, it was and is impossible for Loghain to have known how successful attacking the darkspawn would have been. He did not have a view of the battlefield - that was the whole point of using the tower. Even if he did, it would be effectively impossible for him to have known if his attack would succeed. This was not 'just the facts' or a straightforward calculation. It would be the gut instinct of a reasonably experienced soldier who all the same had had no formal scientific schooling in warfare and who possessed intrinsically limited amounts of information about his opponent. Premodern battle was a lottery that defied prediction; premodern generals trusted in 'instincts', not ratiocination.

And then there's the whole separate issue of where, exactly, Loghain proposed to beat the darkspawn if not at Ostagar. And how he planned to do it without the king, his men, or the Wardens. Construing the Battle of Ostagar as a choice between losing the army and keeping it alive is an entirely false dichotomy, and an overly simplistic one that stacks the deck in favor of Loghain's decision.

[Elhanan]

If Loghain could not see the battlefield, and was awaiting the signal, he could not have seen the numbers opposing the Wardens and the King. Thus, he could not have known his plans to assist would fail; no good reason to withdraw. This does seem to work both ways.

But I yield all matters of legality; simply condemn the General on other crimes within the game. Excellent post!

[Sidney]

And then there's the whole separate issue of where, exactly, Loghain proposed to beat the darkspawn if not at Ostagar. And how he planned to do it without the king, his men, or the Wardens. Construing the Battle of Ostagar as a choice between losing the army and keeping it alive is an entirely false dichotomy, and an overly simplistic one that stacks the deck in favor of Loghain's decision.

 

 

This is a good point. The core of the army is wiped out at Ostagar. How saving his chunk will allow a fight on any better terms at some later date and place is unclear.

Even more is that Loghain insists this is no "true blight" so he should have an expectation of winning the field against a smallish horde. While it isn't clear from the cutscenes that he can't see the actual battle given the terrain it is unlikely he could have seen it from any angle where needing the light from the tower would matter.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

If Loghain could not see the battlefield, and was awaiting the signal, he could not have seen the numbers opposing the Wardens and the King. Thus, he could not have known his plans to assist would fail; no good reason to withdraw. This does seem to work both ways.

Except that given the length of the column, it's entirely possible he could have seen at least a portion of it without being able to see the battlefield. It would even make sense, since he'd need to have something of a clear channel to charge through. And the column is pretty much entirely continuous from all we see, which means he would have seen that the column continues without a break if he could see anything. Besides, the signal was meant to signal the approach of the last of the darkspawn. It is entirely rational for Loghain not to trust his own eyes for that even if he can see everything on the field. All it takes is one break in the line (though again, we don't see any) and Loghain's flankers are flanked. (I think I already pointed this out to you. I don't really remember getting an adequate response.)

[Elhanan]

Many of the torches seen are from his own troops, as they follow with him during his withdrawal. Even if he could see other Darkspawn, he seems to not have known how few or how many were fighting against the King. His inaction condemns him; either as a poor tactician and leader, or as one guilty of killing his own troops, the Wardens, and the King.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Many of the torches seen are from his own troops, as they follow with him during his withdrawal. Even if he could see other Darkspawn, he seems to not have known how few or how many were fighting against the King. His inaction condemns him; either as a poor tactician and leader, or as one guilty of killing his own troops, the Wardens, and the King.

And how many of the ones on the actual battlefield, charging Cailan's lines are from Loghain's troops?