310 réponses à ce sujet

[dragonflight288]

No, of course not.

 

1. Cailen agreed to fight before Olesian reinforcement. As Loghain wanted.

 

2. Loghain devised the strategy. The fact that Cailen decided to risk himself at front doesn't affect the outcome.

 

3. The strategy either failed, or Loghain failed it by betraying the king.

 

If latter, Loghain's betrayl is not justified.

 

If former, it's Loghain who made the strategy and dumped more than half of Ferelden's force to darksapwn.

 

How can anyoen say he is justified?

 

1. Duncan: Your uncle sends his greetings and reminds you that Redcliff forces can be here in less than a week.

    Cailan: Hah, Eamon just wants in on the glory.

 

    Warden: Why the wilds?

    Daveth: I hear the horde came out right in the center of the forest. That's they the armies here. Dangling meat in front of the bear if you take my meaning.

 

    Cailan: There are plenty of darkspawn on the field, but there have been no signs of any archdemon...

    Duncan: Disappointed, your majesty?

    Cailan: I hoped for a war like in the tales! A king riding with the fabled Grey Wardens against a tainted god....but I suppose this'll have to do.

 

To the point, Cailan was anxious for the fight, was drawing the darkspawn out, and didn't even want to wait for local reinforcements, let alone Orlesian ones, whom Loghain did not want. But in DA2, Loghain accepted help from Lord Herriman, who was sending men and supplies to battle the blight. This tells me that it wasn't reinforcements that Loghain opposed, merely Orlesian ones. After what happened with Nevarra during and after the Third Blight, I don't blame him. 

 

2. Loghain: You risk too much Cailan! The darkspawn horde is too dangerous to be playing hero on the front lines. 

 

    Guard: He and the king have been arguing for days!

 

Loghain did plan the strategy, but he was also going out of his way to try and convince Cailan not to fight on the front lines, saying, quite accurately, that it was too dangerous. Cailan wanted nothing to do with it. He only wanted the glory of fighting with the Wardens. 

 

Yes, Cailan risking himself wouldn't have changed the outcome, but him not risking himself would've prevented a succession crises, a civil war, and pretty much the majority of Ferelden's troubles, from Loghain being apolitical and way too blunt for nobles to get over, and nobles wanting to take advantage of the power vacuum, or like Teagan, opposing a united Ferelden for idealistic reasons. These problems would have been avoided had Cailan listened to Loghain.

 

3.  Or they were simply overrun to such a degree that communication lines broke down and they couldn't adapt properly. Plans in war, and chess, rarely survive first contact. You make a plan to give yourself an advantage, then adjust as the circumstances change. 

 

The plan failed simply because there were far too many darkspawn. And we know that there were men stationed at the Tower securing it. The guard at Ishal when we arrive says it's sealed before the battle while they secure the lower chambers. We show up and men are fighting outside, there are corpses all over inside, and the darkspawn are crawling all over the place. What forces there were were overwhelmed so fast, by such a superior force that they didn't have time to adjust. As the battle started, we get to the Tower and we are told it had fallen before the battle truly begun, and Alistair and the Warden decide to fight their way up and light the beacon. 

 

That is good as it shows improvisation, the flaw on the Warden's and Alistair's part, was not sending a messenger to inform Loghain that the tower had fallen, and we know from the developers that the beacon was lit over an hour late, and since Loghain knew the plan, he made it, that doesn't look good for the Wardens, who were the ones put in charge of lighting it. 

 

Also, it doesn't help that Loghain personally saw the Wardens, Duncan's predecessor actually, make a deal with the darkspawn before, meaning the Architect. 

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

The interesting thing is that it's not even all that clear that he did try to rally Ferelden against the darkspawn. He refers obliquely to a crisis that must be responded to sensibly, but he may as well be talking about his phantom Orlesian threat as about the horde. One doesn't even need to accept Loghain's culpability in the outbreak of civil war to point at his failure to defend Ferelden from the Blight.

There is no evidence of Loghain even attempting to engage the darkspawn and a fairly instructive example of him refusing to do so: the withdrawal immediately after Ostagar stripped Lothering of its defenses as well. Instead of posting troops there, he hastened to Denerim with, apparently, his full army, in order to immediately stake his claim on the levers of power. That certainly looks guilty, even if it's also, potentially, quite pragmatic for even a relatively innocent Loghain to have done. Perhaps he guessed that he would face opposition from the country's nobles and wanted as many troops as he could muster to intimidate them and steal a march on a potential rebellion, but that still underlines the extent to which he focused on defeating internal opponents to the exclusion of the darkspawn. And that was the point I was trying to make.

And although it isn't necessarily true that Loghain's focus on Orlais at the Landsmeet can be back-traced to the immediate aftermath of Ostagar, I think that it's not an unreasonable reconstruction based on his reaction to Cailan's suggestion of waiting for the Orlesian Wardens. (A total red herring, because waiting for Orlais - or Arl Eamon - would've required the army to somehow retreat from Ostagar in the face of a nearby and numerically superior enemy. Loghain presumably managed to do it because the king's army and the Wardens were a blood sacrifice that kept the horde occupied while the main army escaped. Giving up a chunk of the army in a hopeless sacrificial rearguard action...well, it might've been necessary, but there's only so far one can retreat. If Cailan chose to wait for either group in place at Ostagar, the darkspawn would still have attacked anyway.)

Loghain's exact words were "We must defeat this darkspawn incursion, but we must do so sensibly and without hesitation." We know that he seals his borders too, but he seems to recognize the darkspawn incursion as a major, immediate threat for all that he doesn't think there's an Archdemon involved. But again, the rebellious nobles are between Loghain and the horde. They live right next to where his supply trains will have to move through. It's only around the point where Loghain is said to have basically won that you'd expect to see Loghain sending soldiers to battle the spawn. (Though I will note as a point in your favor that we see no evidence of him doing so even then, and for another that Arl Wulff states that he's afraid Loghain will "let the darkspawn take the whole country for fear of Orlais." Though the latter could also refer to Loghain barring the borders to Orlesian aid.)

 

As for his withdrawal from Lothering, I think even a relatively innocent Loghain would have done that, for two reasons. One: while he seems to have honestly wanted the nation to rally around him of their own free will, it's possible he realized he needed more soldiers for the semi-legitimate power grab he was planning. (I say semi-legitimate because while I'm being generous when I describe Anora's claim as debatable, she was to all appearances the only obvious choice out of the potential heirs left. For Eamon to say that an unacknowledged royal bastard is the only one with a better claim than Anora should say something about their other options.) Two: Lothering just really does not look that defensible.

[WarriorOfLight999]

My personal thoughts on Loghain:

 

Ostagar was not a betrayal. It was a hard choice to save what remained of his men. I have plenty of other issues with Loghain, but this is not one of them.

 

- The guy gave up Rowan, the love of his life, for Maric. He's tirelessly fought for the freedom of Ferelden, for thirty years. Why betray all of that at Ostagar? For power? I don't believe it. He's arrogant, but not a seeker of power.

- Cailan was a fool, and was planning to marry Celene, thus ruining Ferelden. Not to mention the whole battle strategy was doomed from the beginning, with our golden king trying to play hero.

- Neither Cailan, nor Loghain knew how to slay the Archdemon. This is crucial tactical information that Duncan foolishly withheld.

- Duncan only recruited two dozen Wardens, and never investigated Soldiers' Peak. Nor did he ask for transfers from other countries like Rivain or Nevarra, as opposed to Orlais.

- Loghain's distrust of the Grey Warden Order is understandable, given the events of The Calling.

 

Ultimately, it was the darkspawn who compromised the Tower of Ishal, killed King Cailan and the Wardens, and also killed much of the royal army. I hold them responsible.

[Aren]

My personal thoughts on Loghain:

 

Ostagar was not a betrayal. It was a hard choice to save what remained of his men. I have plenty of other issues with Loghain, but this is not one of them.

 

- The guy gave up Rowan, the love of his life, for Maric. He's tirelessly fought for the freedom of Ferelden, for thirty years. Why betray all of that at Ostagar? For power? I don't believe it. He's arrogant, but not a seeker of power.

- Cailan was a fool, and was planning to marry Celene, thus ruining Ferelden. Not to mention the whole battle strategy was doomed from the beginning, with our golden king trying to play hero.

- Neither Cailan, nor Loghain knew how to slay the Archdemon. This is crucial tactical information that Duncan foolishly withheld.

- Duncan only recruited two dozen Wardens, and never investigated Soldiers' Peak. Nor did he ask for transfers from other countries like Rivain or Nevarra, as opposed to Orlais.

- Loghain's distrust of the Grey Warden Order is understandable, given the events of The Calling.

 

Ultimately, it was the darkspawn who compromised the Tower of Ishal, killed King Cailan and the Wardens, and also killed much of the royal army. I hold them responsible.

This is Gaider recoton, loghain was an evil character before the DLC return to ostagar came out, you cannot accuse  Cailan of nothing he maybe is a fool for your view point, but he doesn't deserve to die, and he have not marry Celene.

[blahblahblah]

This is Gaider recoton, loghain was an evil character before the DLC return to ostagar came out, you cannot accuse  Cailan of nothing he maybe is a fool for your view point, but he doesn't deserve to die, and he have not marry Celene.

HEHEEHE, this is not retcon. Gaider once posted that Celene will visit Denerim but it was cut to game and the DLC show all of it. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

[Monica21]

This is Gaider recoton, loghain was an evil character before the DLC return to ostagar came out, you cannot accuse  Cailan of nothing he maybe is a fool for your view point, but he doesn't deserve to die, and he have not marry Celene.

 

That is... not a refutation of any of the points WarriorOfLight999 made.

 

And for what it's worth, no, Cailan didn't deserve to die. So maybe then he should have listened to Loghain and not put himself in such direct danger.

[Merle McClure II]

Just to point out that when Gaider attempts one of his clumsy retcons he ALWAYS says "Well we REALLY wanted to show 'X' ... but we had to cut it because we didn't have the time/resources to do it." ... He even says this when the team in fact had the time/resources to show the exact opposite (Voiceover of Alistair describing the exact point when Templars are exposed to Lyrium and how he has never taken Lyrium.) or in cases where the "resource" cost is so tiny that the entire argument doesn't make a lot of sense. (Tranquils not having their "brands" in Origins.)

 

 

Now with that said, Return to Ostagar although giving Loghain some much needed character growth hardly redeems him or his betrayal as the actual diabolical aspects of his plot didn't happen during the battle. His retreat is "grey" enough that I'm inclined to give him the benefit of a doubt on that one, it's all of the OTHER things he set into motion, some prior to the battle that damns him. 

[Merle McClure II]

Edit Post function not working for me again, sorry about the double post.

 

 

----

 

Cheated 20 extra Cunning Points just to see what difference having a Cunning 30+ makes via the dialogs (Really, really like how a Mage handles Sloth during the Harrowing, my "old" favorite was to sass him on the Third Riddle as it was the only one that I actually didn't figure out on my first playthrough.) and I must say the Cunning Warden does make an excellent point ... WHY did the Darkspawn attack the tower itself? I'd have thought that they would have been more interested in pouring out behind our lines but there was little reason to enter the tower proper for that considering the underground tunnels would have given them access to the battlefield below and if they were concerned with overrunning the archers on the bridge then there really wasn't any reason at all to rampage through the upper levels.

 

 

--- Almost makes me wonder if there used to be an old abandoned plotline where Loghain really was working with the Darkspawn that didn't quite get cleaned up in production. (The first time I played through alarm bells started ringing the moment I talked to the soldier that kept you out of the Tower before the battle.)

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

--- Almost makes me wonder if there used to be an old abandoned plotline where Loghain really was working with the Darkspawn that didn't quite get cleaned up in production. (The first time I played through alarm bells started ringing the moment I talked to the soldier that kept you out of the Tower before the battle.)

It'd make more sense if Urthemiel was using Duncan and the PC to eavesdrop on the strategy meeting. For a human being to actually collaborate with the darkspawn makes no sense, not just because their interests don't usually line up but because the darkspawn would probably just unthinkingly attack and wouldn't understand much of what it was being told even were it subdued. Now, for Loghain to use the darkspawn in this fashion (which might have been what you meant, if so my apologies) might make more sense, though given that (if memory serves) you accept that Loghain didn't want Cailan dead I can't think what he'd gain thereby.

[Merle McClure II]

Well, I vaguely remember someone hinting that at one time Indoctranation ala Mass Effect was supposed to rear it's ugly head in the story but considering that I'm only barely remembering shreds of third hand information I'm just fishing on that point based off the unspoiled "vibe" that I got the first time I played through Ostagar coupled with the "high Cunning" comment.

 

 

---

 

As for what I accept regarding Loghain/Calian ... well, I believe that Loghain wasn't necessarily planning on retreating from Ostagar and leaving half the army to die, but to be quite frank that's mostly because I don't believe Loghain had a way to know that the Hoard was large enough to "finish" the job.  I do believe that Loghain had ill intentions towards Calian (Whether that meant regicide or "merely" locking the Child King in a tower somewhere while Loghain seized power and single-handedly saved Ferelden doesn't really matter as I see both as being possible for Loghain to decide.) and that he mostly wanted Calian away from the Front Lines for those ends.

 

I tend to believe that Loghain had ill intentions towards Calian mostly because otherwise it doesn't make a lot of sense for him to start plotting to rid himself of possible rivals "just in case" something bad happened to Calian on the battlefield and I haven't seen any theories that would explain what Loghain had to gain without getting Calian out of the way first. 

[ent1]

My personal thoughts on Loghain:

 

Ostagar was not a betrayal. It was a hard choice to save what remained of his men. I have plenty of other issues with Loghain, but this is not one of them.

 

- The guy gave up Rowan, the love of his life, for Maric. He's tirelessly fought for the freedom of Ferelden, for thirty years. Why betray all of that at Ostagar? For power? I don't believe it. He's arrogant, but not a seeker of power.

- Cailan was a fool, and was planning to marry Celene, thus ruining Ferelden. Not to mention the whole battle strategy was doomed from the beginning, with our golden king trying to play hero.

- Neither Cailan, nor Loghain knew how to slay the Archdemon. This is crucial tactical information that Duncan foolishly withheld.

- Duncan only recruited two dozen Wardens, and never investigated Soldiers' Peak. Nor did he ask for transfers from other countries like Rivain or Nevarra, as opposed to Orlais.

- Loghain's distrust of the Grey Warden Order is understandable, given the events of The Calling.

 

Ultimately, it was the darkspawn who compromised the Tower of Ishal, killed King Cailan and the Wardens, and also killed much of the royal army. I hold them responsible.

 

How to kill the Archdemon wasn't relevant at the time, since it was yet unknown whether there was an Archdemon involved. Both Loghain and Cailan are skeptical that there is a blight.

 

As for lack of Wardens, there is an entire army of Wardens in Orlais. Duncan doesn't need to recruit one. He only needs to get Loghain to accept help from the Orlesian wardens, which he will not do.

 

You can debate Loghain's motives for leaving the field in Ostagar. Perhaps he saw the battle was hopeless and made the right tactical decision. However, it's what he does after the fact that seals his fate. He blames the Grey Wardens, when it was clearly not their fault. He enlists Howe to purge his enemies in Ferelden. He may not have been power mad before Ostagar, but he clearly was after.

[Monica21]

Well, I vaguely remember someone hinting that at one time Indoctranation ala Mass Effect was supposed to rear it's ugly head in the story but considering that I'm only barely remembering shreds of third hand information I'm just fishing on that point based off the unspoiled "vibe" that I got the first time I played through Ostagar coupled with the "high Cunning" comment.

 

 

---

 

As for what I accept regarding Loghain/Calian ... well, I believe that Loghain wasn't necessarily planning on retreating from Ostagar and leaving half the army to die, but to be quite frank that's mostly because I don't believe Loghain had a way to know that the Hoard was large enough to "finish" the job.  I do believe that Loghain had ill intentions towards Calian (Whether that meant regicide or "merely" locking the Child King in a tower somewhere while Loghain seized power and single-handedly saved Ferelden doesn't really matter as I see both as being possible for Loghain to decide.) and that he mostly wanted Calian away from the Front Lines for those ends.

 

I tend to believe that Loghain had ill intentions towards Calian mostly because otherwise it doesn't make a lot of sense for him to start plotting to rid himself of possible rivals "just in case" something bad happened to Calian on the battlefield and I haven't seen any theories that would explain what Loghain had to gain without getting Calian out of the way first. 

 

The writers have actually already answered this, but if you want to continue to be confused while you try to find your own justification for Loghain being The Bad Guy then by all means. Have at it.

[Merle McClure II]

*snorts* Ignoring for a moment the fact that the Gaidar quote Rivedales actually dug up not actually supporting the "Loghain is innocent" crowd; Gaidar's rather large credibility problem when it comes to his history of clumsy and UNSUPORTED retcons has already been hashed out, but by all means, if you want to continue to stick your fingers in your ear and ignore the fact that you are unable to back up your position using things that actually appear in the game itself, have at it. (At least Tolkien had the decency to actually go back and change the source material when he retconned "The Hobbit".)  

 

 

Oh, by the way, I'm still waiting for the "perfectly good" theory you so "cockily" CLAIM to have that explains how "Loghain per Gaidar as told by the pro Loghainites" doesn't turn a rather interesting and smart anti-villain into a muppet reject. --- Remember I expect you to actually be able to back up your theory using stuff that we get to see in game.

[Monica21]

See, here's my issue. There is no such thing as a "Loghain is innocent" crowd. No one is claiming that Loghain is innocent. There are opinions that have varying degrees of guilt and varying degrees of punishment, and that's it. Because you believe that such a crowd exists however, there's really no point in trying to have a discussion with you.

 

And again, trying to bait me into replying to a theory that I find ridiculous by calling me cocky is never going to work.

 

I appreciate that you're new to the game and/or to the forum, but you don't seem to realize that many of us have been having these discussions for five years. That's great that you're very invested in your opinion, so be invested in your opinion. You're not tired, but I am. Have fun.

[Xetykins]

If its not in game and the lore then it did not happen. Its all well and good that the writers says.something as an after thought. But what they show us ingame specially the cut scenes says otherwise.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

If its not in game and the lore then it did not happen. Its all well and good that the writers says.something as an after thought. But what they show us ingame specially the cut scenes says otherwise.

If you want to argue that it's non-canon then fine, but I don't think that it contradicts any canon material that would actually be accepted as decent evidence when discussing real life events. If you have something, present it, but I don't think you can make any case stronger than "WoG is not canon because it's not the game."

[Monica21]

If its not in game and the lore then it did not happen. Its all well and good that the writers says.something as an after thought. But what they show us ingame specially the cut scenes says otherwise.

 

I am not aware of anything the writers have said that contradicts what happens in-game. The writers answered direct questions to flesh out answers. Those answers provided context. Choosing to ignore those statements is a curiosity at best.

[Xetykins]

Ofc its not cannon. Its an after thought comments made by the writers. Unless its in some comics or books then its just what it is. A comment. Like when i played the game i was trying sooo hard to understand where this war hero loghain came from because all i saw was a paranoid delusional power hungry murderer person in game. Then i read the books and understand and accepted. That's fine. Just out of curiousity did david even write loghain and howe in the game?

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Ofc its not cannon. Its an after thought comments made by the writers. Unless its in some comics or books then its just what it is. A comment. Like when i played the game i was trying sooo hard to understand where this war hero loghain came from because all i saw was a paranoid delusional power hungry murderer person in game. Then i read the books and understand and accepted. That's fine. Just out of curiousity did david even write loghain and howe in the game?

You weren't aware that Loghain had previously been a war hero before you'd read the books? Eamon makes clear that that's how Loghain got where he was at the start of the game in the conversation after Loghain leaves the Arl of Redcliffe estate in Denerim. Eamon even expresses some personal admiration for Loghain's past achievements for all that the man's current actions necessitate taking him down.

[Monica21]

Ofc its not cannon. Its an after thought comments made by the writers. Unless its in some comics or books then its just what it is. A comment. Like when i played the game i was trying sooo hard to understand where this war hero loghain came from because all i saw was a paranoid delusional power hungry murderer person in game. Then i read the books and understand and accepted. That's fine. Just out of curiousity did david even write loghain and howe in the game?

Mary Kirby wrote Loghain. Also, ugh.

[Xetykins]

You weren't aware that Loghain had previously been a war hero before you'd read the books? Eamon makes clear that that's how Loghain got where he was at the start of the game in the conversation after Loghain leaves the Arl of Redcliffe estate in Denerim. Eamon even expresses some personal admiration for Loghain's past achievements for all that the man's current actions necessitate taking him down.

Its not that. Its the absence of his so called heroism in the game that made me really question that title and people's admiration towards the character. Being the hero of riverdane means absolutely nothing if you dont know the full story after all.

[Merle McClure II]

Monica, just a quick reminder, you were the one who originally called yourself cocky in one of these other threads and alluded to having this theory that I've come to believe is simply a smoke screen on your part. -- As for the "Loghain is innocent Crowd" bit, ok, perhaps then you could explain what you believe Loghain did then, because I've read opinions that do seem to want to whitewash him and lay virtually everything on Howe's head.

 

As for being tired ... ok, fair enough then, be tired, and if the perspective that I approach these sort of issues annoys you then stay "actively disengaged" from me as you claimed to be your wish in another thread. (Notice that until you actively reengaged here I had done my best to leave your posts alone.) Although we disagree Riverdales seems to at least entertain the same "in game evidence trumps" approach that I do and even though we don't actually get anywhere productive I enjoy those discussions.

 

----

 

Riverdales, I don't think a stronger case then; "Word of God doesn't matter if it doesn't represent what actually appears in game." is needed. (Gadiar being, well ... Gaidar probably does play a large part in people who feel as I do easily dismissing "But the Writers Said!") For a non Dragon Age example, it's my understanding that the original "Hobbit" had nothing to do with "The One Ring" and supposedly being able to travel to China was mentioned. Tolkien decided to retcon the story and actually went back and rewrote parts of the story to make The Hobbit a prequel to Lord of the Rings.

 

In Loghain's case however none of the original game was retouched to make Loghain's pre-Ostagar actions make any sense what-so-ever if he wasn't already plotting against Calian and Return to Ostagar seems to me to have been the prefect time to retcon the issue. (Personally I'm rather glad that RtO handled the issue fairly even handedly, Loghain gets some needed character spotlight and Calian is given a little more character then simply "Glory Hound".) But still we are told that Highever was totally Howe's fault because "The Writers said so!" --- Interestingly enough, the Gadiar quote that you managed to dig up is vague enough that it only reads that way if you already held that belief. I'd like to see some of these other quotes that supposedly exists, I'm pretty sure that you would as well.  

 

---

 

Xetykins, I don't know, I still haven't touched the novels but I understood Loghain to have been a great hero "back in the day".  

[Monica21]

Monica, just a quick reminder, you were the one who originally called yourself cocky in one of these other threads and alluded to having this theory that I've come to believe is simply a smoke screen on your part. -- As for the "Loghain is innocent Crowd" bit, ok, perhaps then you could explain what you believe Loghain did then, because I've read opinions that do seem to want to whitewash him and lay virtually everything on Howe's head.

 

As for being tired ... ok, fair enough then, be tired, and if the perspective that I approach these sort of issues annoys you then stay "actively disengaged" from me as you claimed to be your wish in another thread. (Notice that until you actively reengaged here I had done my best to leave your posts alone.) Although we disagree Riverdales seems to at least entertain the same "in game evidence trumps" approach that I do and even though we don't actually get anywhere productive I enjoy those discussions.

 

You're the one who keeps bringing up the theory, not me. It's a silly theory.  It's irrelevant and a time waster. Are you going to tell JK Rowling that Dumbledore is whatever sexuality you decide he is because there was never a gay scene in the books? Of course you're not. It's a different medium, but telling authors that their own explanations about the characters they wrote is far more arrogant than me avoiding an irrelevant question.

 

And fine, Loghain's crimes: Agreeing to sell the elves into slavery, slandering the Grey Wardens, and agreeing to hire an assassin to kill them. The rest is political expediency.

 

I will argue the following and assume that now you're up to speed. Loghain's retreat at Ostagar is a retreat. It is not regicide. It is not murder. It is a retreat to avoid being crushed by the darkspawn, and that's a good reason to retreat. For further reference and examples, KoP's blog post about Ostagar.  Loghain's alliance with Howe was based entirely on needing the troops from Amaranthine to fight the civil war. Had Teagan not declared that the darkspawn were less important than Loghain's attempt to defeat the darkspawn (something we somehow all agree on but then whitewash Teagan's role in actually starting the civil war), then that may not have been necessary.

 

For further fun reading and in-context comments by Mary Kirby and David Gaider, The Complete Defense of Loghain Mac Tir. The thread is archived so I can't find a way to just show Bioware posts, but maybe it's good for you to go through the whole thing like I did.

 

If there's an argument I missed, then feel free to point it out. I will still not comment further on any allegations that Loghain and Howe were involved in the Cousland massacre.

 

edited to add: Eamon! Loghain had suspected for some time that the situation with Cailan was coming to a head. One of the soldiers at Ostagar will tell you that they fight about Anora all the time. Loghain clearly doesn't like Cailan's treatment of his daughter and does not want to see her disrespected by a divorce. His suspicions about Cailan and a potential alliance with Orlais are proven to be correct in Return to Ostagar. Loghain doesn't know when the situation will come to a head, but knows that it will. In a desire to not only protect his daughter but his country, he takes measures prior to the battle at Ostagar, should something happen to Cailan. Those measures include making sure that Eamon is not a threat. (His sister is Cailan's mother, after all.) So he poisons him to prevent him a potential civil war between Redcliffe and Gwaren, while allowing him to put his daughter on the throne.

Modifié par Monica21, 30 décembre 2014 - 04:47 .

[Merle McClure II]

On the theory  ...  of course I keep bringing up "the theory" and until you either share it or as I believe to be far more likely, admit that you lied about having one I don't really see any reason not to keep bringing it up.

 

 

On JK Rowley and Dumbledore's sexuality  ...  actually yeah, unless you can point to something in the novels that hints at Dumbledore being attracted to other men, OR Rowley writes a new novel set in the Potter Verse that contains such hints her proclaiming that one of the main characters "was gay" after the fact seems to me to have been a rather tasteless attempt to stir up attention by latching onto a consaversal social issue like a leech. (Heck, I'd even accept her actually retconning the issue per Tolkien and "The Hobbit".) --- Bringing a similar issue in Dragon Age, although I was somewhat surprised and disappointed that Anders didn't flirt with a male Warden in Awakening I do believe that him being bisexual in Dragon Age II was a change to the character ... a minor and believable change, but a change none-the-less. (I'm less forgiving towards changing Kadian's sexuality in Mass Effect 3.)

 

 

On Ostagar ... Ok, and? I'm fairly sure that the worse I've said about Loghain's retreat is that it's somewhat "grey" when he actually decided to leave the field and that I tend to be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on his withdrawal. Funny that you mention the civil war as I can relate with the Nobles choosing to deal with the tyrant in front of them attempting to seize the throne as opposed to the relatively distant Darkspawn Hoard, especially considering the by all reports the only battle said Hoard won was the one that Loghain withdrew from so it's easy for a noble who wasn't there to blame the loss at Loghain's feet. No-one took the Darkspawn seriously, Loghain and Teagan included.

 

 

On the Highever Slaughter ... naturally as the only thing you can actually point to is "But the Writers said!" Nevermind the fact that the quote that was actually dug up doesn't actually say that, but you can go back to sticking your fingers in your ears now.

 

 

On poisoning Eamon ... so basically Loghain is either a muppet reject or a raving lunatic in your eyes ... meh. --- And let's not even look at the "tiny" detail that even if we accept that POISONING your daughter's Uncle In-Law "just in case something were to happen to her husband that he wasn't plotting against" somehow makes sense if we squint hard enough the argument that Loghain was trying to secure the throne for Anora simply doesn't jive with what we actually see in game (Yeah, yeah, I'm well aware that you don't care about the stuff that appears in the game but whatever.). We actually get to see the cut scene of him seizing the throne from his own daughter and then there is that pesky crown that I seem to recall hearing about.

[Monica21]

You didn't read the links I posted, did you?

edit: I actually really can say "but the writers said!" for one reason. They're not my characters. They're also not your characters. If you, personally, want to decide to believe something entirely different from the writers' stated intention, then that's your business. Just don't expect me to take you seriously.