505 réponses à ce sujet

[Elhanan]

It is not necessary to resort to those kind of magical explanation, if the cunning of the warden is high enough even before Riordan tells to you about the US the warden is allowed to say that s/he figured out earlier that the death of the archdemon had something to do with the taint ,it is simply a dialogue option for those who have an high cunning when they confront Riordan and he is impressed that you figured out this in part on yourself from your deduction.

Except perhaps the majority of the gameplay before such time, and this one does not use high Cunning on Mages.

[Aren]

Except perhaps the majority of the gameplay before such time, and this one does not use high Cunning on Mages.

It is simply a roleplaying possibility i think,  to roleplay a warden that at the time of the decision of letting Loghain alive(even if it was still unaware about the specific of the sacrifice) had some suspicion that Riordan was concerned about the whole Archdemon issue and that is way he wanted another GW.

[Elhanan]

It is simply a roleplaying possibility i think,  to roleplay a warden that at the time of the decision of letting Loghain alive(even if it was still unaware about the specific of the sacrifice) had some suspicion that Riordan was concerned about the whole Archdemon issue and that is way he wanted another GW.

Granted that it does grant a RP method for high CUN builds; simply is not one that I utilize.

[ShadowLordXII]

Why are you continuing to insist on the obvious and ignore everything else? I can't decide if you're really this irrational or just a half-bad troll.

Zevran brings a team of assassins, ambushes you, and then attempts to kill you and your party. Only when he loses does he offer his services. If you were actually as interested in justice as you say you are, you'd kill him for his crime of attempted murder, but you haven't managed to explain how Zevran is different from Loghain, other than the conflict playing out longer. And you're also ignoring what TEWR said, that Zevran can still betray you.

And why should Loghain back down for his crimes? What he says is actually much more powerful than an apology, and I don't think he has anything to apologize for. Loghain doesn't offer anything because you've already won. He has nothing left to offer and he knows it. He doesn't try to bargain for his life, and I find that a much more admirable trait than Zevran. Loghain does what's asked of him, whether it's dying on the floor of the Landsmeet or taking the Warden oath.

 

Saying that Loghain has nothing to apologize for is way too far.

 

It's admirable that he's willing to face death or Wardenhood with dignity. However, let's not forget that he brought those fates on himself.

 

Or I guess he shouldn't have to apologize for: Allying with Howe (a known traitor, torturer and murderer); Selling elves to Tevinter (Immoral and Illegal); Hiring assassins to kill the Wardens; Framing the Wardens for something that they didn't do; Poisoning Eamon; Capturing and imprisoning a templar; or attempting to bypass the Landsmeet and seize power for himself. (even if Teagan didn't say something, the Civil War was clearly on its way regardless)

 

Putting aside the clear fact that the Recruitment crisis is clearly contrived for forced drama (I've pointed this out before), there isn't much reason to recruit Loghain at the risk of losing Alistair.

 

It's also interesting that folk often bring up Zevran and Sten in defense of recruiting Loghain. Why not hire Loghain if you're willing to hire an assassin and a professed foreign murderer?

 

I'd argue that the difference lies in their particular situations. Hiring Zevran is a clear risk that can backfire as TEWR has pointed out. However, he has no real vendetta against you and you've already proven that you can defeat him (in fact, you can outright kill Zevran after beating him). Sten makes no excuses for himself and holds to the life debt that you forge with him unless he utterly loses respect for you.

 

With Loghain, you lose more than you gain from recruiting him. Why trade a trustworthy and battle-hardened templar for a paranoid and irrational old man? I'd sooner put up Zevran or Sten for the Joining than Loghain and I like Loghain's character.

[Qis]

Zevran and Sten both within redemption...Loghain is not.

 

Remember that Zevran doesn't mind you kill him, he just say "just don't eat my flesh", he's offering you a service if you spare him, if you don't then he's willing to die. He's just doing his job as an assassin, he's for hire, and his service for you is "free" as exchange of your sparing his life. A life debt.

 

Sten don't offer you anything, but he's accepting his punishment to die in the cage, he allow himself being captured, and he have been two weeks in the cage without food and water. But he prefer to die in battle. he admit hs crime and he regret. It is just that you are willing to give him another way to die, by defending Ferelden from The Blight. Even if he don't die, he pay his crime by saving more life by helping you ending The Blight.

 

What about Loghain?

 

He NEVER admit his mistakes, NEVER admit his crimes, even when he yield he NEVER admit anything. He just kneel and await his fate. It just that Riordan who suggest thing, Loghain himself is just a stuborn fool.

 

Being an honorable Cousland, i accept his yield and hear reasons, but i chop off his head in the end.. That's an honorable thing to do. Then we can elect a leader of Ferelden and march against the Archdemon.

[TEWR]

Zevran just doing his job, he's an assassin, but he failed in his ambush, then he offer his service in return for sparing him and he's proven loyal

 

Loghain is my enemy, hired Zevran to kill me, after he got busted in the Landsmeet for his crimes he don't back down, instead challenge me to duel, then he yield, ready to be punished, he offer nothing, that's why Alistair said "kill him already" if you refuse to kill him

 

It is just that Riordan who suggest he take the Joining, Loghain himself offer nothing and wait for punishment

 

And Ostagar was Loghain just doing his job; he's a general.

 

I ****** hate the rhetoric that Loghain should've cast thousands upon thousands of soldiers into the fray to save a king who was beyond saving -- he literally dies right as the retreat happens, in the span of less then two minutes -- because it says that the lives of ordinary people are cheap compared to someone like that. It's immature, selfish, and shows a poor mark as a leader.

 

It's why I always shudder when Cailan goes on about his drive for glory. Glory can be an effective tool for morale but not the way he did it.

 

And yup, you're cherrypicking.

 

"Zevran attacked me and failed and then he yielded! He's obviously going to be a good person!"

 

"Loghain attacked me and failed and then he yielded! He's nothing!!!!"

 

It's the same exact scenario, literally. Loghain hiring assassins was just politics. If you think any noble in the world hasn't done that, you're naive. Orzammar does it. Orlais does it. The cities of the Free Marches do it. ****, I wouldn't be surprised if Bryce Cousland did it. I don't hold it against him. I see it as a flattering sentiment because he's saying we're a threat.

 

 

 

He has nothing left to offer and he knows it. He doesn't try to bargain for his life, and I find that a much more admirable trait than Zevran. Loghain does what's asked of him, whether it's dying on the floor of the Landsmeet or taking the Warden oath. 

Also this
 

 

 

It is just that Riordan who suggest he take the Joining, Loghain himself offer nothing and wait for punishment

 

And yet in terms of canon you hear about how if he's spared there's a significant boost to morale for having the Hero of River Dane -- a man who represents Fereldan ideals, made more a symbol then a man -- fight on their side. 

 

It gives them hope. And hope is important.
 

Loghain is willing to accept whatever fate is given to him, which is truly a noble thing. He faces death with dignity, no matter how it happens.

[Qis]

And Ostagar was Loghain just doing his job; he's a general.

 

-snip-

 

 

Loghain don't do his job, he's a betrayer, he supposed to charge and support the king and Grey Wardens at the front line AT ALL COST after the beacon is lit, he don't do that

 

That what's a general should do, rather DIE defending his/her king than abandon the king to the enemy. It doesn't matter if the battle is lost, a general should be beside his king should that happen.

 

This alone show Loghain HAVE NO HONOR

 

The battle is lost  and Loghain surviving don't bring anything good to Ferelden anyway

[Artona]

 

 

Being an honorable Cousland, i accept his yield and hear reasons, but i chop off his head in the end.. That's an honorable thing to do. Then we can elect a leader of Ferelden and march against the Archdemon.

 

No. That has nothing to do with honour. You kill disarmed enemy, who surrendered. It's as honourable as execution of Harrowmont. 

 

 

Zevran and Sten both within redemption...Loghain is not.

 

BUT. WHY? 
Which crime Loghain did is so terrible? Slave-trading? Kingslaying? Please, name one, because right now it looks like you just go "Loghain is evil because". 

[Qis]

No. That has nothing to do with honour. You kill disarmed enemy, who surrendered. It's as honourable as execution of Harrowmont. 

 

 

BUT. WHY? 
Which crime Loghain did is so terrible? Slave-trading? Kingslaying? Please, name one, because right now it looks like you just go "Loghain is evil because". 

 

Harrowmont execution is done by Bhelen and it's his right as a new king

 

If you think Loghain betraying the king is a good thing "because he save his troop", then think about this, his troop dead in civil wars, what good is that? If he and all his troop dead at Ostagar, there will be no civil wars, and Ferelden will elect new king (likely it will be Alistair) using Landsmeet. Arl Eamon still have his knights, and everything go smoothly.

 

Loghain is beyond redemption because he never admit his mistakes.

[TEWR]

Loghain don't do his job, he's a betrayer, he supposed to charge and support the king and Grey Wardens at the front line AT ALL COST after the beacon is lit, he don't do that

 

That what's a general should do, rather DIE defending his/her king than abandon the king to the enemy. It doesn't matter if the battle is lost, a general should be beside his king should that happen.

 

This alone show Loghain HAVE NO HONOR

 

The battle is lost  and Loghain surviving don't bring anything good to Ferelden anyway

 

That is the most romantic and foolish sentiment I've ever heard in my bloody life.

 

"A general's duty is never to make a tactical retreat! It's better that he waste all of his troops in battle and that they DIE, leaving the nation without both its king and its general along with a strong army! It's better that the nation suffer and be caught off guard! Living to fight another day means nothing because they should all DIE"

 

You'd know Loghain has honor if you would bother to recruit him and befriend him. Since that's unlikely to ever happen though because you're obstinate, I just have to shake my head at what you're espousing.

 

Loghain did his duty to Ferelden, and that matters more than fulfilling a romantic sentiment of "death for the king!!!"

[TEWR]

 

 

 his troop dead in civil wars, what good is that?

 

A small percentage of his troops died in the Civil War, which Loghain is not culpable for having started. And that was mostly from guerrilla warfare on them because they couldn't win in a straight battle. If you paid attention, you'd know his army is still the most powerful during the Landsmeet -- only equaled by the army the Warden assembles -- and has won the Civil War from a military standpoint.

 

 If he and all his troop dead at Ostagar, there will be no civil wars, and Ferelden will elect new king (likely it will be Alistair) using Landsmeet. Arl Eamon still have his knights, and everything go smoothly.

 

 

Are you really that naive to believe they'd just easily elect a new king immediately and wouldn't fall to political infighting? Alistair wasn't even known by anyone except for Cailan, Anora, Loghain, Eamon, and Teagan.

[Qis]

That is the most romantic and foolish sentiment I've ever heard in my bloody life.

 

"A general's duty is never to make a tactical retreat! It's better that he waste all of his troops in battle and that they DIE, leaving the nation without both its king and its general along with a strong army! It's better that the nation suffer and be caught off guard! Living to fight another day means nothing because they should all DIE"

 

You'd know Loghain has honor if you would bother to recruit him and befriend him. Since that's unlikely to ever happen though because you're obstinate, I just have to shake my head at what you're espousing.

 

Loghain did his duty to Ferelden, and that matters more to fulfilling a romantic sentiment of "death for the king!!!"

 

Tactical retreat, yeah right...what good is that if his troops die in an endless civil wars? He also poison Arl eamon and making Arl Eamon troops busy with chasing miracles for their master. So called tactical retreat...that is just an excuse to justify his cowardice.

[Qis]

A small percentage of his troops died in the Civil War, which Loghain is not culpable for having started. And that was mostly from guerrilla warfare on them because they couldn't win in a straight battle. If you paid attention, you'd know his army is still the most powerful during the Landsmeet -- only equaled by the army the Warden assembles -- and has won the Civil War from a military standpoint.

 

 

Are you really that naive to believe they'd just easily elect a new king immediately and wouldn't fall to political infighting? Alistair wasn't even known by anyone except for Cailan, Anora, Loghain, Eamon, and Teagan.

 

But his surviving troop is not functional because of busy with civil wars instead of fighting the Darkspawn. Nothing good coming from that.

 

Eamon and Teagan are both inflential, you can see yourself how Alistair can become a king and everyone hail him. There's no problem for that. The problem is Loghain.

[TEWR]

From a purely military and logistical standpoint, they had to fight in the Civil War against those who started it. They couldn't march south through hostile territory -- the lands that are controlled by those rebelling against the crown. And that's EXACTLY what they're doing. By ignoring how Anora was okay with her father as Regent during war, they are effectively saying they are not loyal to her -- because then their supply lines would be harried.

 

The more fronts you try to wage a war on, the harder it is to actually WIN.

 

Loghain wanted their primary focus to be on the Darkspawn, but he HAD to fight against the banns that rebelled both to have a unified front and to solidify Anora as queen and his regency.

 

Hell, besides his post-Ostagar comments to the Landsmeet, Cauthrien says this was what he wanted! That Ferelden would unite after Ostagar and push back the Darkspawn without need of crawling to Orlais for assistance. Anora says it best.

 

My father is also an idealist

 

And yes, Teagan is so influential he broke a fragile peace during that Landsmeet and caused the Civil War to boil over. I'd hardly put him forward as being a man of admiration.

 

How many innocents died during the war that Teagan's comments instigated? Peasants and soldiers better used to fight the Darkspawn?

[Artona]

 

 

Tactical retreat, yeah right...what good is that if his troops die in an endless civil wars? He also poison Arl eamon and making Arl Eamon troops busy with chasing miracles for their master. So called tactical retreat...that is just an excuse to justify his cowardice.

 

Yeah, so he should just order his troops to commit suicide even before battle, if they are going to die anyway, right? What kind of twisted logic is that? 

You seem to mistake "cowardice" with "not being and idiot". I mean only monster would sacrifice thousands of lives and leave kingdom open for his personal sense of honor. 

[Monica21]

Saying that Loghain has nothing to apologize for is way too far.
 
It's admirable that he's willing to face death or Wardenhood with dignity. However, let's not forget that he brought those fates on himself.

He does admit to that. "All of this can rightly be called my fault."
 

Or I guess he shouldn't have to apologize for: Allying with Howe (a known traitor, torturer and murderer); Selling elves to Tevinter (Immoral and Illegal); Hiring assassins to kill the Wardens; Framing the Wardens for something that they didn't do; Poisoning Eamon; Capturing and imprisoning a templar; or attempting to bypass the Landsmeet and seize power for himself. (even if Teagan didn't say something, the Civil War was clearly on its way regardless)

What's the point of an apology at this point? I mean, really? What would it mean? If he said, "Hey, yeah, sorry about Howe. That guy turned out to be a real jerk." Would it matter? Would your opinion of Loghain change? The way Loghain addresses his actions at the Landsmeet is something that I can admire. He's not making excuses or trying to weasel his way out of anything, and I'll be the first to agree that Loghain made mistakes, and several of them. Most of what he did was for the sake of political expediency and he doesn't shy away from stating almost exactly that. An apology would be meaningless and trite to me. Once Loghain decides something he fully commits to it, and while I know he has regrets, I would have been disappointed if he had said, "Sorry about that" if only because I wouldn't believe him. He did what he thought was best at the time, but with incredibly high stakes. He found out he was wrong, and it wasn't because of anything he did, but because he didn't fully understand the situation or the Warden's role in it.
 

Putting aside the clear fact that the Recruitment crisis is clearly contrived for forced drama (I've pointed this out before), there isn't much reason to recruit Loghain at the risk of losing Alistair.

I wish I could talk Alistair into staying around, but since I can't, I will readily give him up for a guy who's actually willing to do the job. Alistair shows himself time and time again to be unwilling to make hard decisions, and this case is no different. Alistair abandons his duty because he doesn't get his way. Now, this is all opinion-based, but just based on that I don't see a reason to keep Alistair and lose Loghain.
 

It's also interesting that folk often bring up Zevran and Sten in defense of recruiting Loghain. Why not hire Loghain if you're willing to hire an assassin and a professed foreign murderer?

Well, you're not hiring Zevran. He joins you willingly. And the opportunity to "hire" Loghain never presents itself. He's needed as a Warden, not as a mercenary.
 

I'd argue that the difference lies in their particular situations. Hiring Zevran is a clear risk that can backfire as TEWR has pointed out. However, he has no real vendetta against you and you've already proven that you can defeat him (in fact, you can outright kill Zevran after beating him). Sten makes no excuses for himself and holds to the life debt that you forge with him unless he utterly loses respect for you.

Loghain doesn't have a vendetta against you personally, but has a well-founded mistrust of the Wardens. I don't really care about Loghain's mistrust, because I just need to get him on my side.
 

With Loghain, you lose more than you gain from recruiting him. Why trade a trustworthy and battle-hardened templar for a paranoid and irrational old man? I'd sooner put up Zevran or Sten for the Joining than Loghain and I like Loghain's character.

Alistair actually proves that he can't be trusted to carry through on a sworn duty. The biggest decision he's ever made in his life is to become a Warden and he actively chooses to abandon that duty. So I'm going to have to disagree with you about him being trustworthy. While my Warden is not ready to go so far as to call Loghain trustworthy after the Landsmeet, he more than proves his worth.

[Qis]

Yeah, so he should just order his troops to commit suicide even before battle, if they are going to die anyway, right? What kind of twisted logic is that? 

You seem to mistake "cowardice" with "not being and idiot". I mean only monster would sacrifice thousands of lives and leave kingdom open for his personal sense of honor. 

 

 Is this a tactical retreat? He WAITED the beacon to lit and then order a retreat...if he really want a tactical retreat he will retreat long before that, he just want to make it look like the beacon is a signal to retreat to all his troops

 

[Monica21]

Tactical retreat, yeah right...what good is that if his troops die in an endless civil wars? He also poison Arl eamon and making Arl Eamon troops busy with chasing miracles for their master. So called tactical retreat...that is just an excuse to justify his cowardice.

His troops didn't die in endless civil wars, or didn't you notice the very large human army you're leading up to the gates of Denerim? And "making" Eamon's troops chase a miracle? Well, that's Isolde's fault, not Loghain's. And by that logic you can blame the Warden for chasing the same miracle instead of telling Teagan to just step the hell up since he's the rightful heir and Eamon is incapacitated. Literally no one has time for Urn of Sacred Ashes.

[Qis]

His troops didn't die in endless civil wars, or didn't you notice the very large human army you're leading up to the gates of Denerim? And "making" Eamon's troops chase a miracle? Well, that's Isolde's fault, not Loghain's. And by that logic you can blame the Warden for chasing the same miracle instead of telling Eamon to just step the hell up since he's the rightful heir and Eamon is incapacitated. Literally no one has time for Urn of Sacred Ashes.

 

Arl eamon troops will be intact if Loghain don't hire Jowan to poison Arl Eamon. The vreason he poison Arl Eamon is to disble that poor man from disturbing his plan on betraying the king.

 

Arl Eamon is late "for reason", and we can guess it is because he feel sick, so Arl Eamon don't arrive at Ostagar to see the betrayal.

 

Jowan meet Loghain before Ostagar...

[TEWR]

 Is this a tactical retreat? He WAITED the beacon to lit and then order a retreat...if he really want a tactical retreat he will retreat long before that, he just want to make it look like the beacon is a signal to retreat to all his troops

 

 

You do remember how we were supposed to light the beacon when ALL of the Darkspawn were committed to the battle? Word of God -- and the very end of the battle where Duncan dies -- shows that Darkspawn were still pouring in from the Wilds, and you can even see this standing on the bridge of Ostagar. Monica21 can probably link the photos showing the horde stretching back into the ass-end of the Wilds.

 

**** even Morrigan and Flemeth say that the horde is strongest in the Wilds right now.

 

We light the beacon not only an hour late -- which Loghain had no way of knowing was due to Darkspawn interference -- but also without having performed it right, as Darkspawn are still coming out in droves. Moreover, Cailan's forces are cracking under the pressure.

 

though in all fairness, the beacon level was designed so that it'd be impossible for anyone to look out at the battle. But that's Bioware's failing and in terms of canon Alistair just blindly rushed to light it without surveying the battle.

 

Which makes his "The king had nearly defeated them!" comment all the more infuriating. DUDE you didn't even bother to check the battle after that Ogre was killed.

[Aren]

 

Putting aside the clear fact that the Recruitment crisis is clearly contrived for forced drama (I've pointed this out before), there isn't much reason to recruit Loghain at the risk of losing Alistair.

 

 

and that's where i disagree,since to me and apparently others players as well, lose Alistair for Loghain was well worth it.

[Monica21]

Arl eamon troops will be intact if Loghain don't hire Jowan to poison Arl Eamon. The vreason he poison Arl Eamon is to disble that poor man from disturbing his plan on betraying the king.
 
Arl Eamon is late "for reason", and we can guess it is because he feel sick, so Arl Eamon don't arrive at Ostagar to see the betrayal.
 
Jowan meet Loghain before Ostagar...

I scoff at anyone calling Eamon "that poor man." That said, of course he did. And so what? It's politics. And Eamon's not at Ostagar because Cailan never called on his troops. He had to be reminded by Duncan that his troops were ready, and Cailan says, "He just wants in on the glory" which may be the only thing Cailan ever got right.
 

You do remember how we were supposed to light the beacon when ALL of the Darkspawn were committed to the battle? Word of God -- and the very end of the battle where Duncan dies -- shows that Darkspawn were still pouring in from the Wilds, and you can even see this standing on the bridge of Ostagar. Monica21 can probably link the photos showing the horde stretching back into the ass-end of the Wilds.

What's that you say? A detailed explanation of Ostagar? Well here you go. 

[Aren]

 

Which makes his "The king had nearly defeated them!" comment all the more infuriating. DUDE you didn't even bother to check the battle after that Ogre was killed.

who said this line^

[Monica21]

who said this line^

 

Alistair says it after you wake up at Flemeth's hut. I think you have to get to it through specific dialogue choices, but he does say it.

[Elhanan]

I have no reason to believe that those in the Tower could not witness the action, as they had to be able to see in order to receive the signal to light it. Alistair was informed what to look for and took appropriate action.

Even Ser Cauthrian questioned the retreat, but then Alix is special....