58 réponses à ce sujet

[AndreaDraco]

The more I think about it, the more the DA Wikia explanation I reported above seems off to me. I mean, the way they put it Loghain seems to had to no plan at all and that he did what he did only because the delay in lighting the beacon of Ishal. So, yes, I'm pretty sure that he (and Howe, and maybe others) had a specific plan, and I'd like to know what exactly this plan entailed.

[Helios969]

soteria wrote...

I don't know why people insist on making this more complicated than it is. If Loghain didn't premeditate Cailan's murder, he certainly happened to have a lot of things in motion to capitalize on the king's unfortunate demise. He had motive, means, and opportunity, and he took that opportunity at Ostagar.

It's just fun to speculate, at least for me.  This is the first game I've found compelling enough to come and discuss my experiences on a forum.  And it's rare for me to play a game more than once - I'm on my fourth run through!  I definitely rate this as the best RPG game I've ever played, and I think the reason is the relationships I've cultivated with NPC's as well as the wondering about many of the unspoken elements of the story.  I never cared about my companions before - they were just foder to assist me in winning the battle.

This has been like a really good book I didn't want to end.  But it did, and I wanted to find others who enjoyed it as I did and discuss the subtleties of story and character.   And I find reading others perspectives, I gain insights that I missed.  I think others feel like this, but perhaps it is only me.

[AndreaDraco]

No, no Helios. That's exactly how I feel

[Sabriana]

Helios969 wrote...

It's just fun to speculate, at least for me.  This is the first game I've found compelling enough to come and discuss my experiences on a forum.  And it's rare for me to play a game more than once - I'm on my fourth run through!  I definitely rate this as the best RPG game I've ever played, and I think the reason is the relationships I've cultivated with NPC's as well as the wondering about many of the unspoken elements of the story.  I never cared about my companions before - they were just foder to assist me in winning the battle.

This has been like a really good book I didn't want to end.  But it did, and I wanted to find others who enjoyed it as I did and discuss the subtleties of story and character.   And I find reading others perspectives, I gain insights that I missed.  I think others feel like this, but perhaps it is only me.

It's not only you. Welcome to the club. And that is the truth. I agree. Completely.

Andrea, it's hard to figure the whole Loghain/Ishal/Cailan thing out without sliding into speculation. For example, the lighting of the beacon was definitely delayed. My PC and Alistair had to fight their way to the top, which takes a lot of time. Alistair himself says that "we surely missed the signal." How does that look to Loghain, who mistrusts anything that comes with the name 'Orlais' attached? Could he assume the lighting was delayed to lure him and his army into a death trap? Could be. Maybe. Maybe not.

In my game, when my PC goes to Orzammar, she is challenged by Loghain's messenger, and called a foreigner. Loghain calls her a foreigner as well later on. She's (both of my PCs) a Cousland, with a blood-line older than the Theirin line, for crying out loud.

Editet for clarity (I hope)

Modifié par Sabriana, 08 février 2010 - 06:58 .

[AndreaDraco]

Yes, I understand Sabriana that we can't do anything but speculate, but the question that I'm scouring the game to find an answer for is, basically, only one: what triggered Loghain? What made him going slightly mad and starting plotting against King Cailan (Eamon, Uldred, Howe, etc.)? Was it the talk about Orlais? Was something else? Was he manipulated by Howe?

[_Ermehtar_]

The wikia must be wrong. Loghain retreats after the lighting the beacon of Ishal. Not at one single point in the game is there a referance to a delay. Surley such an important matter would not go without notice.

[AndreaDraco]

I really hope that David or another writer could pop in and shed some light about this discrepancy!

[Sabriana]

As for the delay, listen to the blurbs. Alistair makes it quite clear that they "surely must have missed the signal". Think about it.

The Soldier and the mage tell your PC that they can't reach the top because of the darkspawn. Without the darkspawn, they would be there and waiting. Your PC has to fight her way all the way up. That's a huge delay.



As for Loghain, I think he started to go over the edge before Ostagar. It could be that Cailan rubbed Orlais in his face too often. Cailan's mention of "Maybe we should wait for the Orlesian forces" seems to be made just to rub Loghain's face in it.

He can't have been sincere, because he didn't even have the time to wait for Redcliffe. I'm pretty sure that this was an older argument between the two.

Gaider said that Howe wasn't a factor before Ostagar, but definitely one after. Gah, I will keep on trying to find that thread, but I can't now. But what Gaider said in it was quite revealing.

[AndreaDraco]

Without the search function, it would be almost impossible to find the right thread. This is why I hope that a writer can hop in and shed a light. I tried too to find David's posts, but I can't.

[_- Songlian -]

Sabriana wrote...
 
Gaider said that Howe wasn't a factor before Ostagar, but definitely one after. Gah, I will keep on trying to find that thread, but I can't now. But what Gaider said in it was quite revealing.

Is this the thread, by any chance? I've bookmarked it some time ago. It has two posts from Mr. Gaider on Ostagar, but I don't know if this is exactly what you are looking for. 

http://social.biowar...83297/18#591250

[AndreaDraco]

Yes, I believe this is it.

What I'm interested in is what did this showdown Loghain had in mind entailed. Did he want to depose Cailan altogether? Or only to make him see his reasons? Of what exactly Loghain wanted to convince him? Did Loghain suspected how deep the negotiantions with Orlais were, or he acted solely for fear that Cailan could indeed ask the Orlesians for help?

Aside from this, David is pretty clear: after Loghain made arrangements to weaken the royalist faction, if Cailan insisted to seek the Orlais' help and ride into battle with the Grey Wardens, he was prepared to let him die. He waited until the last moment - probably, if the battle would have gone well, he could have joined the battling forces and then share the credit - and then decided to flee Ostagar to "save Ferelden" (= preserve the rest of the army so that Orlais couldn't profit from their defeat and invade Ferelden when it was devoid of a defending force)

Modifié par AndreaDraco, 08 février 2010 - 08:19 .

[Solica]

Soteria wrote...
I don't know why people insist on making this more complicated than it is. If Loghain didn't premeditate Cailan's murder, he certainly happened to have a lot of things in motion to capitalize on the king's unfortunate demise. He had motive, means, and opportunity, and he took that opportunity at Ostagar.

The waters are only murky at Ostagar if you insist on muddying them and inventing a story (like, "Loghain could see PART of the fight, but not the WHOLE fight, and what he saw was enough to know he had to pull out but not enough to see the right time to attack in the first place.").

A very reasonable view to take. I think. I tend to share it. And would also add that Loghain leaves when the beacon is lit, and does so because charging then would be too early for Loghain's purpose, and would save the Wardens and Cailan. He always intended to charge and win the battle. But "too late". The faltering beacon was supposed to be the reason. When the beacon is lit anyway, - that is when he decides that the battle was suddenly "unwinnable" and leaves. Because he can't just stand there, after the signal, waiting until the King is dead, and then charge and win the battle.

But even so, I think it's like this: We are not supposed to know exactly. D.G. is rather careful and circumspect about what he exactly says. If one doesn't jump to conclusions, one realizes that waters are still murky and maybe even more muddied. My guess is that we will eventually learn more, in another game, and plot elements simply have to be protected until then. But it can also be that the ambigiuty is there because we are supposed to be able to have different experiences and thoughts about the matter, when we play.

darrenr22 wrote...

Far be it from me to question the "Word of God" but if David Gaider really did say that Howe was not in league with Lhogain when he attacked Highever that makes Howe's action there utterly inexplicable. It makes sense if one assumes that Howe knew that Cailen would be in no position to bring him to justice for attacking Castle Cousland but if not...

As Cailen remarks at Ostagar if you are playing the human noble origin, after Duncan breaks the news of Teyrn Cousland's death: "How could he think to get away it?"

The only way his action makes sense is if Howe knew that Cailen would be in no position to punish him, rather an ally of Howe would soon be running the show.

I think one way this might possibly be consolidated, is if Howe knew that the king wouldn't be a factor, and knew that Loghain would have no complaints about the Couslands. He could know this, without telling Loghain he intended to kill the Couslands, or without them having agreed on Howe's actions. This still makes Loghain an accomplice, sort of, since there must have been something he told Howe.

[AndreaDraco]

Solica wrote...
A very reasonable view to take. I think. I tend to share it. And would also add that Loghain leaves when the beacon is lit, and does so because charging then would be too early for Loghain's purpose, and would save the Wardens and Cailan. He always intended to charge and win the battle. But "too late". The faltering beacon was supposed to be the reason. When the beacon is lit anyway, - that is when he decides that the battle was suddenly "unwinnable" and leaves. Because he can't just stand there, after the signal, waiting until the King is dead, and then charge and win the battle.

What's the source of this information? Does Loghain say anywhere in the game that his plan was to charge too late, and that he retreated when the beacon was lit in time? If so, where?

I think one way this might possibly be consolidated, is if Howe knew that the king wouldn't be a factor, and knew that Loghain would have no complaints about the Couslands. He could know this, without telling Loghain he intended to kill the Couslands, or without them having agreed on Howe's actions. This still makes Loghain an accomplice, sort of, since there must have been something he told Howe.

This view is certainly solid if what you said before - about Loghain's plan - was true (and it actually makes a lot of sense, if you ask me), but I'd still like some sort of in-game (or in-forum, so to speak) confirmation that this was indeed the case.

[Helios969]

Reading through these are interesting. It would seem to me Howe would have to know what Loghain intended, otherwise there is no way he would have betrayed the Couslands. The King was pretty adamant that Howe would pay for his treachery, and I have to believe Howe would have know just how severe the consequences would have been for murdering a Nobel family. Thus, Howe knew Loghain intended to betray the King. As for Loghain himself, since he seems to be suffering from paranoid delusions, perhaps he didn't consciously know what Howe had planned for the Couslands. I'm struck by something Anora says toward the end of the game about her speaking out against her father at the Landsmeet and him believing she was under some spell of the Wardens followed by a statement like "he might even believe it. . ." No, I believe someone or something is pulling the strings. Whether that is Howe, I cannot say - though I get the sense of some larger force manipulating events.



Perhaps this is as some of you suggest, that the writers are setting up subplot lines for future expansions. Maybe even with the Awakenings coming next month.



On an off note, how are some of these small expansions available? Like Return to Ostagar and Warden's Keep?

[Solica]

AndreaDraco wrote...

Solica wrote...
A very reasonable view to take. I think. I tend to share it. And would also add that Loghain leaves when the beacon is lit, and does so because charging then would be too early for Loghain's purpose, and would save the Wardens and Cailan. He always intended to charge and win the battle. But "too late". The faltering beacon was supposed to be the reason. When the beacon is lit anyway, - that is when he decides that the battle was suddenly "unwinnable" and leaves. Because he can't just stand there, after the signal, waiting until the King is dead, and then charge and win the battle.

What's the source of this information? Does Loghain say anywhere in the game that his plan was to charge too late, and that he retreated when the beacon was lit in time? If so, where?

???  About Loghain's plans and motives, - it's all speculation, of course. We don't know anything about that.
But the game gives us good reason to suspect that Loghain tries to sabotage the beacon. And the game itself serves up the information that Loghain leaves when the beacon is lit.
It's offered as an explanation. I don't think I've seen any other reasonable explanation as for why he leaves exactly when the beacon is lit.

It is reasonable to assume that he always intended to eventually charge and win the battle. Why wouldn't he? Most people also seem to think that it's reasonable to assume that he intended to have the Wardens slaughtered, so obviously he can't charge too soon. So he means to be late. So there has to be a reason for him being late.

[AndreaDraco]

Like I said, I think that this theory of yours is perfectly reasonable. I was only wondering if Loghain (when you recruit him, that is) maybe says something more specific about this plan of charging too late (to save the King and the Wardens, but still soon enough to win the battle).



About this theory, though, if this was Loghain's plan, why does he seems well intentioned to convince Cailan not to ride out with the Wardens? Maybe he wanted to annihilate the Wardens and then use his other means - poisoning Arl Eamon, generally weakening the royalists - to manipulate him and drive him away from an Orlesian alliance.

[SusanStoHelit]

AndreaDraco wrote...

Without the search function, it would be almost impossible to find the right thread. This is why I hope that a writer can hop in and shed a light. I tried too to find David's posts, but I can't.

And Susan said, let there be a search function and ... social.bioware.com/forum/1/search
 

[SusanStoHelit]

Helios969 wrote...

On an off note, how are some of these small expansions available? Like Return to Ostagar and Warden's Keep?

Some of them came as promotional items with collector's editions of the game and so on, others didn't. But if you didn't get them as a free offer, you simply purchase them and download them. If you look to the left here, you'll see the Dragon Age Origins, Expand Your Game offer. Just click on it and buy enough points to obtain the dlc.

Then when you start the game next, you can download them.

[RangerSG]

Sabriana wrote...

Helios969 wrote...

Sabriana wrote...

D. Gaider stated in one of these "Loghain" dedicated threads that Howe's actions in Highever were solely his own, and that Loghain was not involved. He also stated that Eamon wasn't supposed to die, he was merely to be taken out of the equation. Hence Berwick was sent to keep an eye on things.
It also makes it believable that the Arl doesn't die when the demon is killed. The demon lied, simple as that. Shocking, I know, but what can you do.

Loghain isn't exactly the most credible.  He has performed one despicable act after another - all for the "good of Ferelden."  In fact, taking this line of thought further, the whole game is setup as if there is some larger force at work: Loghain's madness, Howe's betrayal, the poisoning of Eamon, the chaos Bhelan perpetrates amongst the dwarves, the werewolves' sudden thirst for vengence on the Elves, the insurrection in the Tower, etc. . .  I don't know what the writer(s) intended in all this, perhaps just a series of challenges for our characters to face and overcome.  Still, I would have liked to seen some sort of reconciliation on this matter.  Perhaps it's just me. 

David Gaider is the head-writer.

Yes, but you overstated what DG said a bit. DG's statement was, to be precise, Loghain did not know about Howe's intent to overthrown Highever until the Couslands were already dead. DG did not say that Loghain and Howe did not plan anything in relation to the Couslands. Given the circumstances, it seems very unlikely Howe would've endangered himself by risking the wrath of his liege lord if he did not have some promise of protection and co-operation from Loghain.

So it's entirely plausible that Loghain wanted Howe to delay Bryce Cousland long enough so that Loghain could move against Cailan in whatever fashion they originally planned. And given the extent Loghain was willing to go to ensure other "Royalists" did not make it to Ostagar, empowering Howe to ensure that the Couslands did not march off in sufficient strength to aid the King at Ostagar is entirely consistent with Loghain's plan.

Howe read into this the chance to remove the man who "held him back." But that doesn't mean that there was not some plan between Loghain and Howe ahead of time regarding the Couslands.

[SusanStoHelit]

Solica wrote...

And would also add that Loghain leaves when the beacon is lit, and does so because charging then would be too early for Loghain's purpose, and would save the Wardens and Cailan. He always intended to charge and win the battle. But "too late". The faltering beacon was supposed to be the reason. When the beacon is lit anyway, - that is when he decides that the battle was suddenly "unwinnable" and leaves. Because he can't just stand there, after the signal, waiting until the King is dead, and then charge and win the battle.

Now, this makes a great deal of sense to me. I'm not sure it will turn out to be the 'truth' - but it is certainly both logical and 'sensible'; that is, it makes sense of what Loghain does. The whole argument that he left because he didn't think the battle was winnable, or saw/didn't see something or other, just sounded like a bucket full of crap.

As for the matter of Howe and Loghain,

I think one way this might possibly be consolidated, is if Howe knew that the king wouldn't be a factor, and knew that Loghain would have no complaints about the Couslands. He could know this, without telling Loghain he intended to kill the Couslands, or without them having agreed on Howe's actions. This still makes Loghain an accomplice, sort of, since there must have been something he told Howe.

It certainly makes Loghain an accomplice after the fact (in modern terms) at the very least. But there are a number of possibilities here, I think:

1. Howe was told something by Loghain that made him think he could get away with it; for instance, Howe was aware that Loghain was planning to kill Cailan, or to make Cailan so powerless that he could do nothing even if he was alive - imprisonment perhaps. And he thought Loghain would be forced to back him up anyway, because of his connivance in the matter. Or because of the treason accusation (see 4 below) that Loghain would be very likely to believe given his paranoia about Orlais.

2. Howe was a total nut job and just didn't care what Cailan thought or knew, believing he could get away with it.

3. Howe simply didn't believe that there would be any witnesses. In other words, he thought he could kill all the Couslands at Highever (which he does if you are not the youngest Cousland). And he had people in place to eliminate Fergus, too.  If these were at Ostagar, they would have been killed in the battle before they had a chance to do away with Fergus.

4. This is a variant of 3; where it differs is that Howe didn't make arrangements to kill Fergus. We're told that the Couslands were attainted with treason. In this scenario, I imagine Howe has forged documents and other evidence of this treason (and would have had them in at least version 1, but possible in all versions, of course). It doesn't matter that Fergus is alive, he wasn't at Highever, he doesn't know what happened there, and he has no way of proving anything, much less of disproving allegations of treason on the part of Bryce Cousland and possibly of himself.
   
Since Howe undoubtedly knew of Bryce's trip(s) to Orlais, he might have hoped to use that to strengthen his case of treason against the Couslands. Now, if Bryce was working on Cailan's behalf as an emissary to the Empress, Howe's accusations might well fall flat - but Howe wouldn't know that. Since Loghain didn't know about the communications with Celene, I doubt Howe did either. So, he manufactures treason on the part of the Couslands, possibly using Bryce's trips as part of his case. If Cailan had survived, and Bryce was his emissary, Howe would have been terribly surprised at the response he'd get to his accusations.
_________

I, personally, think (4) is the most likely.

[Edited for formatting - and for both omissions and clarity.]
   

Modifié par SusanStoHelit, 08 février 2010 - 11:15 .

[RangerSG]

Susan,



Howe is a despicable, power-hungry snake. But nothing in his actions speaks of "nut-job." If anything, I would think he played on Loghain's paranoia for his own ends.



Howe was patient enough all those years to act the sniveling toady so that Bryce would trust him. That despite all the "slights" he felt he endured at their hands. So I think that takes out the "nut-job" or "impatience" angles.



And I think it also takes out any option where he doesn't see that the stars are aligned for him to succeed if he is bold this once. So yes, I think he had some "assurance" from Loghain that if he delayed the Cousland's muster, he'd not be held responsible. He had some assurance that Cailan would be isolated and rendered powerless to intervene.



Howe then sees that this is his chance. If Cailan can't stop me from delaying Bryce, why not kill him? Why not remove them entirely and make up a story I can tell Loghain that will ensure I am safe no matter what happens to the King?



I'd say the "treason" angle was forged after the fact...or quite possibly nothing more than an allegation. After all, following Ostagar, there's no one who would argue with him about it other than the HN PC.

[SusanStoHelit]

RangerSG wrote...

Howe is a despicable, power-hungry snake. But nothing in his actions speaks of "nut-job." If anything, I would think he played on Loghain's paranoia for his own ends.

Howe was patient enough all those years to act the sniveling toady so that Bryce would trust him. That despite all the "slights" he felt he endured at their hands. So I think that takes out the "nut-job" or "impatience" angles.

I thoroughly agree with 'despicable, power-hungry snake'. I'm not so sure of him not being a 'nut job', though. I think it's a possibility, if a slim one, which is why I included it. Being insane and being patient are not mutually exclusive. You can be both.

I'd say the "treason" angle was forged after the fact...or quite possibly nothing more than an allegation. After all, following Ostagar, there's no one who would argue with him about it other than the HN PC.

Edit: Except for Fergus. Howe can't know that Fergus will be dead unless he's planned to do that too - or he simply didn't care that Fergus would argue against treason. Most likely because he already had manufactured 'proof'. If he doesn't know that Cailan is going to be killed, he does need proof, if he's sane.

But still, that's close enough to my 3rd possibility.

Modifié par SusanStoHelit, 09 février 2010 - 12:01 .

[Helios969]

SusanStoHelit wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

Howe is a despicable, power-hungry snake. But nothing in his actions speaks of "nut-job." If anything, I would think he played on Loghain's paranoia for his own ends.

Howe was patient enough all those years to act the sniveling toady so that Bryce would trust him. That despite all the "slights" he felt he endured at their hands. So I think that takes out the "nut-job" or "impatience" angles.

I thoroughly agree with 'despicable, power-hungry snake'. I'm not so sure of him not being a 'nut
job', though. I think it's a possibility, if a slim one, which is why I
included it. Being insane and being patient are not mutually exclusive. You can be both.

I'd say the "treason" angle was forged after the fact...or quite possibly nothing more than an allegation. After all, following Ostagar, there's no one who would argue with him about it other than the HN PC.

Edit: Except for Fergus. Howe can't know that Fergus will be dead unless he's planned to do that too - or he simply didn't care that Fergus would argue against treason. Most likely because he already had manufactured 'proof'. If he doesn't know that Cailan is going to be killed, he does need proof, if he's sane.

But still, that's close enough to my 3rd possibility.

I don't think the poster meant "nut job" in the sense of imbecilic, but rather Howe's sociopathic tendencies.  At least that's the way I read it.  I don't think anyone would dispute the latter.  Many "nut jobs" are crafty, some even have genius intellects.  Howe is one creepy, evil guy.  That's part of what I love about this game - character authenticity.  I genuinely hated the guy and thoroughly enjoyed putting him down.

[SusanStoHelit]

Helios969 wrote...

I don't think the poster meant "nut job" in the sense of imbecilic, but rather Howe's sociopathic tendencies.  At least that's the way I read it.  I don't think anyone would dispute the latter.  Many "nut jobs" are crafty, some even have genius intellects.  Howe is one creepy, evil guy.  That's part of what I love about this game - character authenticity.  I genuinely hated the guy and thoroughly enjoyed putting him down.

I know. I was the poster who called him a nut job - or, rather, who said that that was one possible explanation for his actions.

And yes, I didn't mean he was an idiot, I meant that he was a sociopath. And considering his dungeon, I think it's a valid possibility.

[AndreaDraco]

SusanStoHelit wrote...
4. This is a variant of 3; where it differs is that Howe didn't make arrangements to kill Fergus. We're told that the Couslands were attainted with treason. In this scenario, I imagine Howe has forged documents and other evidence of this treason (and would have had them in at least version 1, but possible in all versions, of course). It doesn't matter that Fergus is alive, he wasn't at Highever, he doesn't know what happened there, and he has no way of proving anything, much less of disproving allegations of treason on the part of Bryce Cousland and possibly of himself.
   
Since Howe undoubtedly knew of Bryce's trip(s) to Orlais, he might have hoped to use that to strengthen his case of treason against the Couslands. Now, if Bryce was working on Cailan's behalf as an emissary to the Empress, Howe's accusations might well fall flat - but Howe wouldn't know that. Since Loghain didn't know about the communications with Celene, I doubt Howe did either. So, he manufactures treason on the part of the Couslands, possibly using Bryce's trips as part of his case. If Cailan had survived, and Bryce was his emissary, Howe would have been terribly surprised at the response he'd get to his accusations.

I really like this theory, and, as I already said, I really like solica's theory about what happened at Ostagar when the beacon was lit. I've adopted both of them as my personal truth about the game
And I really think that there's more to Bryce Cousland than what you know about him: his trips to Orlais, the guards wondering why he asked them to patrol the treasure room and so on. It's entirely likely that, maybe, he was indeed one of the key figures in the plan to forge a solid alliance between Ferelden and Orlais, a thought that surely Loghain despised deeply.