I've seen many people calling him a hero and such, all I know about him is that he made a tactical withdrawal that lost Ostagar.
I have a feeling this is borderline public humiliation asking such, but I'm curious about his back-story and why I should/shouldn't see him as a villain etc.
Long story short he helped free Ferelden as a young man, and Ostagar was already lost before he retreated. Still, he is a deeply flawed man and was too busy fighting his own inner demons to see exactly how fallen he had become. --- So yes Loghain is both a great hero and a dastardly villain, but above all he believes that he's trying to do the right thing.
Guest_Faerunner_*
I don't think anyone can explain Loghain.
The writers themselves made his motivations, decisions, and backstory morally ambiguous so players could draw their own conclusion. Some people see his retreat at Ostagar as a "tactical withdrawal," others call it desertion, regicide, and usurpation. Some people see it as a spur of the moment decision (like Gaider, who actually didn't write Loghain for DA:O), others believe his withdrawal was pre-meditated. (There's in-game evidence to support either theory.) Some people feel his "good intentions" of keeping Ferelden independent and Orlesians out is heroic / well-meaning / understandable / whatever considering Ferelden's history and his own, as shown in The Stolen Throne. Others think that "good intentions" don't excuse atrocious behavior and/or horrible decision-making, and/or his crimes make him unforgivable regardless of his motivations. Some people feel he had the right idea, others think he had the right idea but expressed it poorly, others feel he meant well even if he had the wrong idea, others think he was moronic every step of the way.Some people feel he deserves to atone for his crimes, others don't.
It's just up to the player to learn the facts and then decide for yourself whether you think he crossed the line and/or whether you think he deserves forgiveness/redemption.
Just something to add, you can forgive him and even excuse his actions while still believing that he needs to be executed for them.
Guest_Faerunner_*
Just something to add, you can forgive him and even excuse his actions while still believing that he needs to be executed for them.
Isn't that kind of an oxymoron? Why forgive and excuse someone's actions if you're just going to execute them for it anyway? Isn't condemning someone for their actions kind of the opposite of forgiving and excusing it?
Guest_Faerunner_*
No, not really.
Care to elaborate?
Yeah, the basic idea is that it's entirely possible to understand why someone did what they did and even forgive them but still believe that they need to face the consequences of their actions.
If you play "Return to Ostagar" you will find some of Cailans documents, one of them is a letter from Empress Celene. Loghain suspected that Cailan might leave Anora to marry her, and was terrified. I also highly suspect that Loghain suffers from PTSD from the war against Orlais, he just can't forget what happened and the war "never ended" in his mind. He withdrew the army at Ostagar because:
1) He knew the battle was lost
2) While he loved Maric, he wasn't sold on Cailan as king. The reason stated above probably contributing to that. In his mind, he and Anora would restore Ferelden to glory and defeat the Blight. He just didn't know any better.
He even refused support from the wardens of Orlais because he didn't want a single orlesian soldier in Ferelden. He can't let it go.
Loghain isn't "evil", he is just doing what he thinks is the right thing to do. He loves his homeland so much that he is blinded by it. If you recruit him into the grey wardens and get to know him you quickly realize that he is not a bad person, he just has very strong beliefs and sticks to them no matter what. He even says "I have done so much wrong, allow me to do one last thing right" when it comes to slaying the archdemon.
So because the truth isn't 100% out there, you're meant to make head-cannon on the evidence we get? I think I'll go with KCMeredith is saying, I always have a soft spot for people doing what they think is right for someone (eg Alexius)
I get the vague feeling that it's just, wrong, to paint him as a villain.
My stance on Ostagar is that Cailan was a bit cocky to fight on the front lines, last time I checked Kings' don't do that, especially with no heirs...
So because the truth isn't 100% out there, you're meant to make head-cannon on the evidence we get? I think I'll go with KCMeredith is saying, I always have a soft spot for people doing what they think is right for someone (eg Alexius)
I get the vague feeling that it's just, wrong, to paint him as a villain.
My stance on Ostagar is that Cailan was a bit cocky to fight on the front lines, last time I checked Kings' don't do that, especially with no heirs...
Well, to sort of defend Cailan, he was doing what Maric did during the rebellion. Maric was known for fighting on the front lines even if Loghain had to save him by dragging him away on occasion. (That is from the books. I don't think you get that from codex entries.) Cailan wanted to be known for the same kind of thing, but unfortunately he just wasn't the same kind of man. Ostagar was overrun, the beacon was late, and writer-wise, Loghain needed the beacon because his view of the battlefield was obstructed. I really think he didn't have any other choice at Ostagar because he had to save the army he had left.
One thing "Loghain apologists" fall back on is something that was in the books. Loghain risked his life to save Maric from an ambush once, and Maric was angry about it and made him swear to never put anyone before Ferelden again. I see Loghain's actions at Ostagar as keeping that promise. I don't think Loghain wanted Cailan to die, but saw his death as a sacrifice to save Ferelden. Loghain himself is willing to die to better Ferelden at the Landsmeet. He tells you, "There's a strength in you I've not seen since Maric" after you defeat him. He believes that you're willing to do exactly what he is willing to do to save his country, and he's willing to give his life for that if that's what you determine is just.
The rest he was just terrible at. He's a terrible politician and never should have sent an assassin after the Wardens, but he had reasons for not trusting the Wardens, mostly because they lied and almost got Maric killed.
Needless to say, I always recruit Loghain. At that decision point you don't know for sure that you'll lose Alistair so you think you're getting a fourth Warden, at Riordan's suggestion. When Alistair leaves, I still think that Loghain is the better choice regardless. Whatever relationship my Warden has with Alistair, from lover to friend who's had my back for a year, I still prefer a man who will do whatever is necessary to stop the Blight. My character knows that Loghain will do exactly that.
Guest_Faerunner_*
If you play "Return to Ostagar" you will find some of Cailans documents, one of them is a letter from Empress Celene. Loghain suspected that Cailan might leave Anora to marry her, and was terrified. I also highly suspect that Loghain suffers from PTSD from the war against Orlais, he just can't forget what happened and the war "never ended" in his mind. He withdrew the army at Ostagar because:
1) He knew the battle was lost
How did he "know" the battle was lost? Could he see the battlefield? If so, WTF would he say he needed someone to stand at the top of the Tower of Ishal and light a beacon to let him know when to charge? I think claiming he needed someone to be his eyes on the battlefield but then turning around and saying he knew the battle was unwinnable without the beacon is an even bigger sign of guilt than if he really couldn't see or hear what was going on.
Ser Cauthrien was standing right beside him and she didn't see any reason to retreat, and he never explained it to her.
2) While he loved Maric, he wasn't sold on Cailan as king. The reason stated above probably contributing to that. In his mind, he and Anora would restore Ferelden to glory and defeat the Blight. He just didn't know any better.
You mean that "in his mind, he would restore Ferelden to glory." After he declares himself regent, Loghain continually ignores Anora's advise, to the point that he finally has her locked up so she can't speak against him at the Landsmeet.
I find Loghain highly hypocritical for accusing Eamon of wanting to crown Alistair so he could use him as a puppet king, when Loghain did the exact same thing to Anora. He keeps her queen because her crown and seeming support of him ensures his regency, but he ignores her wishes and advice as queen so he can do what he wants, what he thinks is best. He even tells Eamon and the Warden: "Anora is queen, I merely command her armies." And yet he declared himself regent (king in all but title), took over political rule of the country, and effectively silenced her when she spoke against him.
Loghain isn't "evil", he is just doing what he thinks is the right thing to do. He loves his homeland so much that he is blinded by it. If you recruit him into the grey wardens and get to know him you quickly realize that he is not a bad person, he just has very strong beliefs and sticks to them no matter what. He even says "I have done so much wrong, allow me to do one last thing right" when it comes to slaying the archdemon.
In other words, Loghain suffers from HUBRIS. Pride. Arrogance. Ego. He's so convinced that he alone knows what's best in everything he decides to do (how to fight as a general for or how to tackle the darkspawn problem like the Grey Wardens or how to rule the kingdom like a king), and everyone else needs to just get out of the way (as a Hardened Alistair puts it). Even when he's confronted with the reality that his way is not working and he needs to accept help, or listen to someone else's advice, or try it someone else's way, he remains convinced that only his way will work, and would rather spend eternity trying to shove a square peg into a round hole than just give up and try to find a round peg; or accept the round peg someone else offers him.
It's much easier to let the whole country get swallowed up by the Blight and sell elves into slavery to fund his own civil war to maintain his own regency to try to force everyone to go along with his plan for the darkspawn than it is to admit he made a mistake and accept help (from Anora, from the nobles, from the Wardens). That he was mistaken to declare himself regent, he was mistaken thinking he could handle politics as well as battle, he was mistaken thinking the freakishly organized darkspawn horde was not a true Blight, and/or that Ferelden's human army could tackle the Blight without any Grey Warden (or even "outside") assistance.
I feel no pity.
In InquisitionSpoiler
Would you PLEASE put a spoiler tag on this? Not everyone has played Inquisition yet.
Obviously, Loghain is a starkly divisive figure, as seen in this very thread. I personally hated him for his actions -- as I think that's precisely what one should be judged for. But I'm not saying everyone has to arrive at the same conclusions. As far as I'm concerned, I've never made a playthrough where he'd survive the Landsmeet.
Guest_Faerunner_*
Well, to sort of defend Cailan, he was doing what Maric did during the rebellion. Maric was known for fighting on the front lines even if Loghain had to save him by dragging him away on occasion. (That is from the books. I don't think you get that from codex entries.) Cailan wanted to be known for the same kind of thing, but unfortunately he just wasn't the same kind of man. Ostagar was overrun, the beacon was late, and writer-wise, Loghain needed the beacon because his view of the battlefield was obstructed. I really think he didn't have any other choice at Ostagar because he had to save the army he had left.
And I think Loghain's full of it.
One thing "Loghain apologists" fall back on is something that was in the books.
Exactly, the books. Which are different from the games. Which were written after the games. Which were written by a different writer from the one who handled most of Loghain's dialogue, quests and stories from within the game. From the same writer who admits "this is how I see Loghain" when he talks about him in interviews instead of "this is definitely what Loghain thought/felt when he said/did X." From the same writer who alters lore from the games in the books.
(For example, in the game, several characters comment how Alistair was a bastard born from a mistress while Maric's wife Rowan was alive. That Maric cheated on his wife to have him. In the books, suddenly the child Maric has out of wedlock
Needless to say, I always recruit Loghain. At that decision point you don't know for sure that you'll lose Alistair so you think you're getting a fourth Warden, at Riordan's suggestion. When Alistair leaves, I still think that Loghain is the better choice regardless. Whatever relationship my Warden has with Alistair, from lover to friend who's had my back for a year, I still prefer a man who will do whatever is necessary to stop the Blight. My character knows that Loghain will do exactly that.
Yeah, everything wrong. Everything that doesn't work and refuses to listen to advice or accept help even if it'll save the country.
Personally, even if I didn't loath Loghain, I never recruit him because my Wardens just don't find him trustworthy or useful. I don't trust someone who has an ongoing record of betraying and deserting his allies (not just Cailan at Ostagar, but Uldred and the rebel mages in the Circle, Jowan in Redcliffe, etc), failing at everything he tries to do once the Blight starts (whether it's uniting the nobles under his banner or killing two measly Grey Wardens galavanding around Ferelden), not listening to advice or orders, and so on. To me, Loghain has proven himself not to be a team player, so I'm not putting him on my team. He's proven not to be effective against the Blight, so I'm not trusting him to help end the Blight.
Obviously, Loghain is a starkly divisive figure, as seen in this very thread. I personally hated him for his actions -- as I think that's precisely what one should be judged for. But I'm not saying everyone has to arrive at the same conclusions. As far as I'm concerned, I've never made a playthrough where he'd survive the Landsmeet.
Hah, one might say that, yes.
And I think Loghain's full of it.
Okey doke.
How did he "know" the battle was lost? Could he see the battlefield? If so, WTF would he say he needed someone to stand at the top of the Tower of Ishal and light a beacon to let him know when to charge? I think claiming he needed someone to be his eyes on the battlefield but then turning around and saying he knew the battle was unwinnable without the beacon is an even bigger sign of guilt than if he really couldn't see or hear what was going on.
Ser Cauthrien was standing right beside him and she didn't see any reason to retreat, and he never explained it to her.
You mean that "in his mind, he would restore Ferelden to glory." After he declares himself regent, Loghain continually ignores Anora's advise, to the point that he finally has her locked up so she can't speak against him at the Landsmeet.
I find Loghain highly hypocritical for accusing Eamon of wanting to crown Alistair so he could use him as a puppet king, when Loghain did the exact same thing to Anora. He keeps her queen because her crown and seeming support of him ensures his regency, but he ignores her wishes and advice as queen so he can do what he wants, what he thinks is best. He even tells Eamon and the Warden: "Anora is queen, I merely command her armies." And yet he declared himself regent (king in all but title), took over political rule of the country, and effectively silenced her when she spoke against him.
In other words, Loghain suffers from HUBRIS. Pride. Arrogance. Ego. He's so convinced that he alone knows what's best in everything he decides to do (how to fight as a general for or how to tackle the darkspawn problem like the Grey Wardens or how to rule the kingdom like a king), and everyone else needs to just get out of the way (as a Hardened Alistair puts it). Even when he's confronted with the reality that his way is not working and he needs to accept help, or listen to someone else's advice, or try it someone else's way, he remains convinced that only his way will work, and would rather spend eternity trying to shove a square peg into a round hole than just give up and try to find a round peg; or accept the round peg someone else offers him.
It's much easier to let the whole country get swallowed up by the Blight and sell elves into slavery to fund his own civil war to maintain his own regency to try to force everyone to go along with his plan for the darkspawn than it is to admit he made a mistake and accept help (from Anora, from the nobles, from the Wardens). That he was mistaken to declare himself regent, he was mistaken thinking he could handle politics as well as battle, he was mistaken thinking the freakishly organized darkspawn horde was not a true Blight, and/or that Ferelden's human army could tackle the Blight without any Grey Warden (or even "outside") assistance.
I feel no pity.
Would you PLEASE put a spoiler tag on this? Not everyone has played Inquisition yet.
I'm in no way an expert on Loghain and just gave my opinion, and in general agree with you. Especially the second part of your post, I just didn't find the words for that (English is my third language, I have some trouble expessing myself correctly 
).
I just assumed the battle couldn't be won because the Ferelden army looks a lot smaller than the advancing Darkspawn, even if Loghain would've charged into battle. Ser Cauthrien is a knight, not a commander and would probably not have the same experience regarding war.
And of course he would ignore Anoras advise (or anyone else's), he thinks he's doing the right thing. I didn't say it actually was the right thing and he himself admits that he screwed up time and time again, I can't deny that. What made Loghain likeable to me was that afterwards he admits it and seems to feel genuinely sorry about it so I felt like forgiving him for his mistakes and give him a chance of redemption.
One thing to take into consideration is that he did not act alone nor was it a spur of the moment decision for him to the battle at Ostagar. I believe it was a premeditated act where he conspired with Rendon Howe to remove any and all sympathy, business and any kind of influence between the Orlesians and Fereldens by any means possible. The battle plan that Loghain and the King planned simply left a convenient means that helped facilitate his removal without implication anyone except the Darkspawn.
One thing to take into consideration is that he did not act alone nor was it a spur of the moment decision for him to the battle at Ostagar. I believe it was a premeditated act where he conspired with Rendon Howe to remove any and all sympathy, business and any kind of influence between the Orlesians and Fereldens by any means possible. The battle plan that Loghain and the King planned simply left a convenient means that helped facilitate his removal without implication anyone except the Darkspawn.
The head writer apparently believes differently. I'm going with his beliefs.
One thing to take into consideration is that he did not act alone nor was it a spur of the moment decision for him to the battle at Ostagar. I believe it was a premeditated act where he conspired with Rendon Howe to remove any and all sympathy, business and any kind of influence between the Orlesians and Fereldens by any means possible. The battle plan that Loghain and the King planned simply left a convenient means that helped facilitate his removal without implication anyone except the Darkspawn.
I'm not even annoyed by this anymore. I mean, seriously.
Well considering that Gaidar has a really bad habit of outright retconning stuff in random interviews what is actually shown in game is far more important then whatever his opinion might be on any given day. (Alistair, Hawke, and the Warden all prove that Templar's DO NOT get their abilities from consuming lyruim ... Alistair's parentage being changed for no apparent reason, ect...)
However, let's take a look at what actually appears in game;
-- Loghain couldn't see the battle from his advantage point, which is why he needed the signal fire, and Loghain did know that said signal was late. ... It does make some sense that he would realize that something went seriously wrong.
-- We know that Loghain ordered Eamon's poisoning before the battle, and as far as I know, the ONLY person who claims that Loghain didn't "really" want to kill Eamon is Gaidar, nothing at all in game ever hints at suggesting this. Not to mention that Gaidar's "explaination" of why Loghain poisoned Eamon is loonytunes at best and not even hinted at in game as far as I'm aware.
-- We know that Loghain is always portrayed as loving his country above all else, with his daughter a close second.
-- Loghain didn't seem to know that the Child King was really going to divorce his daughter, although I do believe that it's hinted that he did "suspect".
-- Howe on the other hand, is an evil bastard by all accounts, and he did suddenly seem to be "besties" with Loghain.
-- Had something NOT happened to the Child King then even Howe had to realize that killing the Coustlands was suicidal. -- You simply can't keep that a secret as many men as had to be involved, without Howe killing all of the men involved, which while in character with Howe, isn't mentioned as far as I'm aware.
----------------
Now, with that said, I don't blame Loghain for withdrawing from Ostagar, that battle was already lost and had he charged then his men would have been lost as well. However, you do have to take a serious look at how convenient the massive defeat at Ostagar was for Howe and question "how" Howe thought he was going to be able to get away with it had Ostagar not gone the way it had.
Now, with that said, I don't blame Loghain for withdrawing from Ostagar, that battle was already lost and had he charged then his men would have been lost as well. However, you do have to take a serious look at how convenient the massive defeat at Ostagar was for Howe and question "how" Howe thought he was going to be able to get away with it had Ostagar not gone the way it had.
Well, I mean, I think it would work the same way in that no one at Bioware is a military strategist. You wouldn't have the bulk of your archers on the valley floor when you have perfectly good ramparts to fire down on the darkspawn. Except, cinematics, so that's why that happened. The Couslands are a plot device to get you to Ostagar, just like every other origin story. And that's really it.
Well, I mean, I think it would work the same way in that no one at Bioware is a military strategist.
Retour en haut
