145 réponses à ce sujet

[X Equestris]

Teyrnirs do not fall to the eldest. They fall to the most capable. The game confirms this. Fergus being teyrn in Inquisition has nothing to do with this. For that matter, Fergus being named teyrn at the end of Origins does not mean anything either. We do not know what happened between the end of the battle of Denerim and the post-coronation ceremony. For all we know the Warden gave up the title of teyrn so Fergus could have it.
 
In my playthrough the answer would obviously be that the male Cousland was king by that point and so Fergus would become teyrn by default.
 
So that is not a falsehood. Try again.
 
I will reply to everything else later.

You want everyone else to provide proof, yet you don't provide proof yourself. Prove that is how it works. Otherwise, we are assuming normal succession.

[Jeffry]

Rizilliant, Meave is just asking a valid question. Meave is not trying to inject personal preference into anything. The question is why a female Cousland is not sole ruler if Alistair dies and the Bannorn agreed to joint rule. Logically, the female Cousland should be the sole ruler in that case, especially if Anora was completely discredited and locked in a tower. The answer is because BioWare simply did not write all the possibilities into the game. BioWare only designed the game with five outcomes; Alistair or Anora alone, Alistair or Anora with the opposite-sex Cousland, or Alistair and Anora together.

 

But we explained many times why she can't be. Simply being engaged to a person who will be corronated king does give you exactly zero claim to a throne your betrothed has never held. Anora was maybe disredited by the actions of her father usurper, but she was not stripped of titles and the acting king himself declared for all the banns and arls to hear, that should he die, she alone will rule. And many nobles loyal to either Cailan or Loghain would support her, because she presents stability and continuity of the royal line, though she was only married into it. Then he even appointed a regent, probably the most respected noble in all Ferelden to rule in his stead untill the battle is over.

[Jeffry]

Jeffry, just because it's based on a real world system does not mean it works the same way. Unless you have a codex stating that the eldest inherits the title if no heir is named, then this remains your theory and nothing else.

 

Logically, the ones who decide who gets to be teyrn would be those within that family. But since Fergus was M.I.A., the human noble is the more capable person by default. So that required no discussion.

 

Yes, you are the teyrn for now, because there is nobody else left of your family at the moment, but Fergus being MIA does not mean he abdicated. That is not how it works. And you as a noble have to respect that unless you want to risk a rebellion over Bryce's legacy in your teyrnir.

 

Also, why am I required to provide codexes for those things? Have you provided any codexes? I believe that they don't even discuss these things. So we all have to just assume how it would be. And we are basing it both on the game's lore and the actual history at the same time, since that is the best way to do so. I don't know on what you are basing your assumptions.

[Meave]

Rizilliant, Meave is just asking a valid question. Meave is not trying to inject personal preference into anything. The question is why a female Cousland is not sole ruler if Alistair dies and the Bannorn agreed to joint rule. Logically, the female Cousland should be the sole ruler in that case, especially if Anora was completely discredited and locked in a tower. The answer is because BioWare simply did not write all the possibilities into the game. BioWare only designed the game with five outcomes; Alistair or Anora alone, Alistair or Anora with the opposite-sex Cousland, or Alistair and Anora together.

 

kinda, my question in OP is for bioware or their employee or forum moderator, or whomever could answer why they didn't make it possible

 

a) cos it's hard for programming

cos it didn't occur to them

c) story purposes

d) lore purposes

 

but let's gather facts

 

1) my Cousland have claim to the throne just for being pure blood noble born (same as Casandra which is like 68th -or whatever- in succession line)

 

2) customs for vote of the king/queen apply only to "normal" situation and if I didn't do anything noteworthy, my claim to the throne would be weak indeed

 

3) Landsmeet proved that Anora has no support, all but one voted against her including freaking chantry (which shows that if someone more interesting shows up, some claim marriage or that she was acting queen for few years is unimportant)

 

4) I just saved whole Fereldan from both blight and civil war, commoners love me, nobles respect me

 

5) I have most of Fereldan nobles in debt for doing personal favors for them (mostly saving their families)

 

6) I proved that I am the best military and political leader anyone saw in AGES

 

7) I command immense army including mages, golems and werewolves, and leaders of these forces owes me big time

 

8) Landsmeet already agreed that I am eligible queen and even if Alistar is dead it doesn't change a fact that I am eligible queen

 

9) if left unattended Eamon would never raise enough allies to oppose Loghain and Loghain would remain in power despite the civil war. If not for PC intervention Loghains treachery would most likely cost war against blight. So Eamon's voice doesn't have as much power as you claim he have

 

those are undeniable facts, conclusion is that PC could be appointed as a Queen if she wanted to. There are other conclusion which could be drawn from these facts, but that doesn't change the fact that this one is valid as well. I never stated she should in all cases become queen, but I said that it should be an option.

[Meave]

 

1) I never said otherwise, some people said she has no claim at all and that is simply not true

 

2, 3, 4) on these I disagree

 

5,7) who said I am the willing Grey warden? I was forced to it by story and for those purposes I consider myself grey warden renegade. Treaties their ancestors signed compelled to help me against the blight no matter what, but neither of those leaders was wither at power or able to comply with their duties. Doing favors and deeds for them to obtain power have nothing to do with them helping against blight

 

6) simple, all nations were at war/without rightful ruler or otherwise inconsistant and I helped restore order to all of them. Since the last blight there wasn't any war in Fereldan at the magnitude of the blight.

 

8) my point is exactly what you said

 

9)I don't see your point, we are talking about facts and this is a fact

[Rizilliant]

Rizilliant, Meave is just asking a valid question. Meave is not trying to inject personal preference into anything. The question is why a female Cousland is not sole ruler if Alistair dies and the Bannorn agreed to joint rule. Logically, the female Cousland should be the sole ruler in that case, especially if Anora was completely discredited and locked in a tower. The answer is because BioWare simply did not write all the possibilities into the game. BioWare only designed the game with five outcomes; Alistair or Anora alone, Alistair or Anora with the opposite-sex Cousland, or Alistair and Anora together.

But she is trying to interject personal preference.. Stating the Dwarf king oewes her, that shale would decimate any at her command, and Wolfang would goto war for her.. lol, how is any of this not imaginative? I said, glad shes rp'ing, but its not part f the game.. Shes expanding her experience.. Awesome for her, imagination is key for rp'ing.. But expecting the developers to add this outcome, on a 5yr old game, simply because she concocted this outcome, is quite preposterous.. Its been explained many times, and for the last 5 yrs weve all played each outcome of DA:O.. Allistar King, Join control, or Anora Queen...Thats it...

[Jeffry]

1) Cassandra is actually a princess of Nevara. Despite her being very low in the line of succession, she belongs to the royal family. You have no ties to current loyal family. You don't have a legitimate claim to back you up. Simply being a noble doesn't give you a claim. It only means there is a possibility for you to become the ruler under certain circumstances (in your case something like Anora, Alistair, Eamon, Teagan, Fergus all dead or all abdicating in your favor, which is both a bit far fetched).

 

2) What Lathrim said.

 

3) Nobody was voting against Anora, they were voting against Loghain and his treachery. Anora still remains popular, for all everybody knows, she was played by her father as were they.

 

4) They still love and respect their rightful queen. They still love and respect Eamon.

 

5) One thing is owing you a favor and one thing is starting a civil war against the rightful and accepted ruler.

 

6) You know, 4th blight happened 400 years ago and Ferelden was not even hit. There were many wars fought since, for example the Fereldan Rebellion (against Orlais) which ended 30 years ago. You know, the Rebellion that saw the rise of Loghain as the best military leader in ages. You haven't really commanded the armies, the ruling monarch did, you just lead the fighting in the city and killed the Archdemon. While impressive feat indeed, that really doesn't qualify you in the category "best military and political leader".

 

7) Similar as 5, one thing is owing you a favor and one thing is spilling blood of their own people for your petty cause. I really doubt dwarves, elves / werewolves, mages / templars would help you fight a new civil war against a legitimate ruler (Anora). Also that conflict could spill over your borders and many would love to intervene.

 

8) Landsmeet has never agreed on that. They have agreed, that you are an eligible match for the future king and suitable QUEEN-CONSORT (the epilogue even degrades that to princess-consort)*. So even if you married Alistair (if he would survive the blight), you would not be queen. They have also heard Alistair declaring that Anora will be the queen should he die.

 

9) Him being ill and helping you instead of running all the nobles' errands himself does not diminish his authority or influence. Nobles still look up to him just as they always have.

 

*There are some continuity errors in this. Alistair at least once refers to you as queen, but that is a mistake by the writers (correct is the consort thing, probably the prince/princess-consort).

 

EDIT: And once again, your facts are not really facts. You are not basing them on anything factual in most cases. You are mostly basing them on what you think could happen (with almost no basis in game's lore or our history the game is based on) or what you wish to happen. There is very little possibility for Female Cousland being a queen and that is a fact. And absolutely no possibilty for her being the queen if she wanted to during the scope of the game. She could be a queen, but it is so unlikely that it's not even worth discussing how it could happen (like removing 5 other better claimants or starting a civil war with the help of summoned demons... pointless).

[Rizilliant]

1) I never said otherwise, some people said she has no claim at all and that is simply not true

 

2, 3, 4) on these I disagree

 

5,7) who said I am the willing Grey warden? I was forced to it by story and for those purposes I consider myself grey warden renegade. Treaties their ancestors signed compelled to help me against the blight no matter what, but neither of those leaders was wither at power or able to comply with their duties. Doing favors and deeds for them to obtain power have nothing to do with them helping against blight

 

6) simple, all nations were at war/without rightful ruler or otherwise inconsistant and I helped restore order to all of them. Since the last blight there wasn't any war in Fereldan at the magnitude of the blight.

 

8) my point is exactly what you said

 

9)I don't see your point, we are talking about facts and this is a fact

Bold portion:  This seems to be the key issue with the entire conversation...

 

Youre assuming too much.. The treaties are all that obligated the factions to aid you..The entire land was threatened.. Assuming they would then goto wqar for you is a bit much.. Honestly.. Shale, Blanca, Wolfang, etc.. You presume they will attack on your command, willingly, because you feel you deserve it?

 

I suggest playig it again.. You clearly misunderstood what was going on!

[Frenrihr]

Anora rules in that case not you.

 

Captain obvious.

[Captain Wiseass]

I sincerely doubt that the mages, dwarves, or elves would consider a treaty with the Grey Wardens for the express purpose of fighting a Blight to require them to ally with a single Warden who is attempting to seize a throne by force.

 

And hey, didn't Ferelden already have trouble with a Warden attempting a coup d'état? You really wanna get the order kicked out of the country for another few centuries?

[Meave]

EDIT: And once again, your facts are not really facts. You are not basing them on anything factual in most cases. You are mostly basing them on what you think could happen (with almost no basis in game's lore or our history the game is based on) or what you wish to happen. There is very little possibility for Female Cousland being a queen and that is a fact. And absolutely no possibilty for her being the queen if she wanted to during the scope of the game. She could be a queen, but it is so unlikely that it's not even worth discussing how it could happen (like removing 5 other better claimants or starting a civil war with the help of summoned demons... pointless).

 

of please, facts are facts... if you think what your PC character did is just a courtesy barely worth mentioning and you should bow to some halfwit or beurocrat queen, you clearly have no ambition. The position PC get into could be EASILY be used to claim the throne. Either politically or by force

 

I could give werewolves their own land (where previously elfs lived-or more likely traveled) and free pass to kill any elf that trespass their territory if necessary

I could give mages independence which they desire most - as we saw in all three DA (and even if you do chose this outcome it has no effect in DAI)

Branka only cares about the anvil and research and it was I who GAVE her the anvil so it's not too much to expect she owes me since she dedicated whole house and life to find it...

Bhelen plotted to murder his brothers (you actually find evidence for this) so you could always blackmail him if he decided not to cooperate

 

beside hard fact is that Landsmeet chose between Anora and PC not Anora/Alistar, not even Loghain/Alistar, they clearly said either Queen Anora or Warden and after you won you could chose Anora as a queen even tho you were against her in the first place. If those nobles wanted Alistar for whatever reason then you wouldn't have choice to point Anora. But you can. But if you think you know better than those who actually made the story and lore well then we clearly have nothing to discuss here...

[X Equestris]

of please, facts are facts... if you think what your PC character did is just a courtesy barely worth mentioning and you should bow to some halfwit of beurocrat queen, you clearly have no ambition. The position PC get into could be EASILY be used to claim the throne. Either politically or by force
 
I could give werewolves their own land (where previously elfs lived-or more likely traveled) and free pass to kill any elf that trespass their territory if necessary
I could give mages independence which they desire most - as we saw in all three DA (and even if you do chose this outcome it has no effect in DAI)
Branka only cares about the anvil and research and it was I who GAVE her the anvil so it's not too much to expect she owes me since she dedicated whole house and life to find it...
Bhelen plotted to murder his brothers (you actually find evidence for this) so you could always blackmail him if he decided not to cooperate

Everyone hates the werewolves, so that won't work out.

The mages are under the Chantry's authority. You won't be able to do anything about that.

You're right that Branka only cares about the Anvil, but she already has it. She forged a crown for your king, so you are even. You have absolutely zero leverage over her.

Bhelen may have murdered his brothers, but he's already cemented his hold on Orzammar. You won't be threatening to him with a little blackmail.

[Jeffry]

Some of your "facts" are not facts This is not a matter of ambition, this is a matter of what is actually possible, what is less possible and what is just bollocks. You owe the queen your loyalty since it was agreed upon she will be the queen should the king die. Saving the kingdom from certain doom does not give you a claim on the throne. You would have to take it by force and that's where we are getting into pure speculations.

 

A grey warden openly declaring a civil war against his rightful ruler is just no-no. You are forbidden from doing so. As Captain Wiseass mentioned, the last time somebody did this - Sophie Dryden like 200 years ago - she was killed, her forces were killed, the order was banished from Ferelden and her family was stripped of honor, titles and all claims. You could attempt it, but you have to count with the consequences and frankly? The odds are against you.

 

 

And since we are now balls deep in speculations territory... Even if you somehow managed to persuade those races into helping you in your unjust cause they absolutely don't care about, what is there to stop Anora from calling Orlais for help against werewolves, dwarves and golems? Calling the Chantry for help and pleading for an exalted march to be declared against the blasphemous usurper and mages in an open rebellion against their queen? The Divine contemplated calling a crusade against Orzammar for killing brother Burkel and that was just one dwarven Andrastian killed, compare that to mages running free killing everyone in your path. A united Ferelden might stand a small chance against the full might of templars and the imperial army if a military genius like Loghain was leading it, but there is no way in hell that ravaged Ferelden wouldn't be completely overrun.

 

Btw picturing an honorable man Irving helping somebody start a new civil war in order to put her on a throne she has no claim on and defying Greagoir at the same time... that is just nuts

[Rizilliant]

of please, facts are facts... if you think what your PC character did is just a courtesy barely worth mentioning and you should bow to some halfwit or beurocrat queen, you clearly have no ambition. The position PC get into could be EASILY be used to claim the throne. Either politically or by force

 

I could give werewolves their own land (where previously elfs lived-or more likely traveled) and free pass to kill any elf that trespass their territory if necessary

I could give mages independence which they desire most - as we saw in all three DA (and even if you do chose this outcome it has no effect in DAI)

Branka only cares about the anvil and research and it was I who GAVE her the anvil so it's not too much to expect she owes me since she dedicated whole house and life to find it...

Bhelen plotted to murder his brothers (you actually find evidence for this) so you could always blackmail him if he decided not to cooperate

 

beside hard fact is that Landsmeet chose between Anora and PC not Anora/Alistar, not even Loghain/Alistar, they clearly said either Queen Anora or Warden and after you won you could chose Anora as a queen even tho you were against her in the first place. If those nobles wanted Alistar for whatever reason then you wouldn't have choice to point Anora. But you can. But if you think you know better than those who actually made the story and lore well then we clearly have nothing to discuss here...

lol, everything you say is moot.. THE GAME DOES NOT ALLOW IT..  What is your purpose.. All of your lol, "facts" are nothing mroe than personal desire.. 

 

I got it!!! Your a desire demon! Almost making the switch to Rage demon!

[Dai Grepher]

Anora actually does have allies. Gaining her support can greatly influence the Landsmeet.

Fergus doesn't abdicate by default while he is missing in the Wilds. I don't know where you concocted something so ridiculous.

The banns may elect the monarchs, but they have always elected a Theirin, and they greatly value ties to the bloodline. That's the clearest reason why a Cousland PC can't be a sole ruler: they have no connection to Calenhad's legacy, and they don't have the political clout Bryce had.

 

Okay, starting from post #84, a quick point by point.

 

Anora only has her handmaiden. Her influence in the Landsmeet begins and ends with her testimony against either her father or the Warden. Either way, you can win the Landsmeet without her. So she does not have that much influence, and even then it was based solely on her accusations against whomever. It had nothing to do with connections.

 

If Fergus is unable to even accept or recognize the title of teyrn, then he can't possibly fulfill it's role. Fergus didn't even know what happened at Highever until the Warden was marching to Denerim. Meaning, he didn't even know that his father and mother had died and that the teyrnir was in dispute.

 

Yes, they have always elected a Theirin. So what? The point is that they elect the monarch, and thus can elect a non-Theirin if they want to. That is no reason at all why a Cousland can't rule alone. Anora has no connection to Calanhad either, but they will accept her. Bryce had political clout, and many wanted him to be king instead of Cailan who was of the Theirin bloodline. That proves bloodline is not so important. As for clout, Bryce may have had a lot of it, but so can the Warden Cousland given the right choices in the game.

 

#86 Rizilliant, Meave's point is that the Landsmeet agreed to joint rule between Alistair and the female Cousland. So that is how it should be, logically. The banns would have no reason to go back on this agreement and set the discredited Anora into power, especially after siding against her. Marriage has nothing to do with this point. Or at least this is what I assume is the case, since I have not played the female Cousland playthrough. Though I will admit that in the male Cousland playthrough, his and Anora's joint rule is contingent on their marriage. Anora even says that there is no way for the male Cousland to get out of the marriage short of throwing himself into the jaws of the archdemon. So maybe marriage was a requirement in the female playthrough, I don't know for sure.

 

#88 Meave, you are correct. Remember in Origins King Maric went missing, and only 5 years later Cailan took the throne after Anora called Loghain back to stop searching for him. According to the comics, Maric was still alive. So does this mean Cailan's rule was illegitimate? I don't think it does, but the others on here trying to delegitimize the Cousland should hold the same position on Cailan, and by extension Anora as well.

 

You're also right about Highever. It controls Amaranthine. It was also pretty much untouched by the blight. Profiting from its costal cities makes sense for the rest of the Bannorn. That makes the Cousland the more desirable candidate.

 

#89 Jeffry, I will post my proof later today after this post. All the evidence I have is from different codex entries and it will take a lot of time to post here. The forum doesn't allow copy/paste (at least not for me). So check back in about 7 hours. But you are also required to provide proof as well since you are also making a claim.

 

The DA wiki is reliable only when the sources are cited. Otherwise it is a blog that is protected by special interests. Quote the wiki if you want, but make sure that info is backed up by something. Remember, anyone can go there and edit almost any page they want.

 

I'm not interested in a debate on types of monarchies, but whatever is written on that wiki page is just some random Internet user's opinion. Unless that statement is backed up by something in the canon, it is meaningless. Besides, the game itself shows that every monarch is elected. So it is an elected monarchy.

 

That is not what the game shows. The banns are required to grant a candidate ruling power. Beyond that, the monarch must also persuade the banns to cooperate, yes. But the initial ruling power is only won after the banns elect the person.

 

Post proof that Fergus became teyrn as soon as he returned. You don't know what happened in the amount of time between the slaying of the archdemon and the post coronation ceremony. You don't even know how much time passed in that span. We also don't know if Fergus was teyrn during the ceremony or if that came later. You also don't know the circumstances of him becoming teyrn. The siblings may have discussed it with each other, or the monarch may have made the decision after much deliberation. Or maybe the arls and banns decided. You don't know any of this for certain.

 

Being teyrn gives you the upper hand over banns and arls, that's self-evident. Whether it gives you the upper hand over a half-blood prince or the previous king's widow is another matter. I think it would since the teyrn is a war leader, while the other two probably don't have the same experience. But again, this is for the banns to weigh and decide. What is certain is that the Teyrn of Highever is second in rank only to the king. With the king dead, the Teyrn of Highever is the highest ranking official. Under normal circumstances, and by law, that makes him the regent. That is why Loghain needed to kill the Couslands before killing Cailan, so power would flow directly to him upon Cailan's death.

 

Some might want Eamon over others. But most would not.

 

If the teyrn names no successor and dies, then the title would most likely be handled by the teyrn's wife. Maybe she would choose the successor, or even that is not an option, then the title would be in dispute between the siblings either by discussion or force. Either they would work it out, or the local banns and arls would. Or maybe the crown would. Calanhad did reduce the number of teyrns, and Maric was able to name Loghain a teyrn. The monarch at the end of Origins can also grant the Warden the title of Teyrn of Gwaren. Keep in mind, this is only if no worthy heir can be determined. In Origins this is moot, since the younger Cousland is the only known survivor of Ostagar. The title automatically falls to that Cousland.

 

The Cousland has the strongest claim among the nobles. Alistair is a half-blood prince whose identity was in question. Anora is the king's widow, nothing more. She was a consort. A figurehead. I never said being Teyrn of Highever places him above Alistair and Anora, just that it provides the strongest claim, also that by law he is regent until the banns elect a new monarch. Now, if you compare Bryce to Cailan, then yeah, Cailan probably has the strongest claim. Still, it all depends on how the banns vote.

 

#93 Riz, the mages or templars will support you without any mention of the treaties. Eamon supports you even though no such treaty exists with him. And as Teyrn of Highever, you have legal command over the armies of the banns in your teyrnir. But I don't think Meave's point was that the Landsmeet should support the Cousland simply because of this. The military support the Cousland wields simply makes the Cousland the most desirable candidate for the throne. The banns need the Cousland to save Ferelden in this case, so the Cousland demanding to be elected monarch pretty much ends in the Cousland's wish being filled first. Except gameplay reasons.

 

Also, don't accuse people of being trolls just for thinking differently than you. A troll doesn't take as much time as Meave has to post as much.

 

#99 X, to the best of my knowledge, Alistair only says that if unhardened. The alternate is that he says something along the lines of, "Lock her in a tower for now. After that, we'll see...", which indicates that he is contemplating executing her. No talk of her getting the throne in that case. Unless I am mistaken.

 

#102 The point wasn't that they were engaged. The point was that the banns agreed to joint rule between Alistair and the F!Cousland. At least, that's what I thought Meave's point was. Perhaps it wasn't, but that seems to be the important fact here. I agree that if this were solely based on marriage then the F!Cousland can't be recognized based on that since the marriage did not happen. Also, I thought Alistair only allows Anora to take control if he is unhardened.

 

#108 Riz, if Meave is saying the armies would continue to support the F!Cousland after Denerim then that would be incorrect and I would obviously disagree. But I thought Meave's point was that the army being needed to end the blight was what gave the F!Cousland the pull to demand joint rule with Alistair on the throne in the Landsmeet, which I agree with. If this wasn't Meave's point, then I apologize.

 

#109 Jeff, being a noble gives you a claim, though the strength of that claim varies depending on title. Teyrn is obviously the strongest claim among nobles, which is why Bryce was even considered by some to be eligible. Whether that claim beats a bloodline relative or not is up to the banns to decide. I'm sure most say it does not, including Bryce, which is why Cailan is king in the game and not him. But in Alistair's case, he's only half-blood. Yeah, he's Maric's son, but he wasn't raised by Maric.

 

What you say about Anora could be true under the right circumstances, but remember that she can side with her father and speak slander against the Warden. You have to consider all possibilities in the game.

 

I think Meave is correct on the point about leading the armies in Denerim. In Meave's case, Alistair gave a speech, the F!Cousland lead the forces, Alistair struck the killing blow and died from it. What did Anora do during all this? Sat in a tower. What makes her more electable over the F!Cousland as far as command experience goes? Maybe F!Cousland is not the best military and political leader in Ferelden, but this would make her far better than Anora, which I think was Meave's point.

 

I agree that dwarves and elves would not get involved with Ferelden's politics, but mages/templars and werewolves might. Especially if doing so would bring them new freedoms under the F!Cousland. Also, the mages/templars had a score to settle with Loghain. Yes, he would be dead by then, but Anora would still represent Loghain's legacy, and she would be using Loghain's supporters for herself. All the people who had a hand in it would get away with it, and Anora would happily benefit from her father's actions. But I will agree that this is all very... extra, to what Origins was. The simple answer is that the Cousland can't rule alone because of gameplay issues and where the writers wanted to take the story. But it has nothing to do with Ferelden law or rules of succession.

 

The prince-consort/princess-consort thing is a plot discrepancy on BioWare's part. It is a contradiction in terms that BioWare needs to correct (in favor of recognizing the Cousland as a joint-ruling monarch). Some lines call the Cousland king, other lines call him prince-consort. I know for a fact that the Landsmeet options prove the M!Cousland is king. I don't know what the options for the F!Cousland state.

 

#110 Riz, the only ones who actually recognize the treaties are the dwarves. Everyone else can be recruited in exchange for helping them. Not saying they would help overthrow Anora, but just saying, the GW treaties are not even mentioned in some cases, and especially not for werewolves. Same with Branka. You think she cares what you use the golems for?

 

#114 X, the fact that everyone hates werewolves is exactly why they would not want to side against the F!Cousland in this scenario. They wouldn't want her setting them against their soldiers.

 

I will post my proof from the codex entries and game dialogue later today.

[Rizilliant]

That long post is full of "i assume"and "doesnt matter". You claim "fact" when theres little more than opinion and assumption. You and Meave are unilaterally deciding hat matters, and interjecting your own thought up scenario, then claiming them as fact.You have done nothing more, in this long post, than in 5 pages. Create your on fiction, in an  already defined story. Changing the perameters of Origins, then presuming you have armies to command at your whim is just insane! The story has been defined.

[X Equestris]

That's a lot assumptions in that post without citations.

[Jeffry]

The -consort is the correct title, the few various dialogue lines saying the PC is either king or queen are wrong. Anora makes that pretty clear and it would be the same case with Alistair, if writers hadn't made a few mistakes. It is representing the fact that you are only joining the monarch, because by being a noble you have the right to do so. And this is the reason you can ask for such a thing, not because you managed to persuade allies and amassad armies against the Blight, but because you are of noble blood from a family with high social status and banging the future king, which is why he himself agrees. If he hates you, he won't accept your proposal no matter what armies you managed to amass.

 

I don't recall any mention in the game, that there is a law stating teyrns are the highest ranking officials when it comes to succession or god-forbid they have a claim by default. Bryce was considered as a candidate by being the person he was, respectable and proven ruler (of Highever) and soldier. Not just because he was a teyrn. Tho that could certainly help, since you would have some power to sway the arls and banns under you, but the existence of Bannorn itself points out, that teyrns are now very little more than glorified arls.

 

You are correct that we don't actually know how Fergus became the teyrn. I loaded the post-coronation save and he says he has to go back to Highever to clean up the mess Howe made. That implies he is the teyrn by the game's end. It seems as if I lost the teyrnir to him by either being a Grey Warden or marrying the queen. But at the same time I took for myself Loghain's teyrnir. Anyway there is really no information at all about what happens when the current teyrn and teyrna die and they didn't appoint a successor. So the whole debate about this point is based on assumptions.

 

And the Cousland does not have the strongest claim. If we don't count Alistair and Anora, Arl Eamon is the one who does. He is the most respected noble in all Ferelden despite him being "only" an arl. And as a bonus, he has ties to the royal family, which you have not. Since, once again unless you can prove otherwise, simply a "higher" title does not give you the upper hand by default. Arl Eamon is not even your vassal. You are both the ruling monarch's vassals.

 

The engagement in this case doesn't really matter, since it would not even be an equal marriage. More importantly being a fiancee of a dead not-yet-corronated king gives you exactly zero claim on anything. If the marriage and corronation already happened, that would be a whole other discussion.

 

Meave's point about the military leadership was really weak, since the Cousland hasn't managed to win any battle thanks to his tactics or strategies. He led a head-on charge into a burning city and did not even slay the Archdemon herself. And he was saying that because of this feat Cousland was the best of the best of the best the country has seen since the previous Blight that not even touched Ferelden. Now compare that to Anora who basically ran the kingdom by herself for quite some time (sice Cailan was a moron) and the kingdom prospered because of her. So based on experiences only, Anora is far more qualified for ruling than a female Cousland.

 

For crying out loud stop bringing werewolves or golems into this. Then you can also say you will summon a horde of demons and undead and take the throne with them. Yes, you could probably get the throne with werewolves and golems, but you wouldn't been a queen for long. I honestly don't think that either Branka or Lady of the Forest or Irving (that one makes me laugh the most) would help you against what would be coming - a mother of all crusades comprising of templars, chevaliers and every able-bodied soldier of Orlais (and probably Grey Wardens as well, since you would be a traitor). And even if they did help you, you would stand exactly zero chance. Stop using this anymore, it is not an argument, it is Meave's head-canon and that has no place in a discussion that is supposed to be factual and not about "what if".

 

Female Cousland can't rule alone not only because of the game's limitations, but because she hasn't got a stronger claim on the throne than the other claimants. I will repeat this: she could be a sole ruler in OP's setting only if a precise string of ridiculous circumstances happened. And that is absolutely pointless to discuss. In the scope of the game she has no chance and while I would like for my male Cousland to be a sole ruler (and not just a prince-consort), I am glad the game doesn't allow this, because it would not fit both plot-wise and logic-wise. (On a sidenote, DAI compensates for this in that regard that you now play a figure who is more powerful than any king or queen, even more powerful than the empress of Orlais herself).

[X Equestris]

Also, the exact line of dialogue when marrying Alistair or Anora is "Alistair/Anora will be King/Queen, and I will rule beside him/her." There is no joint rule in Ferelden's monarchy. You are naming whoever you choose for the throne, and then announcing your intent to marry them. The Landsmeet is fine with that. But since Alistair dies before the marriage goes through, the PC's claim evaporates. If the marriage had taken place before the Battle of Denerim, then it would make sense for the PC to end up sole ruler, but that isn't what happened.

[Rizilliant]

It has to be a troll.. I just cannot fathom anyone being this ignorant in the face of suhch overwhelming evidence.. Clearly ignoring identifying factors, and choosing to insert ones own perameter.. 

[Dai Grepher]

Okay, here is all the canon proof I have from Origins showing that a male Cousland becomes King of Ferelden. I have not played a female Cousland, so I can't say if she becomes queen or not. That is up to Meave.

 

The claim: The male Cousland can become King of Ferelden through his noble title of Teyrn of Highever and vote of the banns in the Landsmeet.

 

First issue: Can the youngest Cousland become Teyrn of Highever?

 

I know I wrote the Dragon Age wiki is a public blog, and that is true, but what I post now is quoted from the game's codex entries.

 

http://dragonage.wik...entry:_Highever

 

Now, this proves two things. 1. The Cousland family is second in rank only to the king. 2. If the player is the human noble, Howe cannot claim the teyrnir. If the player is anything else then Howe is named the new Teyrn of Highever. As someone who played as the male Cousland, I can confirm that my codex does indeed reflect the first option.

 

So this tells us that without the younger Cousland, Howe takes the title of teyrn. Only the younger Cousland's survival prevents Howe from taking the title. Fergus survives in either case, yet he cannot prevent the title from being seized.

 

Next is Dairren's statement. He confirms that the younger Cousland is more likely to be named teyrn than his brother Fergus. This shows that title passes to the one most capable, not necessarily the eldest.

 

If you do not ask Bryce if Fergus will be the next teyrn, Bryce will not name an heir. Either way, Fergus goes missing in the Korkari Wilds and is not able to fulfill the role of teyrn. In this case, the younger Cousland is the only one left to carry the title and fulfill the role.

 

Next issue. Can the Teyrn of Highever issue a claim to the throne?

 

According to Dairren, many believed that Bryce should have been king rather than Cailan. This proves the Teyrn of Highever is eligible for the throne.

 

Loghain also confirms this, as he tried to take the throne through his own title as Teyrn of Gwaren. This was the reason for the attack on Highever, which was supposed to wipe out all the Cousland heirs, leaving Loghain as the only teyrn.

 

Next issue. Is this a strong claim?

 

Well, that is for the banns to decide, but considering Bryce was favored by so many, it shows that many banns would prefer this claim even over a full-blood relation claim. The next question is if this claim is stronger than Alistair's and Anora's.

 

According to the codex entry "Politics of Ferelden", the king is essentially a teyrn. He is the most powerful teyrn. So, if the king dies, the next most powerful teyrn is the Teyrn of Highever. No one is claiming that the teyrn becomes king automatically, but in practice he becomes the main guiding power until the banns can elect a new king.

 

So, the most powerful teyrn in Ferelden, Maric's bastard son, or Cailan's widow?

 

The strength of each lies in a different type of claim. Historically, there are three types of claims. By relation to the royal family by blood or marriage, by law through noble title, or by force. Eamon brought up his and Teagan's relation to Queen Rowan who was married to Maric, but he recognized that Anora's claim through marriage to Cailan was stronger. So he suggested Alistair, who is a descendant of King Maric. Blood is thicker than water. Another option is law or title. Sophia Dryden was Arland's cousin, so she had a family tie to use as a claim, but she was also an arlessa. Whether she used this or not is unknown, but her leadership experience, as well as Arland's lack of it, was probably brought up. Sophia failed in both cases. Another example is Loghain. He tried to make a claim to the throne through his title as a teyrn. Anora can confirm that Loghain was indeed putting himself forward as a candidate for the throne. If you tell her you will not support her and ask if she will support Alistair, she says that her father must be stopped from taking the throne. The last option, using force, is the method Calanhad used. He forced the banns to swear fealty to him, and with that he united Ferelden.

 

http://dragonage.wik...ics_of_Ferelden

 

Taking each candidate on their merits, Alistair is probably the weakest. He has no ruling or leadership experience. It can be assumed he would be Eamon's puppet. Anora supposedly has fives years of ruling experience, though that can't be verified. It is said that Cailan allowed her to administrate his lands, but even if that is the case, it could be argued that she lead Ferelden into the mess it was in. Regardless, once Cailan was dead, she was swept aside easily by her father, a lesser noble below the crown. This proves her inept in matters of political force. Alistair's only edge is his alleged blood relation, which only counts for something among banns who are willing to hold to tradition and take a risk on Alistair being anything like the father whom he never even met. The Cousland on the other hand was the full-blood son of Bryce (whom many wanted to be king) and Eleanor, held the highest commanding title at the time, demonstrated leadership ability in amassing a sizable army to defeat the blight all while other nobles plotted and even tried to assassinate him multiple times, and he helped other nobles in personal ways while exposing Loghain as the cause of the conflict. He also won the duel in the Landsmeet.

 

The Cousland actually fulfills two of the three styles of issuing a claim, title and force. Some banns could even value the blood relation he has to the Cousland line, and hold that on par with the Theirin bloodline, though this doesn't really count toward the first type of claim.

 

Next issue. How is the monarch determined?

 

http://dragonage.wik...ry:_The_Bannorn

 

"No person has ever sat upon the throne of Ferelden without first winning the approval of the Bannorn."

 

This proves the throne is not inherited. Every new monarch must be elected by the banns. No exceptions.

 

So the banns can vote for whoever they want, within reason. They can't vote for a mage, or non-human, or a foreigner for example. But they can vote for other banns, or teyrns, or arls, or relatives of the last ruler.

 

Next issue, and last question. Can the banns elect the Cousland as king?

 

Yes. Proof of this is seen in the game at the Landsmeet after the duel.

 

There are two replies that deal with joint rule. They are slightly different depending if Loghain was killed or not. The first option is to Anora when she says the Cousland can't seriously support Alistair's claim/temper tantrum. The reply is, "Anora will be queen, and I'll rule beside her". If Loghain dies, Arl Eamon asks the Cousland as arbiter of the dispute, what is his decision, who will lead Ferelden. The Cousland's reply is, "I shall rule at Queen Anora's side, as her husband".

 

Both options are accepted by the banns. Both options prove joint rule between the Cousland and Anora.

 

The first option states Anora will be queen and the Cousland will rule beside her. A consort does not rule. A king rules, and a joint-ruling king rules beside his queen. The words "rule beside" prove that the Cousland and Anora rule on equal standing. The Cousland is not under Anora. He is not beneath her. He is not a consort or a prince.

 

The second option states in reply to the question "who will lead" that the Cousland shall rule at Queen Anora's side, as her husband. This, admittedly, is slightly less direct than the first quote, but it has the same theme. The difference is that this reply mentions the marriage. Still, the Cousland is confirming that he will rule, and that it will be done at Queen Anora's side. Not under her, not beneath her, not at her behest, not as her consort. As her husband.

 

And now, for those who find these facts not to their personal tastes, I'm sure you'll bring up that Anora called the Cousland "consort" and "prince" and so on. For those claims I counter with other examples from Anora herself.

 

At the post coronation ceremony, Anora introduces the Cousland as the Hero who will soon be Ferelden's king. No consort talk there. Also, if you press Anora on this at the ceremony and say you look forward to being king, she will call you prince-consort, but then admit that the title is "perhaps a technicality". She then says you and her will have to talk about the role you'll wish to play.

 

This all stems from Anora's desire to rule and not be shoved out of the way again. By calling you a consort, erroneously might I add, what she is trying to do is claim ruling power from you so she can make all the decisions. But I would remind everyone that what she claims about the Cousland's title means nothing. All that matters is what the Cousland stated to the banns at the Landsmeet and what they voted on. They voted to make the Cousland king, Anora queen, and for them to rule jointly.

 

If the Cousland asks Anora if he could get out of their marriage if he wanted to, Anora tells him that short of dying against the archdemon, probably not. This is because of what the banns agreed to. The agreement was their marriage and joint rule. That is why the Cousland can't back out of it.

 

So, we done here? If not, I have proof from the other Dragon Age games, including as recent as Inquisition.

[Jeffry]

About Fergus, no heir is named and the title falls to you, because you are the last Cousland known alive, that is true. But once Fergus returns he has every right to get that title back as the first born (since the parents can't no longer decide who is more capable) and you can't simply dismiss that, since the Teyrn just as the King must seek the approval of his vassals (more on that later in this post).

 

What your dialogue lines say during the game about you being king / queen is wrong. The prince / princess title is the correct one since it features in epilogue and in Awakening, it is similar to United Kingdom, you have Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, not King Philip. The epilogue was most likely created after the Landsmeet and BW simply forgot to fix the dialogues there (which is not uncommon, BW is not really known for patching things). Simply you proclaiming it will be a joint rule means very little when it is up to the ruling monarch and the compromise (or power struggle) between you two how things will play out. It is clear especially with Anora, you talk about this both prior and post Landsmeet. It is not discussed like that with Alistair, since it would probably be a buzzkill and would not fit the romance.

 

Nobody ever disputed the fact, that Teyrn of Highever had the highest rank second to the King, but simply saying he has the highest "claim" is an assumption. And again, Bryce could have been considered as a possible ruler not only because he was a Teyrn, but more likely because Cailan was a young half-wit and the country could have become unstable, but the nobles decided against a revolt and stayed with the royal family. Although these are assumptions as well, just as what Dairren said. Of course Bryce's loyal subjects would like to see him as a king, since they love him.

 

Couslands had to be removed not because of some claim, which they have not, but because they presented a direct opposition. Bryce would have never agreed with Loghain's tyranny and would stand against him, not to put himself on the throne, but to get rid of an usurper. And Loghain knew he would not stand a chance against such force. Who would have became ruler in that scenario we simply can't say. It could be Bryce by uniting the banns, defeating Loghain and emerging as a leader, it could be Eamon, it could even be Anora (possibly marrying the younger Cousland if he were male or marrying Teagan).

 

Also, you make it almost sound as if Ferelden was a democracy and Landsmeet was a parliament. IT IS NOT SO AND NEVER HAS BEEN. It is a feudal society. King must seek the support of the banns, as a king had to do with his vassals in real feudal monarchy. THERE ARE NO ELECTIONS HELD in normal circumstances and no codex entry ever supports that. The banns either support the next in line ruler or they revolt and face the consequences. They could amass a stronger force and fight the ruler and his loyalits. Had they won, they would establish a new regime (untill the next rebellion). Had they lose, they would be hanged for treason. In the game the Landsmeet is called to "revolt" against a tyrant with undisputed evidences of his tyrrany and to present the true heir in order to stabilize the country, not to put another tyrant in his stead. But since both his and Anora's claims are strong (blood and marriage) there can be a decision between those two and banns will be happy with either of them (since they have a claim). There can't be a vote between rightful claimant and someone else, unless that someone else would be willing to fight for it as Loghain was and throw the country in yet another civil war which would completely ruined Ferelden for many decades to come.

 

The Codexes about Ferelden describe a typical feudal sociaty. The king can't rule the country without the support of his vassals, since in the end they are the ones who hold the land, provide armies and pay taxes in exchange for having the right to hold the land and collect taxes for themselves. The codex is supposed to illustrate that Ferelden is not an absolutist monarchy where the power of the nobles is diminished and the king basically rules as he wants (like in Orlais / France under Louis XIV).

 

For the last time, the Cousland can't be considered a sole ruler if there are 2 rightful heirs standing before him. And also Eamon and Teagan. You being Teyrn does not really matter. What would matter is if you have already married Alistair. Then you would have stronger position than both Anora and Eamon. But right now? You simply do not. You think you have, because you are interpreting the codexes wrong. You read the word support as if it meant the need to be direclty elected. No king in feudal society had to be elected from a pool of claimants / candidates. Ferelden is a feudal monarchy, something like England after Magna Carta (read something about that and about the fledgling english parliament, it sounds awfuly like those codex entries, which is not a coincidence, the only real difference here is gender equality presented in the game), Ferelden is not an elective monarchy like Holy Roman Empire.

[Dai Grepher]

Thanks for replying Jeffry.

 

I agree that the teyrnir is in question in the scenario where you are not monarch and Fergus is discovered to be alive. But as I wrote, we don't know how that discussion went. We just know Fergus is recognized as teyrn by the time Witch Hunt rolls around. So maybe the human noble gave the teyrnir to Fergus. Or maybe the monarch(s) gave it to him. Or maybe the banns did.

 

The codex isn't clear, but it says way back when, the banns gathered to appoint their teyrn, but that doesn't mean each new teyrn is elected. Calanhad revoked teyrn titles when he united Ferelden. The game shows that the monarch can name the Warden a teyrn over Gwaren.

 

So I don't dismiss that Fergus can try to get the title (back or for the first time) and I also recognize that he ends up becoming teyrn. My point is that we don't know what was involved in this process. But I disagree that Fergus, or any heir of a teyrnir, must seek approval from the banns of that teyrnir. This title is passed down, unlike the title of monarch. The teyrnir is property, and it is owned by that respective family, as are the soldiers. Can the banns choose which Cousland becomes teyrn? It isn't known.

 

But we do agree that at the time of the Landsmeet the Cousland was teyrn. That's the important thing.

 

Regarding the dialogue lines in the game at the Landsmeet, those being "wrong" is your opinion. Now, those COULD be wrong if BioWare intended on the Cousland not being a joint-ruling monarch, but unless you have evidence that this is the case then this issue is in dispute. How do you know those lines are wrong and not the epilogue texts? See my point?

 

Now you may be thinking that the same standard applies to me. Well, that's certainly true enough, but my case is slightly different. See in my case, the lines I use to back my claim that the Cousland is king are the lines that ACTUALLY DECIDE who rulers Ferelden. It is much more likely that my lines are correct since they carry such importance in relation to the game and how it is shaped. Your lines are merely... afterthoughts to the event. Also, I have my own "afterthought" lines to match yours. So your claims are met equally with my own, while my main claim stands alone. Do you honestly think BioWare incorrectly worded the very lines that decide who rules Ferelden? Or do you think it's more likely that those who typed up the epilogues were misinformed?

 

As I wrote before, how things work in the U.K. is completely irrelevant to this topic. Just because that's how it is in the U.K. doesn't mean that's how it is in Ferelden. Maybe the concept of Ferelden is based on the U.K. or maybe it's not. Personally, I think Ferelden's system is closer to feudal Japan with fiefdoms and daimyos. But you citing the process in the U.K. is like me citing the process in Japan. It has no baring on the lore of Dragon Age.

 

Don't know how it goes down with Alistair, but if he recognizes the F!Cousland as a joint-ruling queen, then doesn't that sort of indicate that joint-rule is how it actually is even in the case of an M!Cousland with Anora?

 

I never wrote that the ToH (too lazy to type Teyrn of Highever) had the highest claim to the throne based solely on his rank, I only wrote that he had the highest rank absent the king, and that this title gave him a strong claim to the throne. I never wrote that claim was necessarily stronger than Alistair's and Anora's according to the banns, though I personally think it is (in my opinion). What I wrote was that the strength of all these claims was for the banns to decide.

 

Dairren's statement is only proof that it's possible for Bryce as ToH to be elected king. That is my only point there. I'm sure Bryce supported Cailan himself. But in the game, Alistair and Anora proved themselves to be half-wits in their own ways. And if people liked Bryce enough to consider him for the crown, they would likely also approve of his son being king, provided he displayed the same qualities, which he can.

 

No, the codex I linked to and quoted (The Bannorn) clearly states that no person has ever sat upon the throne of Ferelden without first winning support from the Bannorn. The Codex "The Politics of Ferelden" also states that unlike other monarchies, power does not descend from the throne. Rather it rises from support of the freeholders.

 

http://dragonage.wik...ics_of_Ferelden

 

An election is held in every circumstance in which a new monarch is needed, even in a case like Cailan's where he was the clear heir. There is no codex for that, but one of the messages that displays on DA:O's loading screen states that Cailan was elected by the Landsmeet after Maric went missing. Regardless, the Landsmeet in Origins was a clear-cut case of the banns being needed to vote in the next monarch(s).

 

There is no "next in line" ruler in the absolute sense. Cailan was next in line after Maric, which gave him a claim and made him eligible, but even he needed to be elected by the Bannorn. Voting for someone else is not an act of rebellion. It is a bann's right to vote, and having a vote is pretty senseless if you can't vote for whoever you want. Only when a bann refuses to abide by the decision of the Bannorn does it constitute an act of rebellion, ala Sophia Dryden. She was imprisoned, not for running against Arland, but for refusing to swear fealty to him as king.

 

No, the civil war started before the Landsmeet, and it was due to Loghain's actions, and that wasn't a true rebellion because Loghain was the one at fault, not the banns. If anything, Loghain was the rebel. The civil war was halted by Eamon, who called the Landsmeet to settle the dispute of who shall rule.

 

Your statements are contradictory. You write that only those with a claim can be voted on unless it's Loghain who was willing to fight for it. That doesn't make sense. As I wrote before, Loghain's claim was through his title of teyrn. It is the same case with the Cousland, only the Cousland's title is higher than Loghain's. Each of these people had a claim to the throne.

 

Also, I would contend that the banns can elect even a commoner if they wanted to, though it would not be likely to succeed in a vote. But that is a separate issue. The Cousland's claim was the same as Loghain's, only better. So it's moot.

 

By the way, if Loghain wins the Landsmeet, the banns don't vote for Anora. They vote for Loghain. So Anora isn't even a contender unless YOU make her such (or if Anora supported her father, in which case he throws his support behind her).

 

Um... no. The codexes specifically state the difference between Ferelden and normal monarchies. In places like Orlais or Nevarra, the monarch rules over the lesser lords and ladies. Period. Any who dissent are guilty of treason. Period. The codex makes the distinction that Ferelden is quite the opposite. That the monarch has to win the support of lesser nobles in order to rule. It also states that this is a source of constant bewilderment to foreign ambassadors.

 

The Cousland can't be considered a sole ruler in any case because of gameplay issues. That has nothing to do with Alistair or Anora. What you're claiming is just flat out wrong. Lore-wise, the Cousland could be elected monarch, just as Bryce could have been, just as Loghain could have been. If you are so sure of yourself, then post proof from the game like I did.

 

Eamon is an arl. An arl is beneath a teyrn. Teagan is a bann, which is like an arl only not a vassal of a teyrn. So I don't know what makes you think Arl Eamon is above Teyrn Cousland.

 

Again, real world documents are irrelevant. Please post information from the codex or other parts of the game's canon.