522 réponses à ce sujet

[errant_knight]

SusanStoHelit wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

I've also noticed that Anora talks about Fereldan, and the people of Fereldan, more as a concept than as living breathing individuals with lives of their own, unlike Alistair who feels great empathy for the people of Lothering and deeply regrets having to leave them to their fate. 

Me too - that's what I meant by the 'unimportant' people. They're not people to Loghain or Anora, or at least they're nor 'real people' whose situation, whose lives, whose welfare matters - they're numbers, ciphers, the 'faceless masses'. I detest that, irl, historically, or ingame. And I'll oppose people who think that way on sheer principle.

Edit: In fact, Loghain would've made a great Orlesian chevalier as they're depicted in the Orlesian occupation. He is what he hates. Oh, the irony.

Good point. I think the whole 'becoming that which you hate' thing is a potential danger for the grey warden's too. It wouldn't be all that difficult for some of them to go so far darkside to defeat a blight that the purpose of protecting Thedas is lost. Sophia Dryden did, and that wasn't even for a blight.

Modifié par errant_knight, 09 février 2010 - 01:58 .

[melkathi]

SusanStoHelit wrote...



Yes, she really doesn't give a sh*t about anyone but herself. I would like her a lot more if she was 'ambitious' rather than 'power-hungry', if that explains what I mean. I don't mind that she likes to rule, likes to be important and powerful and influential. I do mind that she is willing to go to any lengths to get that power. She is no different to her father in that - willing to do anything, no matter how despicable, to get what she wants. And she just doesn't care if what she does hurts other people (also like Loghain). Further, it's not only their opponents they hurt - it's all the innocent bystanders who get in their way, or whom they simply regard as unimportant.

Though truth be told, I don't think Anora is a female Bhelen.


But indeed, Anora will only care about people if she feels this will aid her ambitions. She can be all nice to an elven warden, but the moment the Alienage has trouble she'll come down hard on the elves. She might not share Vaughan's recreational tastes, but like her dad she absolutely believes in a two class society: there are human nobles and the human commoners they rule over, nothing else.

[errant_knight]

melkathi wrote...

SusanStoHelit wrote...



Yes, she really doesn't give a sh*t about anyone but herself. I would like her a lot more if she was 'ambitious' rather than 'power-hungry', if that explains what I mean. I don't mind that she likes to rule, likes to be important and powerful and influential. I do mind that she is willing to go to any lengths to get that power. She is no different to her father in that - willing to do anything, no matter how despicable, to get what she wants. And she just doesn't care if what she does hurts other people (also like Loghain). Further, it's not only their opponents they hurt - it's all the innocent bystanders who get in their way, or whom they simply regard as unimportant.

Though truth be told, I don't think Anora is a female Bhelen.


But indeed, Anora will only care about people if she feels this will aid her ambitions. She can be all nice to an elven warden, but the moment the Alienage has trouble she'll come down hard on the elves. She might not share Vaughan's recreational tastes, but like her dad she absolutely believes in a two class society: there are human nobles and the human commoners they rule over, nothing else.

You just made me think of an interesting point. I was about to say that it is likely that all the nobility see a two class society as the only possibility, and that while some nobles such as Bann Teagan believe that it is their duty, and a matter of honor, to protect the people for whom they have responsibility, they would see the lower class as something entirely different from themselves. But that's not true of Alistair, is it? We know from his fade dream that if Goldana hadn't been such a shrew, he would have been perfectly happy consider himself family with a laundress. One wonders how that might affect his rule....

[RangerSG]

melkathi wrote...

SusanStoHelit wrote...



Yes, she really doesn't give a sh*t about anyone but herself. I would like her a lot more if she was 'ambitious' rather than 'power-hungry', if that explains what I mean. I don't mind that she likes to rule, likes to be important and powerful and influential. I do mind that she is willing to go to any lengths to get that power. She is no different to her father in that - willing to do anything, no matter how despicable, to get what she wants. And she just doesn't care if what she does hurts other people (also like Loghain). Further, it's not only their opponents they hurt - it's all the innocent bystanders who get in their way, or whom they simply regard as unimportant.

Though truth be told, I don't think Anora is a female Bhelen.


But indeed, Anora will only care about people if she feels this will aid her ambitions. She can be all nice to an elven warden, but the moment the Alienage has trouble she'll come down hard on the elves. She might not share Vaughan's recreational tastes, but like her dad she absolutely believes in a two class society: there are human nobles and the human commoners they rule over, nothing else.

Honestly, I think blaming the elven situation in that epilogue on Anora is weak. There are Arls for a reason. And local issues are supposed to be dealt with by the local ruler. If you're blaming anyone, blame whoever got left as Arl for forcing the Queen's hand. I file this one under the, "I hate Anora because she can marry Alistair and my (elf/mage) PC cannot" syndrome.

[SusanStoHelit]

RangerSG wrote...

Honestly, I think blaming the elven situation in that epilogue on Anora is weak. There are Arls for a reason. And local issues are supposed to be dealt with by the local ruler. If you're blaming anyone, blame whoever got left as Arl for forcing the Queen's hand. I file this one under the, "I hate Anora because she can marry Alistair and my (elf/mage) PC cannot" syndrome.

Not true - or not in my case anyway. I've finished the game precisely once - some others are getting close - and that was with a male Cousland, who married Anora. I hated getting that damn card in the epilogue. I married my pc to her specifically to have some moderating influence on her, because I didn't damn well like or trust her.

I dislike the situation of the elves throughout the game (as I do that of the mages) and that is true regardless of my origin. I simply dislike injustice and cruelty. And yes, I'd blame the arl of Denerim too, but 'the buck stops here'. Anora is Queen, she's ultimately responsible. Not so much for the crack down - you have to do that with riots - but for things having gotten to that point. There wasn't a crack down on lower class/common humans. They weren't rioting. Why? Because even if things were tough, they still had enough to eat. And that, as far as I'm concerned, can be ultimately laid at the feet of whoever is in charge. If everyone is starving, it's beyond anyone's control. If only one group is starving, it's another story.

[errant_knight]

RangerSG wrote...

melkathi wrote...

SusanStoHelit wrote...



Yes, she really doesn't give a sh*t about anyone but herself. I would like her a lot more if she was 'ambitious' rather than 'power-hungry', if that explains what I mean. I don't mind that she likes to rule, likes to be important and powerful and influential. I do mind that she is willing to go to any lengths to get that power. She is no different to her father in that - willing to do anything, no matter how despicable, to get what she wants. And she just doesn't care if what she does hurts other people (also like Loghain). Further, it's not only their opponents they hurt - it's all the innocent bystanders who get in their way, or whom they simply regard as unimportant.

Though truth be told, I don't think Anora is a female Bhelen.


But indeed, Anora will only care about people if she feels this will aid her ambitions. She can be all nice to an elven warden, but the moment the Alienage has trouble she'll come down hard on the elves. She might not share Vaughan's recreational tastes, but like her dad she absolutely believes in a two class society: there are human nobles and the human commoners they rule over, nothing else.

Honestly, I think blaming the elven situation in that epilogue on Anora is weak. There are Arls for a reason. And local issues are supposed to be dealt with by the local ruler. If you're blaming anyone, blame whoever got left as Arl for forcing the Queen's hand. I file this one under the, "I hate Anora because she can marry Alistair and my (elf/mage) PC cannot" syndrome.

Let's not cast aspersions on each other's ideas. No filing filing things under whatever, 'kay? Disagree, but don't dismiss or insult.

 I have to disagree about it being 'weak'. As far as I know, thet ending only occurs when Anora rules alone, making the supposition that the solution, and perhaps the problem, can be laid at Anora's door.

Modifié par errant_knight, 09 février 2010 - 05:01 .

[pharos_gryphon]

Anora never struck me as intentionally malicious like Bhelen, nor intentionally cruel towards the elves and/or commons... moreso she just seemed to exhibit that casual superiority that is prevalent in the world at large. Right or wrong, the overriding worldview by most humans is that humans are simply better than elves. It's just simply the way things are, and the way the Maker made them, in their eyes. Not that I'm in any way shape or form condoning prejudice in our own societies, or saying that those in the game setting are simply 'misunderstood', I'm just trying to point out that in her case it didn't seem so much an outright disgust or hatred, but merely a misguided acceptance of an in itself misguided social norm.

[errant_knight]

pharos_gryphon wrote...

Anora never struck me as intentionally malicious like Bhelen, nor intentionally cruel towards the elves and/or commons... moreso she just seemed to exhibit that casual superiority that is prevalent in the world at large. Right or wrong, the overriding worldview by most humans is that humans are simply better than elves. It's just simply the way things are, and the way the Maker made them, in their eyes. Not that I'm in any way shape or form condoning prejudice in our own societies, or saying that those in the game setting are simply 'misunderstood', I'm just trying to point out that in her case it didn't seem so much an outright disgust or hatred, but merely a misguided acceptance of an in itself misguided social norm.

I agree. It's the way the nobility view the world, in the same way the sky is blue. It actually makes Alistair's desire to know the 'low born' side of his family quite remarkable. He's in a very precarious place on the social ladder. Many in his position would be doing everything they could to distance themselves from those roots.

Modifié par errant_knight, 09 février 2010 - 04:57 .

[draxynnus]

errant_knight wrote...

SusanStoHelit wrote...

Me too - that's what I meant by the 'unimportant' people. They're not people to Loghain or Anora, or at least they're nor 'real people' whose situation, whose lives, whose welfare matters - they're numbers, ciphers, the 'faceless masses'. I detest that, irl, historically, or ingame. And I'll oppose people who think that way on sheer principle.

Edit: In fact, Loghain would've made a great Orlesian chevalier as they're depicted in the Orlesian occupation. He is what he hates. Oh, the irony.

Good point. I think the whole 'becoming that which you hate' thing is a potential danger for the grey warden's too. It wouldn't be all that difficult for some of them to go so far darkside to defeat a blight that the purpose of protecting Thedas is lost. Sophia Dryden did, and that wasn't even for a blight.

There's a reason "be careful when you look into the abyss" is one of those old proverbs. On the other hand, it's probably a darn sight easier for a freedom fighter to become an uncaring noble through doing what they see as necessary to win than for a human to become a Darkspawn, though.

Regarding Anora...it does seem as if she's more concerned about the power than using it for good, doesn't she? The first betrayal I can accept - she did, after all, take pains to point out that she shouldn't be identified even to Loghain's people, so if you identify her you've effectively already betrayed her yourself. However, her throwing a snit and betraying you at the Landsmeet if you support Alistair over her is telling - part of her reasoning for siding with the Wardens is that she claims to believe that Loghain should be removed from power, and yet if she's not going to get that power for herself than she'll try to hand it back to the man she herself claims has gone too far. While she expresses reservations about Alistair's competance, at least he's sane.

[FierachEredasSoulchiou]

SusanStoHelit wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

I've also noticed that Anora talks about Fereldan, and the people of Fereldan, more as a concept than as living breathing individuals with lives of their own, unlike Alistair who feels great empathy for the people of Lothering and deeply regrets having to leave them to their fate. 

Me too - that's what I meant by the 'unimportant' people. They're not people to Loghain or Anora, or at least they're nor 'real people' whose situation, whose lives, whose welfare matters - they're numbers, ciphers, the 'faceless masses'. I detest that, irl, historically, or ingame. And I'll oppose people who think that way on sheer principle.

Edit: In fact, Loghain would've made a great Orlesian chevalier as they're depicted in the Orlesian occupation. He is what he hates. Oh, the irony.

Wrong.

Contrary to popular belief. Loghain actually does care about the people of Ferelden, or atleast his soldiers if you've bothered to recruit him and listen to his party banter.

Tell me, what do you know of Orlesian chevaliers to be comparing them to Loghain?

[errant_knight]

FierachEredasSoulchiou wrote...

SusanStoHelit wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

I've also noticed that Anora talks about Fereldan, and the people of Fereldan, more as a concept than as living breathing individuals with lives of their own, unlike Alistair who feels great empathy for the people of Lothering and deeply regrets having to leave them to their fate. 

Me too - that's what I meant by the 'unimportant' people. They're not people to Loghain or Anora, or at least they're nor 'real people' whose situation, whose lives, whose welfare matters - they're numbers, ciphers, the 'faceless masses'. I detest that, irl, historically, or ingame. And I'll oppose people who think that way on sheer principle.

Edit: In fact, Loghain would've made a great Orlesian chevalier as they're depicted in the Orlesian occupation. He is what he hates. Oh, the irony.

Wrong.

Contrary to popular belief. Loghain actually does care about the people of Ferelden, or atleast his soldiers if you've bothered to recruit him and listen to his party banter.

Tell me, what do you know of Orlesian chevaliers to be comparing them to Loghain?

Provide examples please. We're having a discussion where we back things up, not telling people they're wrong to believe as they do. It sounds like you have something interesting to add, but we need the details of what is said to be able to discuss it. If you think the Orleisian comment is wrong, tell us why you think so, and I'm sure there will be further conversation about it.

Modifié par errant_knight, 09 février 2010 - 09:09 .

[Mabari Owns High Dragon]

I really don't think he knew much more. One thing is for sure, he underestimated the darkspawn. He assumed his army would be enough. As for the Orlesians, I don't think they really had time to wait for them. As in, the darkspawn came before they did. In otherwords, Cailan did put too much trust in the Grey Wardens, Loghain had a point.

[errant_knight]

Mabari Owns High Dragon wrote...

I really don't think he knew much more. One thing is for sure, he underestimated the darkspawn. He assumed his army would be enough. As for the Orlesians, I don't think they really had time to wait for them. As in, the darkspawn came before they did. In otherwords, Cailan did put too much trust in the Grey Wardens, Loghain had a point.

I'm not going to go back through the thread here, but if you haven't read it, you might want to. Some very interesting points have been made about all those things pointing to many being debatable at very least and, to many of us, it doesn't seem that simple.

[FierachEredasSoulchiou]

My apologies. My posts tend to get more curt as I tire, and start to border on being really rude.

Loghain's party banter with Wynne makes it pretty clear that he thought Cailan was beyond saving at the time the beacon was lit. Whether Cailan and his men actually were beyond saving is up and open for debate, but there you have it. In the same exchange, he notes to Wynne that if he thought there was any chance at all of saving Cailan, he would've done so, and as it was, he decided to withdraw and keep his men alive, rather then risk (in his opinion), a foolhardy rescue attempt that would cost more men. Was it cruel to let the army that was with Cailan get slaughtered? Yes. He thought it would've been an even bigger waste to compound the tragedy that already happened with more wasteful spending of men. Loghain states that he knew the men, their families, and that he knew "exactly how much" he lost that day.

The rest is my own speculation. Prior to the darkspawn overwhelming Cailan, he probably decided that the darkspawn wasn't a big enough threat to warrant aid from the country he hated the most (and for good reason), and would rather wait for more reinforcements from people like Arl Eamon. After the defeat at Ostagar, he probably began to see the Blight as the true threat, but only his stubborn pride kept him from asking for foreign aid, but we do see that he has sent emissaries to the dwarves, probably asking for aid. He had Uldred stage a coup at the Circle Tower to completely gain the support of the mages against the darkspawn, and if everything went as planned, he may have even defeated the darkspawn on his own, granted, Loghain's still an extremely formidable general.

But, best laid plans. Uldred was overwhelmed by the very demons he summoned in his coup attempt, the banns refused to believe Loghain's orders and started a bloody civil war, and Orzammar's king was just recently indisposed and therefore were unable to help Loghain.

Modifié par FierachEredasSoulchiou, 09 février 2010 - 09:42 .

[SusanStoHelit]

I don't think Loghain does care about his men - except insofar as he needs them to support him and his goals. And even if he does, it doesn't invalidate my argument, since I was not referring to soldiers only - but the peasants and farmers across the country - and the elves in the alienage. Loghain abandons these people to the darkspawn, or sells them into slavery, because what he wants is more important than they are.



Further, I do know about the Orlesian occupation. Loghain is perfectly willing to brutalise the people he should be protecting, because it suits his purposes to do so. His needs, his goals, his ideas outweigh those of all other people. And he will kill, torture, assassinate, falsely accuse, and sell into slavery anyone he wants to serve his own ends. Sound like the brutal Orlesians to you? It does to me. But ymmv.

[draxynnus]

Regarding the dwarves:

The impression I got from Loghain's emissaries is that they at least considered the dwarves to be part of Ferelden and, in fact, subject to Loghain's regency. Now, it's possible that that was the outlook of the emissaries rather than Loghain's own perspective (Loghain never claims the title of king himself, even if he does claim most of the powers), but if they've managed to make a diplomatic gaffe like that on their own, Loghain chose his representatives...poorly.

Modifié par draxynnus, 09 février 2010 - 10:55 .

[melkathi]

edit: Ah sod this. Can't be bothered to argue on the interweb today

Modifié par melkathi, 09 février 2010 - 10:58 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

errant_knight wrote...

Feraele wrote...
As for the Orlesian wardens...they were turned away at the border...weren't they?  Think Loghain had something to do with that.    Hence why they didn't show up.

We don't know when they were turned back, really. I  don't think Loghain could have done that while Cailan was still alive, so I think it was after Ostagar.

Eh? We do know there were stopped and turned back on the border on Loghains orders.

[Vicious]

Bring Loghain to Ostagar for a second opinion.



For extra fun, watch him freak out if you want to leave Cailan the way you found him.



That's all I've got, too many people think they understand the whole plot but have never once spared Loghain to hear what he's got to say and consider it. I recommend everyone do it at least once, it's a fun switch.

[Sabriana]

Agreed.

And listen to what he has to say when it comes to the time to make the sacrifice. Interesting, that.

I don't own RtO but I watched the part (youtube, I think it was). All I can say is: OY.

[errant_knight]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Feraele wrote...
As for the Orlesian wardens...they were turned away at the border...weren't they?  Think Loghain had something to do with that.    Hence why they didn't show up.

We don't know when they were turned back, really. I  don't think Loghain could have done that while Cailan was still alive, so I think it was after Ostagar.

Eh? We do know there were stopped and turned back on the border on Loghains orders.

 Yes, but I don't believe that we know if it was before or after the battle.

I don't actually think Loghain was uncaring. I think he believed that the was doing the best for Fereldan at every step along the way. I also think he was entirely wrong, at least partly because he isn't completely rational. His opinion about the battle and whether his forces would have made a difference is suspect, particularly in light ot the other decisions he made, most notably, trying to have the PC and Alistair killed. If he wasn't trying to cover his tracks, why do that? That doesn't argue that he believed himself justified. And, like Anora and Morrigan, there's a big question about when you can believe him, which is even more complicated because I think Loghain believes most of what he says.

Modifié par errant_knight, 09 février 2010 - 04:45 .

[bloodtallow]

I think it's interesting to consider what "caring about Ferelden" really means. I agree with those who question Loghain's commitment to the other Fereldans at Ostagar - I think he intentionally leaves them high and dry, and have no qualms about calling him a regicide for what he did.



But I'd like to point out that in Ferelden history, it is extremely rare for "nationalism" to play a large part in the desires and actions of the country's people. And so despite the shock and horror we may feel over Loghain's actions, in Ferelden, his shift of tactics (sudden or not), and of loyalty, is not at all unheard of.



In the codices about the Bannorn and the Politics of Ferelden, respectively, it's mentioned that infighting among the different banns is commonplace, with loyalties shifting as easily and quickly as the seasons. Skirmishes and full-blown wars can occur over the smallest of insults between banns, and as the banns are constantly trying to gain the support of the local freeholders, political intrigue, as well as grappling, are just part of the everyday routine. We are told in-game that Ferelden has united only four times under a single banner.



So in being "loyal to Ferelden," who exactly does Loghain need to show loyalty to? The king? Perhaps, but kings, just like banns and arls, come and go, and their power is in many ways dictated by the lower nobles and their subjects. Loghain may not be an ethical man in our eyes for what he did, but his actions do show the mercurial nature of Ferelden politics, and the fact that no ruler is ever completely safe.

[errant_knight]

bloodtallow wrote...

I think it's interesting to consider what "caring about Ferelden" really means. I agree with those who question Loghain's commitment to the other Fereldans at Ostagar - I think he intentionally leaves them high and dry, and have no qualms about calling him a regicide for what he did.

But I'd like to point out that in Ferelden history, it is extremely rare for "nationalism" to play a large part in the desires and actions of the country's people. And so despite the shock and horror we may feel over Loghain's actions, in Ferelden, his shift of tactics (sudden or not), and of loyalty, is not at all unheard of.

In the codices about the Bannorn and the Politics of Ferelden, respectively, it's mentioned that infighting among the different banns is commonplace, with loyalties shifting as easily and quickly as the seasons. Skirmishes and full-blown wars can occur over the smallest of insults between banns, and as the banns are constantly trying to gain the support of the local freeholders, political intrigue, as well as grappling, are just part of the everyday routine. We are told in-game that Ferelden has united only four times under a single banner.

So in being "loyal to Ferelden," who exactly does Loghain need to show loyalty to? The king? Perhaps, but kings, just like banns and arls, come and go, and their power is in many ways dictated by the lower nobles and their subjects. Loghain may not be an ethical man in our eyes for what he did, but his actions do show the mercurial nature of Ferelden politics, and the fact that no ruler is ever completely safe.

You make a very interesting point! I have a little trouble getting my mind around that, I must say....

[AndreaDraco]

I simply think that Loghain - like he said during the cutscene where he's on the balcony with Anora and challenged by Bann Teagan - loyalty is not toward a specific King or family, but to the indipende of Ferelden. I think his attitude is very modern, in that it perfectly represents a true form of patriotic nationalism -- I think that Loghain is one of the few men in Ferelden to feel this way.

[errant_knight]

AndreaDraco wrote...

I simply think that Loghain - like he said during the cutscene where he's on the balcony with Anora and challenged by Bann Teagan - loyalty is not toward a specific King or family, but to the indipende of Ferelden. I think his attitude is very modern, in that it perfectly represents a true form of patriotic nationalism -- I think that Loghain is one of the few men in Ferelden to feel this way.

Except that only he gets to define what is or is not right for Fereldan, ignoring that the nobles have a say. This isn't a strict monarchy, but is closer to a republic. He dismisses the input of the nobles, going for straight dictatorship.